BitDefender 2009 comments please

I ment doing either a scheduled or ondemand scan is of less priority if you keep realtime protection on. In your case doing a deep scan once a week would be more then enough. Y BD thinks a full scan each night is needed beats me

 

I see, realtime protec is like having the deep scan live "24/7". OK. Thanks for helping me with these very basic settings.

It's not BD that told me to make a full scan every night.... I'm the one that thought a scan should be done daily. I'm learning!

Best regards.

 

OK. I've changed my "custom" schedules... to more normal schedules! Thanks for the help.

 

Hello TKHgva,

Sorry, for the late response.

1) Feedback on seccenter.exe issue: I have this seccenter.exe issue. Started 1-2 months ago. I couldn't access the BitDefender control panel by clicking the taskbar icon or even from "Prog Files". BD support then told me I have to end the seccenter.exe task in task manager. When I end the task, I can then access again but it's quite annoying. It happens regularly.

Do you think BitDefender can do anything about this if I ask for a solution?
Or is it simply a bug that we have to live with?

I have the same issue sometimes on my vista computer. Did you ran sysdump when the problem happened? Since the recently forum change you can post and support people will answer. The more people who provide information the easier it is to solve problems.

So, in refferal to your quote above: the issue is still present.

2) Questions regarding BitDefender Configuration:

(Quick note: I'm not too lazy to read the help file, please don't get me wrong, I refer to it very regularly. But my concerns started after readng this thread and forum in general: I have realised that after we install and configure a software, we should monitor & analyse the way it works to make sure defence is efficient and that there are no holes).

I think I've figured out how to run and configure BitDefender, but I'm just not sure that it's actually doing all that it should, or that I'm protected in the way I think. I'm too much of a novice to get a clear picture of how my laptop and AV are working together.

- Real time protection: do you set it on default , custom or aggressive? (The latter adds heuristic analysis.) What do you recommend?

I've set it on aggressive and the protection level of the behavioral blocker on critical

- How often should we run: full system scan and deep system scan?

You can opt to run a deep scan once a week.

- How can I make sure BitDefender scans new programs I download or even files?
Example 1: I download a new software using Free Download Manager. After the newsoftware.exe. file is downloaded, I right-click and scan withBD. Is there a way to configure BD to scan whatever new data/files arrives on the computer systematically?

open BitDefender,switch to advanced view go to antivirus,high light the shield tab now press on custom level but on every protection level you set p2p traffic is scanned by scan accessed files press on + to have the maximum protection select scan all files press on ok to save

(PS On Free Download Manager, there's an option in settings for automatic virus scans. Do you know which program/file I should select in order to use BitDefender as the scanning tool in FDM? Is it something like an exe. file?)

uiscan.exe can be used but the problem is that I don't know the parameters. But if you have enable scan http traffic (is automatically being enabled when you have the protection level on aggressive) you are safe. Also BitDefender onaccess scanner will protect you, just as the behavioral scanner

Example 2: U torrent. How can we make sure that the activities of U Torrent are being properly monitored by BitDefender?

You can check that by doing this open BitDefender,switch to advanced view go to antivirus,high light the shield tab now press on custom level but on every protection level you set p2p traffic is scanned.


- Finally: since installing Spybot S&D with Teatimer, when BD runs the schedule scan, it says: "2 items (paths refer to Spybot) were not scanned due to password protection". Should I ignore this issue?

That is absolutely normal. Some security software encrypts or password protect infections that they have removed. Mostly to aviod that you can't accidentally run them or that another antivirus can detect them again. BitDefender doens't know the password so that is the reason why it's skipped.

Kind regards,
Niels

 

Hello Niels,

No problem at all; I appreciate your replying to the post.

Thanks a lot for the step by step help. You're really blessed with the quality of patience.

I've got BD set for full protection and happy now. I'll also post in the new BitDefender forum, as you suggested. That's great that they have people from support to answer on the forum.

Thanks for letting me know the log issue (skipping files when scanning)with Spybot S&D was normal, and especially for giving details. That way one learns the "pourquoi et comment". However, I've left Spybot S&D definitely and opted for the licensed version of Prev X Edge. It feels more silent and scans more rapidly (in my novice's opinion).

Regarding my question for setting BD as a scanner for new downloads in Free Download Manger (FDM), I thought about putting uiscan.exe as well. However, as when in doubt I usually ask, so this is what BD support replied:

"BitDefender does not have this option, as the location of the file you are
looking for is constantly being changed after each update.
(However, not using this function in FDM) will not affect the security of your system, as it will scan in real-time
all the accessed files for malware. "

So basically what you advised to do (scan shield-P2P-check all) is the answer. Thanks. I'll also be posting any issues

I must also say that BD support is usually very rapid at responding to requests and helpful. I usually get responses the same day, at the best a few hours after inquiring.
However, I've emailed them a couple of times requesting support phone numbers, because sometimes it's easier to talk to someone; but they haven't provided any numbers. I live in Switzerland, their Swiss helpline is based in the German speaking part, but I live in the French area and can't handle technical explanations in German. So I tried a few times calling France support, the UK support and the International English support they provide in our BD account. However, neither of those numbers went through or worked. Strange.

