KAV as backup to NOD32

I know that only one AV should be used in real-time at any given time. But is it OK to run KAV 5.0 as an on-demand backup to NOD32 2.5?

I am hoping that someone has actual experience with this, rather than just "It should be OK" suggestions.

KAV 5.0 loads a bunch of drivers (can be seen in Device Manager if you look under "non plug-and-play" stuff). Can they be disabled? Should they be? I think most or all are related to real-time scanning and network stuff.

BTW, the reason I posted this here is that it is appropriate to this forum. I am interested in not breaking NOD32 2.5, which is why I'd like to hear from other users who rely mainly on NOD32 2.5.

 

Hi kanod,

I do it all the time (in both directions), using KAV 4.5. Not sure what the issues may be, if any, using 5.0.

BTW, Kaspersky has an online scanner that you can use that is in beta.

Rich

 

This is the option i would choose too. But, if you really want an second on-demand scanner, then i would find a copy of Kav 4.5 and disable all the options you don't need during the install.

 

not sure about 5, but kav 4.5 works flawlessly as a backup scanner for all the avs ive tried. u gotta choose custom install and uncheck everything except the 2 things that cant be unchecked + scanner and updater...this should leave u with just 4 components..

 

I am using NOD32 2.5 as my primary AV and KAV 5 Personal Edition as my backup (on-demand) scanner. I have not run into any problems whatsoever. I am a big fan of both products. This is what my Device Manager looks like (I have disabled the Real Time Protection options for KAV 5): If you need me to send a capture of Task Manager as well, do not hesitate to ask.

 

Thanks a lot for the replies. I own licenses for KAV 4.5 and 5.0 (though I guess if you have one for 5.0, you retroactively have one for 4.5... But whatever). But I've got a weird thing about always liking to have the latest software... Neurotic I guess.

I'll check out the online scanner. I hope it's better than the one they have now, with one-file-at-a-time capability.

To view the KAV drivers in Device Manager, you need to select View | Show hidden devices, then expand "Non-Plug and Play Drivers". KAV has a bunch of stuff that starts (entirely or primarily) with "kl...", like KLIF, KLIN, KLICK, etcetera.

But it's OK; I don't need a screen cap of KAV drivers. Thanks a lot for the one you did post!

Thanks again.

 

And thanks for teaching me something new (about the hidden devices in device manager). I never knew about that even though I feel like I should have.

 

Hi,

Yes, the new KAV online scanner will scan your whole file system. You need to register here:

http://www.kaspersky.com/beta?product=161744315

Rich

 

When I usesd to have KAV 5 and Nod32 on my comp.

I had it running like this:

Nod32's EMON,DMON, and IMON running while AMON disabled and KAV's demand scanner running. Worked well together

With that nothing should really get passed you.

Regards,

snowboard

 

Well...it became obvious that only NOD users need to have backup AV - and they always choose KAV.

Be practical and use only KAV - you will be protected as much as it is possible these days.

Marketing stories that KAV is to heavy for PC are outdated...with KAV 5 and modern PCs, you will not see any significant difference in PC load.

Truth is that NOD is lighter than KAV, but let me tell this again: with KAV 5 and modern (1 or even 2 years old) PC config this difference is not detectable.

And maybe even you will get better overall performances because you will not have to have backup AV

 

I prefer NOD because of its AH and much better proactive zero-hour protection against a number of fast moving wide spread outbreaks.

No matter how fast definitions are made and then updated on a PC there can still be an hour or more time gap which can be too late for the end user.

 

What nonsense bre. I have noticed that a number of people on the forums use KAV as their resident scanner backed up by NOD. KAV #1 , NOD #1a or NOD #1 and KAV #1a take your pick. Either way you have the best. Mind you Bitdefender is showing up in their rear view mirror and gaining. See retrospective test at AV-Comparatives for May.

 

Not true. Allmost all users use NOD32 as resident scanner and KAV for backup scanner. Why? NOD32 has great AH and it is lighter than KAV. KAV has the best signature detection. People don't trust NOD32. This is my opinion. If you have KAV as resident scanner computer is slower than if you have NOD32. But it's much more safer with KAV as resident scanner.

Izi

 

Izi,

I certainly don't know enough to claim that almost all NOD32 users have KAV for backup. I happen to own both, but it's not for backup per se, it simply reflects the historical evolution of my setup at this point.

Both are outstanding selections. Simply because I choose one for a given task doesn't necessarily mean I don't trust the other. I also do not believe that it is much safer with KAV as the resident scanner.

The problem with brand A vs. brand B AV (or AT, or firewall, etc.) comparisons is that too many people treat it as a winner vs. losers proposition. In other words, for KAV (or NOD32) to be the "winner", every other AV must be a loser selection by definition. I personally don't believe that's a productive way to view these types of products

Blue

 

a bit off topic here, but kav being slower than nod isnt true anymore, not on my computer anyway. kav personal 5.0.325 has seen a dramatic improvement in this area. in fact its as fast and lightweight as my drweb (drweb which i find faster than nod). and kav6 looks like it will be even faster. not flaming here just pointing out that kav slowing down is a thing of the past, at least on this pc (2600+, 1 gig)

 

Yo, NOD heuristics fans - don't you look at facts?!

