PDA

View Full Version : Scanning .jpg & .gif

jg88swe
July 22nd, 2004, 12:23 PM
Why does NOD32 scan .gif and .jpg files?
Is that really necessary?

Notice that on the new ver.

Here's some pic.
jg88swe
July 22nd, 2004, 12:23 PM
One more
ronjor
July 22nd, 2004, 12:30 PM
Okay. I see what you are talking about. I guess we are scanning all files rather than extensions, right?
ronjor
July 22nd, 2004, 12:35 PM
Imon setup screen. Scan all files or extensions.
DiGRem
July 22nd, 2004, 03:57 PM
That does not work. I am still getting "scanning all files"

DiGRem

WinXP Pro SP1 + Maxthon 1.0.0178
ronjor
July 22nd, 2004, 04:04 PM
You are correct. That setting does not affect what is scanned one way or the other as far as gif, jpgs, etc are concerned. It scans them anyway.
jg88swe
July 22nd, 2004, 04:34 PM
Cant belive that I found that error frist... :o

Whoho... ::)
Blackspear
July 22nd, 2004, 06:33 PM
I don't know if this is a error, as far as I know it scans all incoming traffic regardless of extension, given that the extension could be "song.mp3.exe.jpg" which is a executible program (.exe), it is neither an MP3 file nor a JPG file.

Will have to wait for Marcos or Jan to come along...

Cheers ;D
ronjor
July 22nd, 2004, 06:37 PM
Good point and it doesn't slow anything down here.
VikingStorm
July 22nd, 2004, 10:11 PM
-{ Quote: "Good point and it doesn't slow anything down here." }-
The only slow-down seems to be that large images don't "preload" until IMON scans them, which isn't really a slow-down, but a visual thing, which isn't too bad.
Mele20
July 23rd, 2004, 02:48 AM
I see that blankety blank Imon download box. As soon as you see that you know you are considerably slowed down. Plus it is very irritating to see. It should be hidden. I just don't understand how you guys can claim IMON HTTP scanner doesn't slow you down. Of course it does! And for what? What it is it saving you from? I'd much rather have a fast box and have to scan eicar.zip after downloading (without needing to unzip of course) instead of having IMON alert on hover.

I wish someone would explain to me exactly why I need two real time scanners? That is what I don't understand. No other AV that I know of has two real time scanners. Why didn't Eset just beef up AMON instead of coming up with this HTTP scanner that slows surfing so much?
VikingStorm
July 23rd, 2004, 08:57 AM
-{ Quote: "I see that blankety blank Imon download box. As soon as you see that you know you are considerably slowed down. Plus it is very irritating to see. It should be hidden. I just don't understand how you guys can claim IMON HTTP scanner doesn't slow you down. Of course it does! And for what? What it is it saving you from? I'd much rather have a fast box and have to scan eicar.zip after downloading (without needing to unzip of course) instead of having IMON alert on hover.

I wish someone would explain to me exactly why I need two real time scanners? That is what I don't understand. No other AV that I know of has two real time scanners. Why didn't Eset just beef up AMON instead of coming up with this HTTP scanner that slows surfing so much?" }-
My thinking is that so you can configure IMON to be more aggressive, and leave AMON less aggressive for some system performance reasoning. Though since they added AH in AMON, IMON's http scanning isn't as unique anymore. It's not vital as far as I can see.