For a perspective of how well Panda handles the most up to date malware tests, I tried it with an arrangement of malware-facilitating URLs found by MRG-Effitas over the most recent few days. I propelled every URL and noted whether Panda hindered all entrance to the URL, disposed of the malware on download, or sat inertly doing nothing. I kept at this test until the point that I aggregated outcomes for 100 late malware-facilitating URLs.
Actually this sort of do-it-without anyone's help trying is accessible for huge organizations. Little and medium organizations do not have the assets to do it appropriately, and that is the reason they trust proficient testing organizations' outcomes to decide. Security Week's Kevin Townsend composed an article a couple of months prior.
The outcomes are disillusioning. Panda steered the program far from 34 percent of the awful URLs, rather showing a substantial cautioning page. For another 14 percent, it isolated the downloaded document, despite the fact that in a few cases this didn't happen until around 10 seconds after the download wrapped up. Its aggregate assurance rate of 48 percent is the second-most reduced among current items; just Comodo Antivirus 10 scored lower.