Operating Memory Scanned Via On-Demand Scan?

[TJP]

Hello all,

How does one set up Nod32 to scan the operating memory via an On-Demand Scan?

Looking at the scanning options within the On-Demand Computer Scan/Scan Targets/Setup/Select Scan Targets menu, it is possible to add a tick to the checkbox for the operating memory to be scanned (as well HDDs etc).

If I return to this menu after saving my settings, I note the option to scan operating memory isn't recorded/retained (i.e. the checkbox is blank).

Is is therefore possible to set Nod32 to scan operating memory via the On-Demand Scan set-up? OS details as requested: I am using XP Pro with SP2 plus all MS updates & 1GB of RAM.

I do note within the ThreatSense Engine options (under the menu heading of Objects) provides the option to select the operating memory.

If the ThreatSense engine automatically scans operating memory & there is no need to scan it via the On-Demand scan, then perhaps it is wise to remove the option to scan operating memory from the Select Scan Targets menu.

Cheers.

[TJP]

I hate to bump my own question - it does appear no one knows the answer ???

On top of the on demand scan not scanning operating memory as requested, I also noted UI ram usage going steadily upwards over time, only to reduce once I'd access a menu then minimise the program.

Back to 2.7 for me until all the bugs are ironed out.

Cheers.

[Thankful]

It doesn't seem to be able to save the setting for scanning operating memory.
However, can't you check operating memory and then click scan?

[TJP]

Thanks for responding Thankful. At least one other person has noticed the oversight.

As for separately scanning the operating memory separately - of course you could scan manually but why should you, I or anyone else have to do an extra step when 2.7 scans it automatically.

In the end, it’s probably not a major issue - I don't even know if it is possible to have "undesirables" in the operating memory. However; as the option to scan memory is listed within the scanning option, it should work.

I'm not going to fret about this (or any other annoyances I encountered with v3) because I'm back using v2.7. I've spat the dummy and "gone home" ;D

Cheers.