Besides that, I had an issue last week: for 3 days update would stop at 20%. So after sending them all the sysdump, bdtar...files they made me uninstall and reinstall with "latest download package". It's working again now.

Thought I'd mention the above as the thread is "BD 2009 comments please".

Ok, thanks again.

PS
Do you work at BD support by any chance? I don't think so, because I haven't seen BD support reply to inquiries in the question-by-question style you used. The only ones I've seen that respond in that way before you was PrevX support. Their support is really good as well.

 

Just to add something (not of national importance though...):

I had to reinstall BitDefender last week (due to an update bug) and after installing a fresh new version of BD, I saw that the full scan schedule is actually set by default at 2AM daily. So BD default settings actually considers a full system scan is required/advised every day.

 

I know but imo its a bad call on their side, everyone knows that it isnt needed to do daily full long scans when your protected in realtime though it wouldnt hurt to do a weekly one just incase. Every night is plain waist of resources n time.

 

I use BD Antivirus since Version 10, couple of years ago. Right now I still have it installed on 2 computers, it's up to date on version 2009 and it runs smooth. One license is installed on my son's computer and it runs well together with Spy Sweeper 5.5.7.124 and also Net Nanny (Internet filter). I think Bitdefender is still a big player.

 

Hello TKHgva,

No, I am just a volunteer and that since the start of the official forum. Before I was active on an unofficial BitDefender forum also as moderator. But I do know some people who work for BitDefender. It's been a while that I needed to install BitDefender again but I thought that you could opt not to scan daily at 2am. But I am not 100% sure. It isn't necessary to run a daily full scan.

Kind regards,
Niels

 

Hello Niels,

Thanks for volunteering to give your help on forums

By the way, I didn't express myself very clearly: when installing BD, the scan is automatically set at 2AM daily, but that can be changed to one's preference (no scan, once, periodically etc at the time one wishes). But you know all that.

Best regards, hope to bump into you on the BD forum if I need some help. I'll post soon (didn't make time yet) because I had a BD "blackout" after making a new setting in advanced system settings in Vista, but I'll post that there.

A+

 

It had waaaaaaaay too many FP's. I really dont like bitdefender.

 

Can you tell us wich files?

 

Hello TKHgva,

I thought that you asked me how to preventthe 2am scan during installation.

Kind regards,
Niels

Hello CookieCrumbler

I suppose that you are referring to riskware detections. I mean tools that are legit and can be misused. To give a few examples software to gain remote access on another computer,password revealer's,... or packer detections.I use BitDefender for a long time and I don't had that many false positives. Please otherwise mention what files were being detected.

Kind regards,
Niels

 

Apart BitDefender asking to allow a program or not (to auto add to Start Menu for ex.) when installing applications for the first time, and very few times when I get a warning of attempted Registry changes, I don't recall having any false postives on any programs that were actually running on the system, and I have quite a few programs now. This is over a period of 8 months since I installed BitDefender. Also, I have real-time protection on aggressive.

Also, deep scans and full system scans, over a 8 month period, never revealed any infections. BD also successfully blocks downloads of harmful files.

From what I have read on the internet about some people getting many FPs from their AV, I think BitDefender ranks very well (in my personal opinion and experience). Maybe my memory is short, there are certain occasions when BitDefender alerts that a program might be a threat, but that's only during installation time. However, in my internet and computer usage, BD's behaviour is far from the statistics mentioned by CookieCrumble. It runs quite smoothly and silently I find.

 

Hello TKHgva,

The purpose of registry control is only to alert everything that is added to the registry,run key so it will automatically run at each boot. This is that so you may prevent an infection that isn't detected yet by BitDefender by preventing it to add it to the registry so it can't start and you can use B-have to block changes. B-have only reports possible malicious actions. So that is also why you see many times the pop-up's. You can reduce that (behavioral scanner) by excluding legitimate processes or by changing the slider from critical to low. So infact that aren't false positives. Or I didn't understood what you said?

Kind regards,
Niels

 

Sorry to say but their B-Have really suc* ,
They hadn't been able to improve it in these last 2 years.

In some av test B-Have scored same score today as 2 years ago!
I've tested it myself on "many" Unknown files and it doesn't seem to be a superior on Unknown files.

