Thus, in total, it was necessary to filter roughly 18,000 malware apps.
Later, the object was to detect the reference set containing an additional 2,800 apps with malware which had already been wreaking havoc for 2 weeks. In each of the three rounds, all protection apps were initially required to detect some 3,200 brand-new apps with malware samples in the real-world test. Last place finisher is Google Play Protect with a total of only 6 pointsĮndurance test with nearly 18,000 malware apps He additional apps from Ikarus, Sophos, F-Secure, Antiy, and Cheetah Mobile achieved 11.5 to 10.3 points out of 13. Following close behind are the apps from McAfee with 12.8 points, Alibaba with 12.7 and AhnLab with 12.4 points. This top score was achieved by the apps from Avast, Bitdefender, G Data, Kaspersky Lab, PSafe, Symantec, Tencent and Trend Micro. In the first two categories, the laboratory awards a maximum of 6 points, and for features a maximum of 1 point.
8 out of 16 apps with the maximum point scoreĪll apps, and Google Play Protect, were tested within three separate test rounds from November 2017 to March 2018 in the categories of protection, usability and features. Play Protect was not able to keep up with the detection rates of specialized security apps. In the tests, all 16 apps, along with Google Play Protect, were required to detect nearly 9,500 brand-new infected apps and filter over 8,500 apps with malware samples that have already been known for 2 weeks. This is also documented by the result of the endurance test throughout a period of 6 months.
Google's aim to protect users from malicious apps is indeed honorable and ambitious, but the protection still doesn't work the way Google intended.
0 kommentar(er)
