ESET Needs To Seriously V3 Has Been Pathetic

Discussion in 'ESET NOD32 Antivirus' started by DasFox, Nov 12, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DasFox

    DasFox Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2006
    Posts:
    1,825
    When dealing with ESET tech support I would think that a company like this, dealing with security would hire people with some sense, and knowledge.

    v3 has a problem with my routers firmware running the latest version of Firefox, so what's their reply, roll back and use and older version. I told them, you've got to be kidding me? Where's the reply, we are going to look into this and see what can be done? Instead they make it sound like nothing is going to be done. Apart from the fact of the matter that HTTP Checking chokes the connections from time to time, dropping connectivity to sites.

    Also everytime I turn around I'm getting false positives, and NOD32 was never this bad with false positives in the past.

    Boy with v3 this is really taking the straw that breaks the back, and I'm about ready to dump NOD32 and move on somewhere else. V3 has been the most pathetic version of NOD32 I have ever dealt with since the company started, just pathetic! :thumbd:

    What the heck is going on with this company and product?

    P.S Odd the post title went goofy and didn't post correct, LOL, don't mind the title...
     
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2008
  2. PaulB2005

    PaulB2005 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Posts:
    525
    Rants like this only help you and no-one else.

    From your previous post it's obvious you are the only person experiencing this so it's not a common problem. Why shouldn't Firefox work out what the problem is or Linksys?

    ESET could put a lot of time and effort into this or they could spend that time and money on improving detections. I know which would be better given the limited number of people suffering.

    As for false positives, again from time to time they happen and some of the time i don't think there's much of an excuse esp when they detect and remove critical core system files such as AVG did last week crippling systems. See http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11/11/avg_false_positive

    You can switch and go to another competitior but don't think that any of them don't suffer FP or won't treat one off problems any different.
     
  3. DasFox

    DasFox Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2006
    Posts:
    1,825
    This revolves around HTTP Checking, and I highly doubt I'm the only one suffering...

    HTTP Checking is not working good...

    I've been around Eset since this company began, and I know for a fact that v3 sucks compared to v2...

    P.S. I unchecked it, no need to tell me to do this...
     
  4. sbowling

    sbowling Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2008
    Posts:
    7
    I agree, this program is a pile of crap in it's current state. I want the version that I used for the free trial perion. That one didn't slow my cable access don't to dial up speeds (Even when it was disabled).

    So far the email support seems about as effective as the "official support Forums". I haven't heard anything back from either.:thumbd:

    I will be warning all my frinds not to get suckered by the demo verrion of this program. It's garbage in it's current state.:thumbd:
     
  5. PaulB2005

    PaulB2005 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Posts:
    525
    Can't see anyone else complaining. I know that doesn't prove anything but if it was a widespread problem more would be complaining. No?

    Absolutely fine here.

    I've been using ESET for a few years and i find both v2 and v3 fine. OK few niggles when v3 first came out but that's all they were.

    Wasn't going to...

    The problem is whilst you are suffering from the problem it does appear to be a problem very few people are suffering. It's easy to say "I've got a problem i demand it fixed" but it's not always viable to work out what's wrong from one persons experience. Now if 20 people reported the problem with NetGear, Belkin and other routers and all sorts of browsers then fine there's more to go on, but one particular setup experiencing problems is difficult for ESET to troubleshoot when it might not even be ESET that's at fault.

    I did ask above why Firefox and Linksys shouldn't be looking at this too but can't see an answer. Does IE work OK? What if you downgrade the Firewall firmware?
     
  6. PaulB2005

    PaulB2005 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Posts:
    525
    Don't tar everyone's experience with your personal experience. Myself and dozens of my clients have no problem with ESET on a variety of hardware and software setups.

    Just because you have a problem doesn't mean everyone else does.
     
