First impression Final 3.0.551.0

Hello,

I have no mark of scan in my mails but I have putted 'put a mark in all scanned mails'

Do you have this problem ? Thanks.

 

Running smoothly on Windows XP Home. The only issue I have is that email tag appears on only about 80% of incoming email. Not sure if same issue occurred with Version 2.7.

 

For me, this version is a disappointment on my system Perhaps in the future...who nose

 

I ran it for a few days when it was in beta and I was a skeptic but I reinstalled yesterday and haven't had any problems that I know of. I use Thunderbird for e-mail and all my mail has the tag at the bottom of it.

The only thing that I think is odd is that it says, "The message has been checked by Nod32 antivirus system." It sounded better when it said, "This message has been checked by Nod32 antivirus system."

 

Not trying to rain on the parade, and I realize a lot of this stuff is subjective, but I have two questions: is version 3 any lighter than 2? I've heard it can be "as light". Also, is the detection any better? I suppose that's what it all amounts to, along with cleaning, and lightness. Big question: any benefit over version 2?

EDIT: Typo.

 

v3 used some more resources than v2.7, but nothing astounding. It was noticable, though. v3's detection is the same, although cleaning is suppose to be superior to v2.7's, but I'm not certain if it is or not.

 

AFAIK ver. 3.x only include registry cleaning. The other still the same with ver. 2.x

 

How will the firewall "die"? I have tested it on GRC and pcflank, and it came up all stealth. The only way it could die if a piece of malware slipped pass the AV and attempted to turn off the firewall. Even though the chance is slim, you could add a HIPS or behavior blocker to minimize that slim chance.

 

Improvements Of NOD32 (3.0.5551.0):-
1) All suspected and infected files are quarantined by default.
2) Seems to be more potent - my NOD32 (3.0.5551.0) found THREE infections from the restore folder which my (2.70.39) had failed to, in 4 months of its existence.
3) On-demand-scans are comparable if not quicker than (2.70.39)
4) Exclusions at every level (file extensions, website adresses, ports, applications, browsers & email clients) work like a charm.
5) Signature updates are frequent, small and unobtrusive.
6) Mates well with Outlook 2007 and MailWasher Pro (6.0)
7) 'Real-time File System Protection' is of the highest order.
'Email Protection' with Outlook 2007 has been good (have not checked out tagging.)
9) The new 'Import and export settings' option is good news for Noobies - advanced users worked around earlier with registry keys.

Drawbacks Of NOD32 (3.0.5551.0):-
1) Consumes more CPU resources (just try clicking on the radio button 'OK' within the NOD32 GUI to check this)
2) Http filtering is quite aggressive and wastes a lot of time in scanning the web pages, images and some of which fail to load completely unless I keep refreshing the page. Seems to disagree with Firefox (2.0.0.9) more often than with Internet Explorer (Internet Explorer 7.0.5730.13) in this area.
3) On rare occasions, the tray icon inexplicably goes into hiding (good news = it's working in the background, bad news = needs to be reworked in the 'looks' department, preferably an animated one would add value.)
4) User name and password fail once in a while (giving me a little scare.)
5) The window warning one of infection was better in the (2.70.39) interface - the (3.0.5551.0) needs to be made to look more scary with perhaps red graphics and a bigger window with more options on offer.
6) It's irritating to find the NOD32 window open on each reboot (another little license scare.)
7) It also disagrees with Internet Download Manager's (IDM 5.11 Build browser integration (my remedy = added IEMonitor.exe to Web Browsers with a red X.) Works for other applications adopting third layer integration, too.
Found it faster to add exclusion list of file extensions through the registry than through the application GUI (good news = the excluded file extensions sort themselves alphabetically.)
9) On-demand scanning has one major irritant - it STOPS scanning when it comes across some infection, waiting for user intervention (man, I say get on with the scanning because I run manual scans only when I need to sleep - will take necessary actions but only towards the end after waking up, so don't stop.)

Data:-
Platform = WinXP Pro
RAM = 512 MBs
Net Connection = DSL @ 2 MB/s behind a router with hardware firewall turned on
Browsers = 1) Firefox (2.0.0.9) with addons NoScript (1.1.7.7) and Adblock Plus (0.7.5.3)
2) Internet Explorer (7.0.5730.13) with addon - IE7 Pro (1.2.0.3)
Anti Spyware = Webroot Spy Sweeper (5.5.7.103)
Software Firewall = ZoneAlarm Pro (7.0.408.000)
Email Client = Outlook 2007
SPAM Blocker = MailWasher Pro (6.0)

The above impression is subjective and definitely does not apply to others. IMHO, this release is at a nascent stage and there are no mind-blowing advantages over the previous version, at the moment. However, it looks to be quite promising - largely due to the Operators out here for their patient but prompt replies. A little bow of respect to all you guys for a commendable job.

 

I've had no technical problems with RC1 or the final version, but man, what happened to the GUI and the systray icon. This looks like kiddie stuff. I thought everything looked fine on RC1. Will the "Business Edition" look any different? If not, I may leave all of our 500 users on 2.7 as long as possible. Please ESET, do more work on the graphics, especially on the systray icon.

 

I think the GUI is nice. It's like alot of other apps. The icon is a little flat and would look better with a little 3D or two colors, but it's only an icon.

 

Running nicely with XP and COMODO Firewall Pro., release candidate1.

 

I've had to go back to v2.7 for now. I had v3 on for 24 hours and repeatedly it seems to kill anything internet related. Web pages just stopped loading in Firefox or Internet Explorer. It seemed to stop Firefox responding when a page was trying to load. Email timed out and gradually the PC got less and less responsive. Back to V2.7 and all's good again.

 

Disappointed that version 3 would not allow me to log into my lycos email account and into my favourite photo-forum. The user-id and password boxes go blank without any error/action message. Probably wrong handling of cookies. No user options/settings for cookies.

Another disappointment (although purely cosmetic) is the replacement of that lovely blue eye by that sick constipated looking robot!... Whatever got into ESET to change their 'maskot'. The system tray icon is just as bad, I can't make out what it is supposed to be...

 

I second that, Sunshine803 (check my Avatar.)

 

I have the same problem. I use firefox and all pages were taking at least twice as long to load as v2.7. What I did was go into setup and I decided to try unchecking 'web access protection' for firefox and the internet pages started to load at least twice as fast! My question is whether its safe to leave this option turned off in NOD? Am I exposing myself to a lot more risk? I do also run a seperate firewall and spyware software in addition to NOD antivirus. Thanks for any advice!

 

The first one is the recent version (3.0.551.0)
Second one is the previous version (2.70.39)
(check out the graphics and number of options.)

 

This is how it looks after one clicks the "show advanced options" on the left. This I feel should've been designed to remain open by default as it's not eye-catching - most users would overlook it unless they were as observant as you (I noticed it only on my third threat found.). I do miss the 'rename' option from the 2.70.39 which was very helpful when one is not sure on the action to be taken - renaming a .exe file would ensure protection against self-execution of the unknown.

 

Hi NodboN,

Thanks for the screenshots!

Is there no way, from the configuration, to get the option "rename" into the warning box? I will also miss that option

 

You're welcome, Atomas31 - am unsure of the possibility of getting the 'rename' option onto the warning box (looks to be hard-coded into the architecture.) But, will give it a shot and report back if I succeed.