 

Hello Niels,

You understood correctly; it's probably me that doesn't explain very specifically and with correct terminology, I'm still learning how to use computers (I even had to look up the definition of false positive after reading the posts, just to make sure I knew what I was saying before posting...).

So you are surely right: those aren't false positives that I am getting; which confirms what I was trying to say about BD not being "over-reactive" and running well, at least on my system and with the use I make of the internet.

I actually get very few registry alerts from BD. I mean that on aggressive mode, I don't feel like BD is constantly alerting me, in a way which makes me want to reduce the scan level/settings. What I was trying to say was that BD doesn't seem it's "over-reacting" in situations where it should remain "passive", contrarily to what the poster CookieCrumble seems to have experienced.

Would you care to kindly explain a little bit more this section of your post:
"The purpose of registry control is only to alert everything that is added to the registry,run key so it will automatically run at each boot. This is that so you may prevent an infection that isn't detected yet by BitDefender by preventing it to add it to the registry so it can't start and you can use B-have to block changes."

I just need a bit more to fully understand. Thanks!

 

Hello TKHgva,

I will try to explain:

When a software wants to start together with windows it needs to create a value that points to a file that is needed to program to start. That particular key is called run. What BitDefender registry control do: is always asking if you want to allow or block the creation of a value inside the run key in your registry. During an installation that behavior is common.

Kind regards,
Niels

Hello aniku,

Did you ever had the behavioral scanned enabled and set on critical?(only possible in the 2009 edition a.k.a version 12).
Soon quickscan will be available, now it's still in bèta. That is a new technology that automatically uploads unknown files to BitDefender virus labs. That will be a good addition to BitDefender's current protection.

Kind regards,
Niels

 

Hello aniku,

Did you ever had the behavioral scanned enabled and set on critical?(only possible in the 2009 edition a.k.a version 12).
Soon quickscan will be available, now it's still in bèta. That is a new technology that automatically uploads unknown files to BitDefender virus labs. That will be a good addition to BitDefender's current protection.

Kind regards,
Niels[/QUOTE]

We were posting about B-Have - detect - undetected Unknown files. Not behavioral scanner.
You know as well as i do that in last 2 years their heuristic B-Have has not been improved.

Quicskan - people already subimit more then hundred of thousand of Undetected samples to Bitdefender i still don't see that they improve their engine , so why would they improve with Quickscan even if they got more samples? I think it would be more FP's with Quickscan

I am not saying BD is bad but Bitdefender few years ago has stopped in same level-detection rate, it has good detection on Unkown files but it has never improved the "Engine" but stayed in that lever just "Good" and this every user that use Bitdefender product know, that's why many of them changed to Eset, Avira or some other good product.

 

I will not start an argue...just pointing out. FP: s are a common fact with all vendors, some have more some have less...an example, the leader in FP:s is Avira, but is in the same time the leader in detection...With the BD suite you have to consider not only detection on demand but also intrusion detection and behaviour analyze...I will say that BD is among the some 5 best suites...Comparitives alters from month to month and No 1 today isn't tomorrow. That' s my point of view. It' s the general picture you have to rely on.

 

I dontthink anyone is questioning their detection ability. It is, the damn software is just so buggy. From imcompatibilities to having everything work fine one minute and the next it doesnt. Great product that causes a great headache.

 

Well, headache is bad...for sure. If several ppl have headache with BD it speaks for itself, I agree to that. But sometimes it seems to me as some are comparing AV:s as cars...
BD hasn'n left me with headache yet, on the contrary, only minor thing with the trayicon not showing up from time to time, but for me that's minor....Maybe the headache has to do with something else ?

 

my thoughts on it, are pretty much the consensus I get from others here. Ones that seem to be fair and accurate.

 

There's suppose to be soon a major product update.
Maybe Niels or some from BD can post when this happens.I posted my opinions regarding the product.I think it passed more than 6 months after it was released and i'm not sure someone can say it's working flawless for them.About the same happened to their 2008 line.

If someone has time ,and has BD AV 2009 installed on some image can you please check the handle column in ProceSExplorer for bit defender processes.When you boot and after 2hours of PC usage(doesn't matter how: gaming or just looking at your desktoop ).I seen some high numbers here last time i tested it and i'm curious to see if on other PC is the same.

 

Hello aniku,

B-have heuristics of BitDefender's AVIS are more aggressive then the ones in the current home products. The only problem if the high sensitive heuristics are implemented are the very high false positives grate including packer detections. You can download AVIS here. You can update the heuristics also. So you know the real strength of BitDefender heuristics.


Kind regards,
Niels


Hello trjam,

Can you give examples of incompatibilities? When was the last time you tried BitDefender? There were a couple of large upgrades that fixed bugs and incompatibilities. Since the end of February there are now support people active on the BitDefender forum.

Kind regards,
Niels


A large product upgrade is being scheduled for the end of this month.