Exclusion System Help

Discussion in 'ESET NOD32 Antivirus' started by UTLonghorns, Apr 24, 2009.

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

    UTLonghorns Registered Member

    Apr 24, 2009

    I am currently trialling NOD32 V4 to see if I like it better than v3. I have always loved NOD32 because it does not bog down the system or infest every part of your machine.

    The exclusion part of NOD32, however, seems to be pitifully inadequate for a premium AV product. It was the same in v3. To have a black and white exclusion list is completely nonsensical for an AV of NOD32's stature. Most of the other premium AV's and several free ones offer a better exclusion setup.

    Here are a few options that should, at the least, be included in the product.

    1. Exclude items from particular protection modules only.

    For example, I should be able to exclude my backup partition from the Real-time Scanner, but still be able to scan the files using the On-Demand Scanner or a manual scan.

    2.Exclude the activity of individual processes from Real-Time Scanner.

    For example, say you use a product like Total Uninstall to install your software. NOD32 scans every file Total Uninstall scans and makes the process take forever. I know I can avoid this by turning off On-Access Scan,
    or pausing protection, but I should not have to reduce my security to run a program.

    3. Provide a simple checkbox when excluding directories, to include sub-directories as well.

    From a functionality standpoint, simply adding the exclusion abilities listed above would allow for reduced scanning activity, disk writes, and resource usage. Many of the problems I have seen people on this forum having, could either be resolved or more comprehensively troubleshot with a more robust exclusion system.

    Please let me know if I wrong about the current system, or if there is any way I can use the current system more effectively.

    I would love to use NOD32 as my main AV-Spyware app, so I hope ESET implements a better system, because it looks now like they threw it in as an afterthought instead of actually developing a worthy system.
  2. Gamil

    Gamil Registered Member

    Apr 25, 2009
    Excluding a product such as Total Uninstall, which is accessing files that may not have been scanned, is no less secure than disabling the scanner completely while you're using the software to install an application.

    Other than that, yes, it would be nice to have a Global whitelist and independent whitelists.

    Keep in mind, however, that one of the reasons NOD32 is small and unobtrusive is that they haven't sandwiched in a thousand features of limited use. Every feature added is another cpu cycle (hdd access, memory byte) used. Independent whitelists would mean additional memory used for *each* component. It would also mean a not-insubstantial number of support calls, since people would forget that they'd marked something "do not scan," and wonder why the product wasn't scanning that item.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.