New Beta

Discussion in 'ESET NOD32 v3 Beta Forum' started by ronjor, Jul 22, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Page 2 of 4
  1. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    163,902
    Location:
    Texas

    It has always worked for me. I can't speak for Eset.
     
    ronjor, Jul 22, 2004
    #26
  2. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,537
    I install it over the previous version and works fine.

    Until now this beta version works very well, I test it with the Maxthon, Firefox, Opera on the EICAR website and he catch all the files ;)

    I don't see any slow down on my connection...

    The DMON is compatible with OpenOffice?

    Great work http://m2.overseasky.net/smileys/smiley32.gif
     
    rdsu, Jul 22, 2004
    #27
  3. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,537
    NO... :(
     
    rdsu, Jul 22, 2004
    #28
  4. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    163,902
    Location:
    Texas
    I don't know about Open Office, but Imon is scanning everything on newly opened web pages if you have it setup to scan all files. With advanced heuristics no less. No drop in speed, in fact, this beta seems to run even faster than the other version.
     
    ronjor, Jul 22, 2004
    #29
  5. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,537
    But will be nice if the DMON works with the majors Office managers...

    I notice that now the "nod32kui.exe" use about 680kb and the "nod32krn.exe" 13.448kb
     
    rdsu, Jul 22, 2004
    #30
  6. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    163,902
    Location:
    Texas
    My memory usage is about the same as yours.
     
    ronjor, Jul 22, 2004
    #31
  7. tosbsas

    tosbsas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Posts:
    789
    Location:
    Lima, Peru
    Scans Opera here with high efficency - is that ok or high compatibility be better

    After Update got these infos:

    NOD32 Antivirus System information
    Virus signature database version: 1.819 (20040722)
    Dated: Donnerstag, 22. Juli 2004
    Virus signature database build: 4694

    Information on other scanner support parts
    Advanced heuristics module version: 1.007 (20040309)
    Advanced heuristics module build: 1053
    Internet filter version: 1.002 (2004070:cool:
    Internet filter build: 1013
    Archive support module version: 1.017 (20040715)
    Archive support module build version: 1092

    Information on installed components
    NOD32 For Windows NT/2000/XP/2003 - Base
    Version: 2.000.11b
    NOD32 For Windows NT/2000/XP/2003 - Internet support
    Version: 2.000.11b
    NOD32 for Windows NT/2000/XP/2003 - Standard component
    Version: 2.000.11b

    Operating system information
    Platform: Windows 2000
    Version: 5.0.2195 Service Pack 4
    Version of common control components: 5.81.4916
    RAM: 160 MB
    Processor: x86 Family 6 Model 5 Stepping 0 (233 MHz)


    Thats what I needß
     
    tosbsas, Jul 22, 2004
    #32
  8. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    163,902
    Location:
    Texas

    Higher compatibility is the default. I'll try this for awhile.

    Looks like your info is correct.
     
    ronjor, Jul 22, 2004
    #33
  9. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,537
    All the browsers should be with the "high efficiency", but the NOD32 put all my browser (Maxthon, Firefox and Opera) in "high compatibility" by default...

    I change them to "high efficiency" and will see what it's happen...
     
    rdsu, Jul 22, 2004
    #34
  10. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    163,902
    Location:
    Texas
    All of my programs were put in the higher compatibility mode. I just changed to higher efficiency mode and also will see how it goes.
     
    ronjor, Jul 22, 2004
    #35
  11. Infinity

    Infinity Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    2,651
    Hi Eset, so far so good.

    pitty though their is no internal protection for termination process?? or do I misunderstood??

    virus or trojan can disable this process or not??

    for the rest, super, better then before!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


    THANXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
     
    Infinity, Jul 22, 2004
    #36
  12. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,537
    Only in Opera I received this message after I select the option "Terminate":

    Should we received the same in all browsers?
     

    Attached Files:

    rdsu, Jul 22, 2004
    #37
  13. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,456
    Infinity, were you really able to terminate the nod32krn process?
     
    Marcos, Jul 22, 2004
    #38
  14. Mele20

    Mele20 Former Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    2,495
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii
    Terminate? I don't have that. I still have to download and unzip eicar before AMON alerts. Nothing has changed.

    Plus, I have quarantine checked and it isn't quarantined.
     
