NOD32 V3.0.566.0 hangs at startup on Vista Ultimate / Dell XPS-M1210

[mOOky]

I have been using Eset NOD32 v2.7 on my laptop with no issues since originally installing it. Immediately after upgrading to v3.0, the system hangs at startup after user logon. [I let it go for almost an hour with no progress] I can start in safe mode with no problems. Reverting to the point prior to NOD32 v3.0 install using System Restore corrected the problem, though I could then not re-install v3.0 nor uninstall v2.7. Re-installing v2.7 allowed me to then try installing v3.0 again, with the same result of hanging at startup. I then started in safe mode, disabled the two ESET services, rebooted normal mode and uninstalled v3.0 clean, and did a clean re-install of v2.7

So, I guess I'm stuck with v2.7 until a bug is identified and fixed, or someone can tell me what my problem might be. I'm using v3.0 on my wifes Averatec laptop running WinXP with no issues.

I have a Dell XPS-M1210 that I performed a bare-metal install of Windows Vista Ultimate on, along with all the appropriate hardware drivers from Dell's support site.

In addition, I use the following as startup software:

• Lavalys Everest Ultimate v4.00.976
• Logitech LCD Software Manager v1.04.153
• Logitech SetPoint Control Center v4.00.121
• BlackBerry Device Manager v4.2.2.10
• FlashGet v1.9.2.1028

(A full "HiJack" report attached for reference)Log removed per this announcement.

Anyone have any ideas for me to try?

[Trooper]

I noticed it as well. Not on my machine, but my wife's.. strange indeed. The best thing that I have found that seems to work at the moment, is doing steps 1-4 outlined here by HiTech_Boy.

Please let us know if this works for you. In my opinion, this is something that need to be fixed by Eset. Did you happen to send them any information regarding this?

[Thankful]

If you continue to have problems, please submit a ticket via Help and Support on the main NOD interface. Click on the 'Customer Care support request'. This form allows you to submit your system configuration to Eset.

[mOOky]

Originally Posted by Trooper

...I have found that seems to work at the moment, is doing steps 1-4 outlined here by HiTech_Boy...

Not to be ungrateful, but why would changing the way the AV works by delaying it and dumbing it down (disabling scanning of all file access versus only those with known executable extensions...it would miss anything being written that is masking its true extension...). I'd rather stick with a working full protection set in 2.7 than dumb down 3.0 to get it working.

[mOOky]

Originally Posted by Thankful

...Click on the 'Customer Care support request'. This form allows you to submit your system configuration to Eset.

Thanks, I will try that, since the forum moderators took it upon themselves to remove the log I posted that actually had my relevant system configuration.

[Trooper]

Originally Posted by mOOky

Not to be ungrateful, but why would changing the way the AV works by delaying it and dumbing it down (disabling scanning of all file access versus only those with known executable extensions...it would miss anything being written that is masking its true extension...). I'd rather stick with a working full protection set in 2.7 than dumb down 3.0 to get it working.

Because its a workaround until it gets fixed, that's why. If you want to sit there and wait for your desktop to appear, so be it. I suggest submitting the information to Eset so that they can rectify it.

Originally Posted by mOOky

Not to be ungrateful, but why would changing the way the AV works by delaying it and dumbing it down

Hi mOOky!

Because there is no software in the world that can opt 100% to all machines that exist . Default settings are OK for most but not for all . That is why ESET have left the possibility to change in details all the settings and ESET is just one of the few vendors that allow so many settings to be changes in details . In this forum noone recommend changing settings in a ways in which we can lower the protection level - no . We just change the settings so that your machine performs better and you still remain well protected . Perhaps you reacted this way because you don't know what exactly does these two scans (the start up scans) do . Their purpose is to eliminated memory resident threat which for some reason have bypassed any other protection component (many reasons) . The two scans can in no way stop the threats from loading in memory but their aim is to eliminated them . That is why it is not importnat if NOD32/EA/ESS will scan the memory objects in 15 seconds (in Lowest priority) or in 25 (when idle priority) ,for example.

(disabling scanning of all file access versus only those with known executable extensions...it would miss anything being written that is masking its true extension...)

No , it won't . Any reputable modern antivirus (including NOD32/EA/ESS) will not make that mistake. If someone tries to mask an exe file (e.g. this way rename it file1.bmp.com) with default Windows settings one will see file1.bmp . however , the file is actually executable (file called file1.bmp with com extension) - the antivirus will 100% scan it .

If someone "masks" a file (previously called file2.exe) but now called file2.bmp , bmp is no longer executable for Windows , poses no risk . If must be renamed to *.exe to be started . When this happens the security software will scan it.

Moreover , let us not forget that Trooper outlined only options 1-4 (they don't include the above stuff)