AntiVir 7 Premium Open Beta

Not much difference on cable/ADSL but dial-up shows up the difference in speed of updating.

Here on my machines in the UK, Classic on dial-up typically updates at 1 kB/s while Premium updates at 4-5kB/s. These different updates are carried out within minutes of each other.

This translates to a markedly slower update on dial-up.

 

I see a major flaw in the GUI, but I will only tell it if I will get a free license, no just kidding, all windows should be resizable and be able to remember their size/position.

But I will wait for the final version, AntiVir is my favorite free AV, and the beta of KAV 2006 seems to have a lot of bugs at the moment, so it´s likely that I will choose for AntiVir.

 

Nope, I have been down this road many a time now, and that's it as far as I am concerned. I no longer wish to discuss this topic either, no one listened to me in the past, and now I fear it will start all over again. I am done with this, and with AntiVir/Classic.

Thanks
Wildman

 

As he said, you're on dialup. You certanly can't expect more.
Dialup has far higher ping times (this is the main reason why your update check takes so long) than any cable or dsl connection, it has far more packet loss/data corruption and it's far more slower. Belive me i was on dialup too like 3 years ago. Not brilliant but i was able to use it just fine.
I was still using Norton back then and i downloaded big program updates without any problems. Took a while to verify what i need and to get the response but then it was downloading with 5KB/s most of the time. I tried AntiVir 7 again today and it was pulling over 7KB/s on DSL (and like 40-50 in the beginning). Fine, i have no objections to download speed. I got ~5MB update in a minute or two. Remember i'm on 1Mbit ADSL connection. Should i complain because i don't get 120KB/s ?
Also remember this is still a beta, so expect there will be client and server side problems. Belive me they also have to test server side to correctly optimize and adjust it. Server overloads can happen to anyone, especially if you're still migrating to incrimental updating.

 

I'm finding myself somewhat annoyed by the full-scale popup when PersonalEdition Classic updates. I understand AntiVir needs a vehicle to help move people towards a premium subscription, but I'm almost tempted to go back to Avast! and higher memory usage because of the lesser amount of updating annoyance.

 

Hardly visceral since a large chunk of this thread as posted by others concerns servers(Premium vs Classic) and connection problems and download times. So no need for personal swipes of this sort.

 

I didn't mean it to be a personal swipe, so I apologize. I tend to get frustrated when people throw up their hands and walk away from something in a manner such as this.

My experience with the servers has been a mixed bag. I have not had a problem connecting to the Classic server, but after installing Premium this afternoon I found myself unable to update for almost two hours. When I do connect, either through my school's (overly)managed network or my home cable network, I get speeds around 130k.

I've noticed something else I think may be out of the ordinary. I installed Classic last night on my laptop and updated it. This afternoon, WindowsXP SP2 gave me the "Your Antivirus Definitions may be out of date" dialogue. Would this be an XP issue, or is the out of date sensitivity set rather high in Antivir?

 

Have you checked that your Clock/Date is set correctly?

Also, if you don't like the notifier popping up when you update you can always delete or rename Notifier.exe - that should stop it.

 

O.k., you want a reason? I currently have six security related programs on my system, all of them "free", and one of the six is a "free" virus protection program. Now out of all of these, I rarely encounter any problems in obtaining updates for them. The only one, repeat the only one to continuously give me problems is and has been AntiVir/Classic. Now I may not be a computer wizard like some of you claim to be, but I am smart enough to figure out that it ain't me babe, nor is it my system, nor is it my ISP. Gee I wonder what is left? I don't need any charts or logs to tell me that AntiVir/Classic server(s) are and have been a bunch of "crap".

Thanks
Wildman

 

maybe try a tracert in your console

Tracing route to dl4.avgate.net [62.146.66.184]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms 1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 22 ms 26 ms 11 ms 217.0.116.68
3 11 ms 10 ms 11 ms 217.0.68.210
4 14 ms 15 ms 15 ms f-ea3.F.DE.net.DTAG.DE [62.154.17.54]
5 24 ms 23 ms 25 ms oc48-pos8-0.cr1.FRA3.ip-exchange.de [193.158.5.2
2]
6 24 ms 24 ms 24 ms oc48-srp2-0.cr1.NBG1.ip-exchange.de [212.123.127
.17]
7 24 ms 24 ms 24 ms ge1-1-951.rtr2.NBG1.colo1.ip-exchange.de [212.12
3.127.117]
8 25 ms 24 ms 24 ms 62.146.66.184


Tracing route to dl1.antivir-pe.de [62.146.87.171]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 11 ms 12 ms 13 ms 217.0.116.68
3 11 ms 11 ms 10 ms 217.0.68.214
4 15 ms 15 ms 15 ms f-ea3.F.DE.net.DTAG.DE [62.154.17.54]
5 25 ms 24 ms 24 ms oc48-pos8-0.cr1.FRA3.ip-exchange.de [193.158.5.2
2]
6 24 ms 23 ms 24 ms oc48-srp2-0.cr1.NBG1.ip-exchange.de [212.123.127
.17]
7 24 ms 24 ms 24 ms ge1-1-950.rtr3.NBG1.colo1.ip-exchange.de [212.12
3.127.88]
8 24 ms 24 ms 24 ms 62.146.87.171

Trace complete.