    Mele20, Jul 22, 2004
    #39
  15. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    163,902
    Location:
    Texas

    Do you the beta released today? It will light up at eicar.org on the double zipped file if you just click on it.
     
    ronjor, Jul 22, 2004
    #40
  16. Infinity

    Infinity Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    2,651
    Marcos, just with process termination from diamondcs. to be honest I presses on all. then it was removed from systray but service still runs. My bad. I guess it has this protection.
     
    Infinity, Jul 22, 2004
    #41
  17. Mele20

    Mele20 Former Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    2,495
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii
    Yes, I have the new beta. It doesn't light up. I use
    AMON. I want a resident scanner that works properly. I wouldn't dare use the IMON HTTP scanner on my W98SE box where I have the new beta installed. That scanner slowed my XP box a great deal when I had an earlier version of the beta on my XP box. KAV 4.5 doesn't slow XP at all and it is supposed to slow all boxes. It doesn't mine. But NOD32's HTTP scanner makes surfing too slow and that is on a very fast XP box. Can you imagine what it would be like to use the HTTP scanner on my old 450MHz box with only 224 RAM? Plus, I don't want anything messing with Winsock. I don't use the email scanner either. Too many problems with scanning at the Winsock level. Eset should have a standard email scanner IMO. I don't care particularly that I can't use the email scanner but I do care that almost all improvement in NOD32 is in the HTTP scanner and not in AMON where it should be.

    So I am very unhappy. I wanted to see AMON doing a proper job. I should NOT have to unzip to have AMON detect eicar.zip. I guess NOD32 just isn't for me. KAV 4.5 detects without unzipping. That is what I was hoping NOD32 would do. Plus, if the way Eset is going to beef up trojan detection is through IMON then I know NOD32 is no longer for me. I am not going have my boxes slowed significantly by that HTTP scanner. I want the resident scanner to do a proper job that is all. I don't know why that is too much to ask.
     
    Mele20, Jul 22, 2004
    #42
  18. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    163,902
    Location:
    Texas

    I don't notice a slowdown on my xp machine with http scanning on. I guess each machine is different.

    I don't see any reason why amon shouldn't detect zips as you say. Maybe they can add that feature-------------hey Marcos!!
     
    ronjor, Jul 22, 2004
    #43
  19. Blackspear

    Blackspear Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Posts:
    15,115
    Location:
    Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
    Blackspear, Jul 22, 2004
    #44
  20. Blackspear

    Blackspear Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Posts:
    15,115
    Location:
    Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
    That happened the first time, not the second time, it must be loaded into cache (which I have yet to figure out how to clear with Firefox) or a temp file. I was a little dissapointed that it did not flare up on just clicking the link as it did in the first instance, which was impressive...

    Cheers :D
     
    Blackspear, Jul 22, 2004
    #45
  21. Blackspear

    Blackspear Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Posts:
    15,115
    Location:
    Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
    You are talking about earlier releases, there have been about 10 previous versions of pre-release Beta that I know of, I have kept 6 or so of them, they are all different file sizes...

    There was someone else that posted with the same specs as your 98 machine.

    Cheers :D
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2004
    Blackspear, Jul 22, 2004
    #46
  22. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    163,902
    Location:
    Texas

    Firefox, options, tools, privacy, clear all. You will have to log on to Wilders again if you clear the cache while here because your cookies go too.
     
    ronjor, Jul 22, 2004
    #47
  23. Blackspear

    Blackspear Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Posts:
    15,115
    Location:
    Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
    Thanks for that...

    Cheers :D
     
    Blackspear, Jul 22, 2004
    #48
  24. Mele20

    Mele20 Former Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    2,495
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii
    Why clear all? Just clear the cache in FireFox and keep it very low. You do not need much cache unless you are on dial up. So for those on broadband connections the recommended cache size is about 500KB. Just enough cache so you can download extensions. Most of us would have 0 cache except then you have to go back and make a small cache each time you download extensions. They cannot download if the cache is set to 0. If you don't download extensions often, then set the cache to 0.

    Tool/options/privacy/clear cache ... not clear all information stored while browsing!
     
    Mele20, Jul 22, 2004
    #49
  25. Mele20

    Mele20 Former Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    2,495
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii
    Some here have asked for this for a long time. :(
     
    Mele20, Jul 22, 2004
    #50
Page 2 of 4
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Accept Learn More...