Is HTTP scanning necessary

Hi,

Just wanted to know whether HTTP scanning is really necessary for added protection. Really found surfing to be a pain with HTTP scanning turned on (with NOD32).

Yes I know it can be turned off, but I am wondering about the dangers of not having the HTTP scanning function? I can think of one: protection from xxx.toolbar being downloaded for example. However, as another poster noted, usually the av will catch this if it is downloaded onto the hard drive. Or perhaps the firewall will block it from contacting out and one can subsequently clear the cache, which should clear the malware. Are there anymore examples?

Thanks

 

u say it slows down ur surfing, have u tried setting it to high compatibility mode instead? anyways HTTP scanning isnt necessary but its nice knowing i have that much more protection against malware and the examples u gave are rele the only ones i can think of.

 

What pain exactly? I'm using it all the time on Compatibility Mode and it's working flawlessly. I barelly notice it on my 1Mbit ADSL connection.
On the other hand Efficiency Mode is noticeably slower and will delay page rendering quiet alot. Also very useful if you're using IE6 to avoid possible exploits before they actually get to the browser itself...

 

Been using it since Avast introduced it, no troubles ever.

 

How is it a pain? I use it on all my rigs, never noticed any speed change, never found any issues...be it in IE, FF, or my current fave...Opera.

What is this "pain"? Are you having it jump up and alert you all the time? If that's the case, it's doing its job..might want to consider not surfing those sites.

 

I`ve used it too since day one and it hasn`t slowed me down any. It may be a config problem?

 

Hmm, I guess everyone focused on the "pain" part. What I really wanted to know was what type of exploits are there to warrant http scanning...

Back to the topic of pain, perhaps misconfiguration was a problem. Unfortunately, I have already uninstalled nod. Maybe I will revisit it again before my current av expires.

Thanks for your feedback though

 

http scanning lets u catch malware earlier (im not an expert on exploits so i cant answer on that) and for most ppl, it doesnt slow their internet much so its nice to have it running and protecting u while u surf.

 

Also here is a nice thing with HTTP scanning because it also checks inside archives. So you know right away if there is malware in it or not without manually extracting it or manually scanning it with explorer extension.

 

Having tried both Avast & NOD32 I found that HTTP scanning did slow down my internet speed slighty. I prefer not to use it.
Is it necessary? You have to ask one of the gurus I guess, but malware needs to be executed to infect your PC, and a good resident scanner should pick this up before this occurrs. Just my 2 cents worth.

 

Well i belive there must be something on your side. It might slow down. Actually it's not slow down because speed will be the same. It's about delay of page rendering. But few miliseconds shouldn't affect your browsing experience.
At least not for the goodies that HTTP scanning brings...

 

the main thing about http scanning is to catch java applets and activex contoles. In these cases it is better to not even get them on your system.

I'm not sure why they would implement http scanning but one thing is sure they did do it for a reason. There must be some advantage to it.

 

I left NOD32 because they introduced that feature for promotional purposes. It DOES DRASTICALLY slow down surfing in my experience. It was constantly showing me a download bar and I had to sit there forever before I could see any page. This is a very fast 3.0GhZ 800MhZ FSB, hyperthreading, dual channel 1024RAM computer that was brought to its knees by that unneeded feature. KAV never has slowed my computer but NOD32 went from being a very good AV to being awful with that needless gimmick IMO. Eset refused to beef up AMON and refused to give us a lot of what we asked for and instead promoted a gimmick because AV companies have to scare users and "impress" them falsely so they will purchase that AV. Eset is not the only AV guilty of scare tactics and gimmicks. That abounds these days.

If you are worried about ActiveX why are you using IE? Use Fx, Mozilla, Netscape, Opera and you won't need that IMON feature. All you really need is a barebones AV with OUTSTANDING detection and that would be F-Prot but the GUI currently is terrible for XP. There is a thread today though quoting Frisk as saying the very long awaited version 4 will be out before the end of the year!! I was going to go with KAV 2006 (if I decided to not stay with my BD free) but if FProt is really coming out with version 4 that sounds great and will make my choice difficult. I currently have been using Bit Defender free version, which has an outstanding scanner, as my sole AV for a year now. You don't need all the junk that is in most AVs UNLESS you visit porn sites, warez and stubbornly stick with IE. Get a router, practice safe hex at all times, use a non IE based browser, stay out of the dark side of the Internet and you won't need gimmicky AVs.

 

Hi
To me, having Http scanning, is like having the peephole in my frontdoor. Why open the door if you know its dodgy.

 

KAV 2006 will also have this feature.