  7. doktornotor

    doktornotor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Posts:
    2,047
    You'd be way better off contacting Linksys about your issues... If any software causes a router to fail, then the router is a piece of junk. :rolleyes:
     
  8. Dark Shadow

    Dark Shadow Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Posts:
    4,553
    Location:
    USA
    I was running Nod32 V3 with vista with Nod maxed security settings and set in Active mode rather the passive mode which suppose to be less compatiable in active..Along side Nod32 I ran Online Armour and shadow Defender with netgear router with none of the above issues.This includes IE7,Opera 9.6 and Fox 3 and as far as the trial version as far as I know its a full version function on 30 day limited time.Hence upgrading of the purchase product should not change a thing other then license time for one or more pc.
     
  9. DasFox

    DasFox Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2006
    Posts:
    1,825
    Give me a break guys!

    Look I'm not trying to be rude, but I've been around, and you guys obvisouly have not been paying attention to the posts here on Wilders since version 3 came out, if you did, then you'd know the 3 ring circus this has been.

    v3 plain and simple has not been the quality like v2...
     
  10. xan K

    xan K Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Posts:
    152
    Location:
    Dominican Republic
    amen to that.
     
  11. sbowling

    sbowling Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2008
    Posts:
    7

    To add to be earlier statement their support is crap. Still no response to my emails. I will be disputing the charge with my credit card company.

    Also, there are numeros people reporting problems with the program and support, but most of them are getting shouted down by the fanbois on the boards.
     
  12. jmc777

    jmc777 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Posts:
    244
    V3's been great for me so far. No complaints. :p
     
  13. ASpace

    ASpace Guest

    Although I haven't had any serious problems with any ESET product and all my clients are quite pleased with ESET and even though the product is not that bad as some people make it look like , I think you are right that the overall quality of v2 series was much better than the overall quality of v3 is . Additionally , the general public and the existing clients of the company seemed to have expected something else - not what we saw a year ago . That is why ESET are preparing v4 - public beta version coming soon.
     
  14. CodePoet

    CodePoet Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2008
    Posts:
    1
    v3 hasn't been good for me - the IMON pegs the processor out when browsing the web w/ IE - ekrn.exe registers near 100% and takes a long time to process pages. Slows the whole system down. I don't know what's going on , but it's been a few weeks and hasn't gotten resolved yet.
     
  15. LenovoT61B

    LenovoT61B Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Posts:
    51
    ESET is not what is use to be. Right now it sucks. Switch to another AV.
     
  16. Thankful

    Thankful Savings Monitor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Posts:
    3,731
    Location:
    New York City
    Same here. One of the few AVs that actually works on my PC and doesn't cause any problems.
     
  17. xxJackxx

    xxJackxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2008
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    USA
    I do have to agree with those that are disappointed with v3. I maintain a 3 user license for both ESS and KIS and am tired of paying for 2 products because neither are quite right. I am currently running ESS because it causes the least problems. I will probably even renew next month when my license is up. In my testing, KIS detects more, cleans better, and has way better self defense. But it is not worth the BSODs and slowdown it causes. I would be much happier to only support ESET, but I would really like to see see some improvement in the areas I mentioned. Particularly the self defense. I have sat here and watched it just close when Vundo decided to install itself. Can't catch them all is no excuse for it to just let some program close it. I hope when v4 comes out, it is everything v3 should have been.
     
  18. Thailand_for_YOU

    Thailand_for_YOU Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2006
    Posts:
    19
    What are you trying to say by this wise post. Do you want the whole world to know that you have no complaints? (merely rhetorical question)
    ---

    Re: Virus detection

    Please take a look at this post.

    Re: False Positives

    Take a look at: UBCD4WinV322.exe at http://www.ubcd4win.com/ - this website was around for quite some time with http://www.ubcd4win.com/faq.htm#false.
    My NOD32 v.3.0.650.0/3615 don't let me to install the app. till now.