Looks awfully responsive to me, wildman... maybe your ISPs routing to the servers is ****ed up. This would explain your bad performance with antivirs servers while other AVs servers are located in differently routed networks.
I've had such problems while i was on dialup with many overseas servers.... i gather you're not located in europe...

 

I installed AntiVir 7 Classic at home for some testing, updated at 19:00 German time - which is the currently traffic peak on the servers.

Well, there was no delay (< 1 sec) getting the IDX files and the VDF files (full update after install) downloaded with 250 KB/sec on DL1-Server.

Wildman, I suspect you have less problems with other programs because they have international hosters. But it is very strange indeed that even people from UK have any problems.

 

anyone installed it on win98se or ME?
I can't figure out a way to install it on my pc

 

I hope you downloaded Win9x version not WinNT one...

 

that's what I downloaded..

 

problem fixed by reinstalling IE6SP1

 

memory usage of ver7 is about 10 times greater than ver6..
also could you plz make all screens resizable?

 

This is related to antivir6 premium but also i guess to the beta 7.Ive also posted at antivir forums http://www.free-av.de/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=37&t=000046
but still am a little unclear to the answers given (possible language problems).Im a little confused about antivirs double extension detection as stated in antivir help.....

"Double Extension Files (HEUR-DBLEXT)
Executable files that hide their real file extension behind a false one and that can therefore be classified as possibly suspicious.

AntiVir is able to detect "Double Extension Files" Software. If you have activated the option "Double Extension Files (HEUR-DBLEXT)" under Unwanted programs in the configuration menu, you will receive a corresponding warning whenever AntiVir reports a find."

Now ive tried renaming various executables and giving them double and triple extensions but i dont recieve any warning such as for example wormguard give , in fact i havent had a peep out of antivir.Ive been told on antivir forums that id only get a warning if theres a virus in the double extension.Mmm am i missing something or what is the point of that as the guard would get that anyway .Anyone know exactly how this double extension detection actually works or is it just a gimmick?
tia
ellison

 

I am done with this product and this subject. Give a cheer, because the "Wildman" has spoken his last in regards to AntiVir/Classic. It is a damn shame, as I think the program is not that bad, could stand to have an email check however. I wish all of you well who continue to tout this product, but as for me, I am finished with it and it's "crap" for server(s). Also please do not try and goad me into responding either.

Thanks
Wildman

 

minacross, are you sure about the 10x memory usage? The Windows team paid special attention to keep the memory usage low, and it will even further lowered soon (guard and mailguard load the engine/vdf seperately for now).

ellison, I wrote that detection and it works pretty well. There is a "trick" about it, it won't simply report anything that has double extensions like virus.exe.pdf. Alas, I cannot go into details.

 

Is there a way to disable guard from start up.You can disable guard while running but how to disable from running after reboot.

 

Thats no problem Stefan.In that case though, i do think that perhaps the help file for version 7 double extension (if its the same as 6 premium),should maybe be explained differently, as it seems to suggest it will behave in a similar way to wormguard which also detects double extensions..i.e a file with a double extension.May i ask why you cant go into details Stefan ?or does it use some sort of " smart" detection that is under wraps.
tia
ellison

 

But i can go, the social engineering guru

"virus.exe.pdf" won't do it since last extension is a PDF which means it will try to open in Adobe Acrobat Reader (ever tried openening EXE file in Adobe Acrobat Reader? It just won't work, trust me .

On the other hand "virus.pdf.exe" will certanly do it. Add PDF icon to this file and you're ready to go. Then you have tricks with multiple whitespace sequences ala "virus.pdf .exe" and so on and so on. There are countless posibilities.

The trick is that people recognize files by extension even though Windows OS doesn't show them by default (for known filetypes like EXE,PIF,SCR and other non viral). "virus.pdf.exe" will actually look like "virus.pdf" in Windows Explorer.
Thing that wonders me is that users simply don't get it that "virtual" extension shouldn't be there in the first place. And this is the biggest reason why people mindlessly clicking on every attachement they get. Along with natural stupidity...

 

Rejzor, that was merely me sleeping on the keyboard, virus.pdf.exe is the propper order of course. But you can try, AntiVir still won't barf on that file.

Those double extensions are used in a specific way by the malware. The detection is not "smart", though. As soon the heuristic 2.0 is in, I will be able to use some of the information that the h2 gathers to improve the dbl-ext stuff.

 

I'm sure 1000%. That's why I am using AntiVir PEC, besides it very good detection it has - had - a very small impact on my old 300mhz celeron.
I hope you fix this issue soon

 

Very nice looking interface indeed.