Anti-phishing tools comparison
3 Comments
3Sharp published an interesting 37-pages comparison between anti-phishing tools available on the market today.
Not only it's interesting because it provides a useful compendium to the lastest Internet Security Threat Report published by Symantec, but also because it includes some unexpected results, distinguishing between recognition rate (detailing false positives) and blocking rate.
GeoTrust TrustWatch is the most capable in recognition but has 2 big issues: has a 32% rating of false positives and is unable to block any phishing attempt.
Microsoft Phishing Filter included in Internet Explorer 7 Beta 3 is the best in class, able to recognize 89% of threats without false positives, and a 83% capability to block phishing attempts (remaining 6% is only warned) .
The much popular Google Toolbar included in Firefox is only at 4th place, able to recognize without false positives and block only 53% of threats.
The interesting SiteAdvisor, which claimed a 90% worldwide websites coverage before being acquired by McAfee in April, has been included in the comparison even if McAfee clearly states the product doesn't recognize phishing (read comments for more details).
No surprise it was the last one with a mere 3%.
Read the whole report here.
Update: As every report it should read with due aloofness: the study has been committed by Microsoft, 3Sharp founders are former Microsoft employees and the company is mainly skilled on Microsoft technologies.
Not only it's interesting because it provides a useful compendium to the lastest Internet Security Threat Report published by Symantec, but also because it includes some unexpected results, distinguishing between recognition rate (detailing false positives) and blocking rate.
GeoTrust TrustWatch is the most capable in recognition but has 2 big issues: has a 32% rating of false positives and is unable to block any phishing attempt.
Microsoft Phishing Filter included in Internet Explorer 7 Beta 3 is the best in class, able to recognize 89% of threats without false positives, and a 83% capability to block phishing attempts (remaining 6% is only warned) .
The much popular Google Toolbar included in Firefox is only at 4th place, able to recognize without false positives and block only 53% of threats.
The interesting SiteAdvisor, which claimed a 90% worldwide websites coverage before being acquired by McAfee in April, has been included in the comparison even if McAfee clearly states the product doesn't recognize phishing (read comments for more details).
No surprise it was the last one with a mere 3%.
Read the whole report here.
Update: As every report it should read with due aloofness: the study has been committed by Microsoft, 3Sharp founders are former Microsoft employees and the company is mainly skilled on Microsoft technologies.
Most Recent Articles
3 Comments:
-
SiteAdvisor isn't DESIGNED to do anti-phishing, which explains why it is useless against phishing. SiteAdvisor's site is explicit about this:
http://blog.siteadvisor.com/2006/09/we_dont_do_antiphishing_1.shtml
SiteAdvisor was designed for blocking spyware, browser exploits, and sites that send excessive emails, among other things. McAfee has a different product for anti-phishing.
Also note that this study was paid for by Microsoft (is it any surprise Microsoft won?) -
Thank you for stopping by and providing this useful feedback.
I've modified my post to warn about SiteAdvisor misplacing in the comparison.
About the point Microsoft committed 3Sharp study: while the company is based in Redmond, the founder has a previously experience in Microsoft, and the overall focus is on Microsoft technologies, I didn't find any evidence the study has been committed by MS.
If you can provide any proof of this, apart SiteAdvisor team claim, I'd like to see it. -
I've found evidence of committment from Microsoft, and updated the post accordingly.
Thank you again for your feedback.
Links to this article:
Stay up to date |
|