Avira AntiVir PersonalEdition Premium?

I'm not sure yet. I am just discovering this notion myself. Basically what they are saying is that email scanning is redundant because any malware (that the on-demand scan would have caught) that is in the email or email attachment will be caught by the real-time scanner. This assumes that the on-demand scanner and the real-time scanner have the exact same detection rates, which seems to be a safe assumption for the most part. An extension of this reasoning is that any and all on-demand scanners or special area scanners (like POP3 scanning) are unnecessary and redundant. For if they were to be caught by the on-demand or special area scanner, then the real-time scanner would similarly catch it. For once it executes the real-time scanner will catch it, and until it executes it can do no harm. The logic seems to make sense, but I'm still dumbfounded as to why all the AV vendors would continue to include such features if they were entirely excessive and potentially harmful (as in the case of email scanners).

 

That is what I was wondering. If the feature can cause problems, and Microsoft recommends that you don't use an AV's e-mail scanner, then why do AV companies include it in their software?

I've always enabled the e-mail scanner in any AV I've used. It never seemed to cause any problems, except for Avira's. It always seemed a little buggy. Maybe I'll start disabling the e-mail scanner from now on.

 

is that true -no mailscan??

Ruben

 

What I see here is that MS recommends to avoid use of AV's email scanner feature only to prevent the email databases corruption in OE (they don't mention another downsides).
I'd say also find the mail scanning option useful for heavy POP3 email users.

So the final decision about disabling it is yours.

 

I wouldn't limit the recursion depth. As the scan is more thorough when u do not limit it.