On latest AV-Comparatives heuristics test you have result that with heuristics NOD has 70% chances to catch unknown malware and KAV has 50%.
But, one component of the system which is better does not mean that system is better.
Why? Because in real life KAV has that "unknown" virus in base within 10 minutes...so, if it was unknown in 10 minutes will become known and intercepted.
So, 50% of unknown viruses not intercepted by KAV heuristics will be intercepted by KAV base within 10-15 minutes.
But, 30% of unknown viruses not intercepted by NOD will not be intercepted for a quite longer period of time, because NOD bases are rarely updated.

And as result, KAV as system is safer than NOD as system, even if we agree that NOD has better heuristics.

But in real life, you will have more chances to "survive" with KAV philosophy of rapid updates than with NOD philosophy of heuristics.

Just look at http://virusscan.jotti.org and in much more situations you will find that KAV detected with base and NOD failed to detect with heuristica and base, as well.

 

bre,

Pulling firm numbers out of thin air (10 minutes..., 50% of unknown viruses...,) and putting them around an opinion, doesn't elevate your opinion to fact. You should learn the difference.

Since you firmly state that NOD32 bases are rarely updated, could you please provide a comparative mean-time-to-coverage following emergence for propagating threats relative to KAV? Right, I didn't think so.

Opinions are fine, but it is critical to understand the difference between opinions, impressions, and objective facts. Labelling an opinion or impression a fact doesn't make it one. Most of the facts that you desire are simply unavailable. Furthermore, simply because a file is detected as malware, doesn't make it so. It could be malware, it could be a genuinely positive detection on a inoperative code fragment or module, or it could be a false positive. The difference is important.

Now, before you dismiss me as a raving NOD32 fanboy, as I note above, this isn't a single winner vs. many losers scenario as you appear to position it. There are a handful of top tier products and the objective differences in protection provided to users of these products are nil - that means it doesn't really matter which one a user chooses, they will likely have equivalent coverage. I hedge my statements since in all cases we are using historical results to predict many dimensions of future performance.

If your preferences are KAV, that's great, it's a fantastic product. My list of top tier? KAV, NOD32, Dr. Web, McAfee, Bitdefender, F-Prot, Panda, and Symantec. Where do I come up with this list? Holders of Advanced+/Standard and above or Advanced/Advanced ratings in the av-comparatives.org test protocol within the past year where the two ratings reflect demand and retrospective test results in either order. You can quibble with my list, but that's my opinion on the matter, naturally rebranded engines are also covered. Note again, this is my opinion, based on an articulated criteria, but even this is not objective fact.

Blue

 

Give me a valid answer to this one question and I'll take you out of my "wannabe virus expert" file:

"If NOD32 bases are as rarely updated as you seem to think, why has it been #1 in ItW virus detection in Virus Bulletin's VB100% tests WHICH DO NOT USE HEURISTICS AT ALL for the past 7+ years ?"

 

Well, it looks like that you as "frequent poster" seems so educated to file others as wannabes and experts.

I really doesn't care where I am filed by you...but if you are expert as you should be to file others in experts or wannabies, you should know that VB100% statistics means how which vendor performed in history...so if one company has 22 pass and 1 failed, and if this falure is for present product, I hope that you will agree that other product who passed in latest test is better - even if in history that vendor has for example 15 pass and 8 failed.
And, on single test you have dozens of products who get VB100% which does not mean that all of them are giving equal protection.

 

Totally agree. KAV 5.0.325 is running super slick on my PC. On demand scanning is also faster than NOD. The age old arguments about performance impact of KAV is definitely going away.

 

I'll have to keep an eye on KAV as I like their interface better. Question though any ADS issues?

 

ADS is present in kav5, but not in kav6. it doesent bother me tho, and its pretty
easy to get rid of

 

Just run KAV6 when it is released, and KAV6 should clean KAV5 ADS when the first scan is run.

There are other ways too, like using programs to remove ADS.

 

Where the on-demand scanner of KAV is faster than NOD32?

I scan my system with the maximum setting of both, and the KAV use more than 3x times more than NOD32...

 

Hi, in regard to the ad streams. I have been test driving Anti Virus programs for several weeks since ditching Norton Internet Security 2004 because of numerous problems with the program. I have tried NOD32, KAV Personal 5.0.325, and an older version of KAV 5 Personal Pro.
Well my point is when i uninstalled the older trial version of KAV 5 Personal Pro the AD tags were still in place but when i uninstalled KAV 5.0.325 there was an option in the uninstall to remove the AD tags if you desire. Personally speaking (grain of salt) I feel better protected with KAV 5.0.325 than I did with NOD32 even tho NOD32 felt very light on my system.