    For more info on this issue please visit: http://ubcd4win.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=9927


    Certainly, something is wrong!
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2008
  19. NOD32 user

    NOD32 user Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Posts:
    1,766
    Location:
    Australia
    Hi Thailand_for_YOU,

    Not running things that have about a 95% or better chance of being a virus is far better protection than any antivirus.
    That information is really saying that NOD32 has been working correctly.
    It's far easier to just say 'false positive' than it is to say '... is flaged as something that you potentially may not want on your PC unless you {know it is there|want to install it} because it may sometimes be used at other times for malicious purposes' but I like this part:
    If you do not want NOD32 to check for Potentially dangerous applications or Potentially unwanted applications anymore you may simply disable checking for these (it is off by default anyway). You may also find these two posts helpful: here and here.

    Hope that helps.

    Cheers :)
     
  20. Thailand_for_YOU

    Thailand_for_YOU Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2006
    Posts:
    19
    See my comments above...
     
  21. Thankful

    Thankful Savings Monitor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Posts:
    3,731
    Location:
    New York City
    I'm looking at the post by WhiteZero in that forum:
     
  22. NOD32 user

    NOD32 user Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Posts:
    1,766
    Location:
    Australia
    The OP clearly stated it was attached to a Keygen in post#3 and that they guess it's possibly widespread (which they clearly cannot be sure of unless they have some kind of tracking mechanism attached to the threat).
    I'd agree that it's probably detection-worthy and in post#2 the correct advice was given to that effect - "why not report it..."
    It goes without saying that ESET have no way to analyze files until they are received.
    The simple answer is to temporarily re-disable the detection of Potentially unsafe applications which was already off by default.
    Open your NOD32 v3 or ESS and hit <f5> to open the settings tree and then follow the arrows and hit OK twice:-
    Screenshot - 17_11_2008 , 4_59_57 AM.png
    Once installation is completed you can add an exclusion possibly just for 'C:\UBCD4Win\plugin\Network\*.*' should be OK as shown below and then re-enable detection of potentially unsafe applications again if that's what you want :-
    Screenshot - 17_11_2008 , 5_30_54 AM.png
    Or just excluding the two PUA detected files individually should be enough if that's what you preferred.
    RemoteAdmin.WinVNC application
    Win32/QuicknEasyFTP application

    Same here :)

    This current detection is a 'Not-a-Virus' category, meaning that the detection as 'Win32/RemoteAdmin.WinVNC application' is actually a correct detection of a potentially unsafe application in a user enabled category and only if the user chooses that they wish to check for this group.

    Whilst I can appreciate the experience of some there may have seemed frustrating others who have had similar issues don't seem to have had a great deal of trouble with a resolution, so I can only suppose that since they were all dealing with the same product that something else must have been different.

    Cheers :)
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2008
  23. Thailand_for_YOU

    Thailand_for_YOU Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2006
    Posts:
    19
    Your life is probably boring... you choose to see only one satisfied user amongst many unsatisfied/unhappy customers. What else can I say.

    I would agree with you if it were the inverse ratio.
    --

    NOD32 user,

    Thanks for advice.

    Then again, it is not clear to me why are you trying to justify the attitude of ESET and putting the blame elsewhere (on the messenger).
     
  24. Thankful

    Thankful Savings Monitor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Posts:
    3,731
    Location:
    New York City
    LOL.
    Please follow the advice in this post:
    https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1349335&postcount=22
     
  25. Thailand_for_YOU

    Thailand_for_YOU Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2006
    Posts:
    19
    Re: Installation of UBCD4WinV322.exe

    Yes, following the instructions of NOD32 user, everything went smoothly. No problems so far.

    Although, I shall mention a strange behavior of NOD32 on my system. Every time I tried to change the settings (i.e. hit <F5> and un-check something), the NOD32 freezes, and then, exits all by itself. In order to activate anti-virus, I must restart it.
    It makes me thing that, potentially, some virus or malicious application may deactivate the anti-virus program.

    Is it so?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.