By Michael Santo
Contributing Writer, RealTechNews

It’s been a few days since the WMF (Windows Metafile) vulnerability was uncovered. Microsoft has released a workaround, but no patch yet. Hopefully you can count on your antivirus (AV) program, but not all of them cover all the variants.

AV-Test, which tests anti-malware products, has been tracking the situation closely and has, so far, analyzed 73 variants of malicious WMF files. Products from the following companies have identified all 73:

Alwil Software (Avast), Softwin (BitDefender), ClamAV, F-Secure Inc., Fortinet Inc., McAfee Inc., ESET (Nod32), Panda Software, Sophos Plc., Symantec Corp., Trend Micro Inc., VirusBuster

These products detected fewer variants: 62 — eTrust-VET, 62 — QuickHeal, 61 — AntiVir, 61 — Dr Web, 61 — Kaspersky, 60 — AVG, 19 — Command, 19 — F-Prot, 11 — Ewido, 7 — eSafe, 7 — eTrust-INO, 6 — Ikarus, 6 — VBA32, 0 — Norman

Source: eWeek

We Say: The “big 2″ (McAfee, Symantec) do fine, but it’s interesting that Kaspersky, generally thought of among alternative AV users as the best, only caught 61 of the variants. I’ve always picked an AV program with strong heuristics (detecting the virus by identifying the basic techniques of the exploit, rather than looking for specific signatures), as well as good signature support, so that I am protected even before the signature database is updated. My AV is not in the big 2 (and I don’t feel comfortable advertising it), but it is on the list above. Also, if you look at this AV-Test spreadsheet with regard to the MS05-039-based attacks from earlier in the year, you can also see which AVs reacted proactively (heuristically) to the threats (note that McAfee, Symantec, and Kaspersky didn’t proactively catch them, but my AV once again did). Don’t get me wrong; no AV is going to catch everything. Just make sure you have a good one and be careful out there (and that means both on the Web and out driving tonight. Happy New Year!).