AVIRA Premium

I don't think like he claims folks think. And I think it very dangerous to believe that article is anything other than crap. He had it right in the past regarding criticizing palliative security measures. Stupid, stupid very irritating crap like so called tamper proof packaging for OTC items could not possibly be worth the hell it puts you through to get the damn thing open! And there is NO SUCH THING AS TAMPER PROOF. Geez..crap like that makes my blood boil. And the USA fools who are so terrified of terrorism....geez...what is wrong with their minds? If they live in New York City or Washington, DC then maybe there is more reason for concern but, gee, I grew up in the town where all chemical, germ, and biological warfare was developed while I was growing up. I wasn't constantly terrified of being killed by one of the chemicals, etc. getting loose. And I certainly would not have been terrified if I lived ten states away. Or those who think airplanes are more dangerous than autos? His only point is that the majority of humans can't think straight. Yeah...so? What about the minority that can think straight? He doesn't explain those folks. I can think straight and I do...as every one of those examples in that article proved. I don't fit the mold at all. I guess that is why I know that using an http scanner is stupid.

 

Thanks for sharing, subset
No download version available though, they say will charge shipping costs separately (private courier) for orders outside Germany

 

Maybe I'm just lucky, but I've never had a problem with an http scanner slowing down my computer. The only http scanners I've had experience with, is in KIS 7, Bitdefender IS 2008, and Avira IS. I've even set the http scanner to high in KIS 7, and it didn't affect my speeds. With Avira IS, and with the http scanner enabled, I get the fastest download speeds results, at speakeasy.com, compared to those other two. I just thought it would be nice to put in a good word for http scanners.

I have Comcast high speed cable internet service.

 

Hello,

I've had to "downgrade" to AVIRA Premium from the IS version because the IS firewall causes temporary bottlenecks in throughput on my systems (Vista Ultimate 2G/dual-core). Employing a site such as Speedtest for discovery purposes displays download speed with IS to be 0 for almost 25% of the download before the needle jumps to 11M. Using just the Premium version my needle jumps to 14.5M almost immediately and stays there (Road Runner Turbo).

This apparent "bottleneck" occurs no matter which download/upload site I choose on Speedtest, domestic (USA) or foreign. Final speed results, however, vary considerably from domestic/international site to site.

Anyone else having such initial "bottleneck" results using IS?

Thanks for your input.

Regards,
Jim

 

this behavior is normal due to the webguard, which downloads all to internal proxy and scans it before the files are forwarded to your browser.
but it should be nearly the same download speed as without the webguard.

 

Yes, you are right as you are much of the time. Http does slow down browsing and speed, that is an objective fact. So if you or I argue that http scanning is not worth it (value added prevention versus speed), then all of a sudden it is subjective and it is our "feelings." In point of fact, http scanning slows down browsing. And, I too am a beta tester for the new Avira Security Suite, and it slows down pages loading, and in some cases, they only load partially. I have a very fast connection, so any slowdown is noticeable. Dr. Web does not do this, nor does Avira PE Premium- which do not have http scanning.

 

Actually, it depends on where your personal bandwidth bottleneck resides, whether it's on the machine or the connection.

With a slow machine and very fast connection, yes, you'll see an impact. With a fast machine and very slow connection, no, you won't notice it. For the rest of us, which is where most of us sit, it's somewhere in the middle, but the outcome very dependent on the local situation.

Blue

 

Trying to assign a disconnect between perception and reality as purely a result of "not thinking straight" misses the bulk of the issues.

First of all, thinking straight is for naught if the required information and/or context are absent. If you don't have the proper information, thinking straight will not fill the void. If you don't understand the contextual interrelationships, thinking straight will not reveal the underlying background connections.

I will grant you that there are some people who can possess all the required information and context and still move in a completely wrongheaded direction.

One of Schneier's points is that people don't have a complete dossier of information to work with, but they still have to deal with everyday life. That necessity means that the missing cold hard facts will be replaced by more casually based perceptions of reality. Unless one is omniscient, one will do this in all aspects of everyday life as well.

Obviously, I disagree, but that's probably because I see his main points played out on a daily and continuing basis. It also provides a framework in which to understand some of the discussions and behavior exhibited in this and other security focused forums.

Blue

PS - yes, the absolute need for webscanners are overrated IMHO

 

I have a fast machine and a fast connection, and I do notice it-enough to not use an http scanner.

 

Thanks, Leo2005. I only experience this "bottleneck" with IS, not with Premium. Is it correct to say that Premium has no webguard, while IS does (although the feature in IS may be disabled by the user)?

Regards,
Jim

 

I have a similar situation and agree on course. I'm simply outlining why we all don't observe the same end result - which is tied to the specific bottlenecks suffered by each of us.

Blue

 

I will agree that a "bottleneck" is a variable in the equation, and that individual experience can (and will) vary. Rational men should not disagree on the same issue- right?

Dr. G

 

That is correct. You do a custom install and uncheck Webguard with the security suite. You can also do this after installation by going to the add/remove programs and modifying the original Avira installation.

 

Thanks, Bunkhouse Buck.

Regards,
Jim

 

Doesn't NOD32 v2.7 also have this (the IMON module)?
If Avira Premium doesn't have a web scanner component then how does it check the files that come across your pc while browsing?

I thought Avira had Webguard. Isn't this the same? I was thinking about switching to Avira, but now I'm a bit confused.
How DOES Avira monitor internet traffic?

 

Avira Premium Security Suite has Webguard. Avira Personal Premium and Avira free do not have Webguard. And I am glad they don't! I am beta testing version 8 of the Suite and I can't use Webguard. If you want Webguard you will need to get the Suite. In Personal Premium and Free versions, Guard and Lukefilewalker protect you. Webguard is an additional layer of protection but not really needed unless you believe that Guard will not catch a nasty when it goes to execute.

 

Thanks for your reply Mele20. What exactly do Guard and Lukefilewalker (is this a component of Avira Premium) do?

 

Guard is the realtime scanner and Lukefilewalker is the on demand scanner. They are the major components of all Avira versions free, Premium and Suite. The webguard will catch the baddie before it gets to your PC. If you don't have webguard then Guard (the real time scanner) will catch the baddie when it lands in a temp file and tries to execute. So, webguard catches the baddie EARLIER and BEFORE Guard has a chance to act. But Guard will stop it from executing (assuming there is detection for the baddie either by signature or heuristics and webguard will also catch it only if there is detection for it by signature or heuristics). If webguard doesn't slow your computer a lot and doesn't mess with speed tests then it is a nice extra layer of protection. But it doesn't really protect you MORE ...it just protects earlier before the baddie touches your computer. What many average users don't understand is that having a baddie on your computer doesn't mean you are infected. It is only when the baddie executes that you get infected. Guard stops the baddie at the moment it tries to execute.

Until NOD32 came out with their IMON "webguard" all AV's protected you via a realtime scanner and an on demand scanner that you use to perform a full scan or to right click scan a file you just downloaded.

 

I find that web scanning with the new beta does not cause any issues or bottle necks compared to the current release. Contrary to what some may have you think, my web page loading with the beta is just as quick as a PC using just the AV.

 

I have another problem, and that is that some images do not load at all. I will install the new build this morning and see if this has been rectified. I do not find much of a delay in loading pages, but Firefox appears to be problematic in terms of some images not loading completely.