If you want the best virus protection out there, Kaspersky, Bitdefender, and Avira are the top three. ThreatTrack and Comodo, meanwhile, are among the worst.
That’s according the latest round of tests by AV Test, an independent IT security institute based in Megdeburg, Germany. The firm’s December 2015 results for Windows 8.1 devices compared 20 different anti-malware programs for protection, performance, and usability.
The results, outlined in the chart above, add findings based on three different ratings:
By these metrics, the best possible antivirus will detect nearly all actual malware, will not use up a lot of system resources, and will not see malware where none exists. The chart makes for an interesting overview, but download the complete report and you can dig more into the specifics.
For example: At this point, most applications catch over 99 percent of well-known malware. Many, including Kaspersky and BitDefender, caught absolutely everything. But Comodo was shown to be particularly weak here, catching only 96.1 percent of the known malware that should be easy to spot.
The real difference comes when you get to 0-day malware, which is yet to be documented widely but is possible to spot based on patterns. Nearly half the programs tested caught everything; most caught over 98 percent. ThreatTrack, however, caught a pitiful 78.3 percent. Also weak in this category: Microsoft’s Windows Defender, which is the protection included with Windows right out of the box, and which demonstrated only a 90-percent catch rate.
But there is such a thing as being too zealous: pointing out malware where none exists can confuse users and waste time. AhnLab’s software seems to enjoy falsely labeling legitimate software as malware, with 18 installed programs falsely identified. F-Secure also falsely declared nine legitimate apps as malware. Most programs didn’t do this, however, or only falsely labeled one app.
This all could change, of course — malware is a fast-moving world, and this month’s test results might not stand up next month. That’s why it’s good that AV Test is regularly running these tests, to keep the security companies accountable.
Did you think hitting delete on your AI chatbot conversation actually makes it disappear? Georgia Tech researchers just proved that's not entirely true. They have built a forensic tool called ORISA that can dig deleted conversations from your phone and even rebuild them into a working chatbot session you can keep talking to.
How can ORISA bring deleted AI conversations back?
Touchscreen laptops have been around for years. You can get them in all sizes and shapes. Just not from Apple. For years, the Cupertino giant has treated the idea of a touchscreen MacBook the way I treat a meeting that could have been an email: with open contempt. However, Wednesday looks like the day the company could finally change its mind.
The latest Apple invite puts the “Pro and Tell” showcase in Los Angeles at 10 a.m. PT (1 p.m. ET) on October 28, 2026. Instead of a regular live-streamed keynote, it is an invitation-only, hands-on event for a handful of press and creators (similar to what the company did for the MacBook Neo earlier this year).
Two residents of Chicago have filed a lawsuit in the US over claims that robots run by Coco Robotics and Serve Robotics captured their facial and hand measurements without consent, bringing renewed attention to the food delivery robots. The cases raise a troubling question: If a robot delivers food to your door, can it also be gathering sensitive information about you?
According to a report by The Associated Press, the proposed class-action lawsuits were filed in Cook County on Oct. 9 and allege violations of Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act. The complaints claim that the robots’ cameras and LiDAR sensors captured information on customers’ faces and hands as they approached the machines to pick up their orders. Both have denied the allegations.