Active Virus Shield (now using AOL update mirror)

Originally, AVS was using Kaspersky mirrors to update and they were always fast. Now AVS is using AOL's mirror to update and it is SLOW. I did a re-install today and, of course, it needed 7MB+ of updates. The updates came in at 4.7KB/s and that was painfully slow on my 5MB/s connection.

http://download.newaol.com/avs/update/mirror/

Although this is probably good news for Kaspersky users because as AVS gains popularity it wont slow down their updates. But this AOL update mirrors is crazy slow.

Who else thinks this is bad news for AVS users?

I would have more trust in Kaspersky, but I don't know how much trust I will have in AOL managing the security of my system by controlling their own update mirror.

 

Wouldn't it be possible to redirect that link to the Kaspersky servers by editing your hosts file? I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work, as long as AOL is just mirroring the Kaspersky files... Don't have VMWare installed at the moment, otherwise I would have tested it myself.

 

That sounds a lot like what other vendors are doing between paid customers and non-paying customer users of a software program when they need to update them. When I download the updates to Antivir (Free) it goes at 1 KB/sec on average. I have to wait close to 1/2 hour or more to get the complete download.

 

That will not work because AVS would ask for files inside a non-existent folder (avs/update/mirror/) . However if the AOL server is blocked AVS will switch to the kaspersky servers. 127.0.0.1 causes a delay but 0.0.0.0 not.

 

What is opinion of AVS by KAV? Is this reliable enough protection as in mostly current detections and frequented updates?

Also does it Auto-Quarantine or offer end-user their choice of how to proceed?

Being pretty well HIPS/Sandboxed guarded AV is lost some appeal for me but if i can find one that is not "bloated" as in for example, 3 processes running all the time, or no noticable negative performance impacts, i wouldn't tend to be so distant from them.

They serve a very protective purpose indeed, but because of the delicate nature of unpacking/repacking files, heuristics, and all those methods, i found most AV's nothing but a royal pain and nusance. I would like to change my opinion on at least a couple of them currently.

 

Yep . You get what you have payed for , well known story

 

I'd like to ask AVS users if this problem still exists. The reason I switched from AntiVir was due to its extremely sluggish update servers, a problem compounded by my bad connection. If the same issue exists in AVS, then I'll simply have to look elsewhere...

Thanks in advance for replies.

 

solcroft, while the update servers are fine for me in TX, your location may be different. You should install AVS and see how it works out.

 

I never had any real problems with AVS updates. Sure server response isn't as fast as with avast!, but regular update usually takes around 10 seconds from start to complete end. 1024/256 ADSL line.

 

No problem with Antivir Free here same update speed as always. All of 60 seconds from start to finish on High Speed of course. Not sure what problem you may be having.

As for AVS I had it and got rid of it so I can not say about this new problem. I believe the Free ones like AVG, Aviri, and Avast have a real interest in keeping their servers reasonable in there update speeds or it would defeat the purpose of what they are attempting to do encourage purchase of pay product.

 

Are you on dial up? I have cable modem at 5ms down. I'm way off in Hawaii yet aVira updates only take about 5 seconds. Plus, I have aVira set to autoupdate during the prime usage time for the servers. So, unless you are on dialup, I can't imagine why it would take so long.

 

Antivir updates are quite fast, have not measured though.
Here in Finland I get my daily update in the mornings at 8:46 AM, GMT.
There was a month ago I think some problems when a large program update was delivered, but these daily virus signature updates, no problems.

 

I am on dialup which averages around 45K/sec. My last update still showed 1KB/sec download from the Avira servers, but it seemed to be faster than before (though I did not time it).

 

Yes, I am on dialup and will NEVER switch to super speed unless the rates come down. I pay less than $100 a year for service and I am willing to use the extra money I saved on other things. It's slow but at least the money isn't flowing out of my pockets as fast as using high speed access.

 

I think the distance from Finland to Germany is MUCH smaller than from the US to Germany.

 

I very much appreciate your point of view on this. The bill for Cable High Speed but I am a surf speed addict and I ain't talking drugs either.

In all likelyhood it is less then 60 seconds it just feels like a minute... see what I mean.

 

here in the uk you pay almost more for dialup than you do for broaband its crazy
lodore

 

Remember the old saying that "speed kills"? Sometimes my dialup service forgets to bill me so I get to use the service for free that month too. Another reason to stay with it. Everyone wants to surf fast and have hundreds of TV channels to watch, but it is not a free ride.