Extrem slow scanner

Discussion in 'ESET NOD32 Antivirus' started by Greebo, May 23, 2009.

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

    Greebo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Posts:
    9
    I updated my NOD32 Antivirus from 2.7 to 4 recentliy (v 4.0.314.0).
    This scanner needs for the same data 1.50 hours for what the version 2.7 needed 35 Min.
    Nod32 is always tested as the fastet antivirus around.
    So what can I do to make it as quick as version 2.7 ?

    OS: Win XP Home SP2
     
  2. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    V 2.7 uses certain limitations (e.g. size for archives). You can try setting the desired limits in v4 yourself to see if it makes a difference, otherwise scanning should be basicly faster with v4 due to various improvements in the code.
     
  3. Greebo

    Greebo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Posts:
    9
    I just tried another scan- it made no difference. I gues I will install v 2.7 again. How long will it be possible to update this version ?
     
  4. Greebo

    Greebo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Posts:
    9
    Hello ! can somebody answer my question, please.
     
  5. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    No exact or preliminary date for discontinuing v2 has been set yet. However, I wouldn't recommend downgrading to v2 as it detect less threats than v4, doesn't detect threats detected by AH on removable media on access, etc. If the only problem is long scanning, try setting size limits for scanned objects. V2 uses in-built limits whilst v3/v4 doesn't use any and in v4 you can custom the limits yourself.
     
  6. Greebo

    Greebo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Posts:
    9
    What were the limits of version 2.7 ? Because I do not run this scanner at this time I do not see them.:)
     
  7. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    I don't know. Try setting the limit to, let's say, 10 MB and see if it speeds up the scanning.
     
  8. Greebo

    Greebo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Posts:
    9
    I set 10 MB size and 30 sec scan maximum.Now it needed 1.20 hour. That is not really better.
    Cold it depend on the file system ? I have WinXP on a FAT32 system.
     
  9. Greebo

    Greebo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Posts:
    9
    Hello !:'(
     
  10. SmackyTheFrog

    SmackyTheFrog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    Posts:
    767
    Location:
    Lansing, Michigan
    I may be incorrect in this, but it is my understanding that the advanced heuristics in v3/v4 take considerably more time and resources to perform and v2 did not include that feature. Hitting a bunch of archives or installers would essentially force a system scan to unpack all of those files to a protected memory space for scanning that could account the increase in scan time. Maybe try disabling the advanced heuristics scanning in the on-demand module to see if it changes anything (AH should still be used on creation and execution of archives and installers by the real-time scanner with the default settings).
     
  11. Greebo

    Greebo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Posts:
    9
    Wow - much better .This time it lasted 43,23 minutes.Not as good as v 2.7 but better. How big can a virus or trojan become ? Perhaps it becomes better if set down size to 5 MB.
     
  12. SmackyTheFrog

    SmackyTheFrog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    Posts:
    767
    Location:
    Lansing, Michigan
    It really depends. A majority of spyware will try to package itself in a small file so that it can download and slip in to a system undetected by the user. However, occasionally you will see software that is valid but comes bundled with adware/banner garbage or was maliciously modified by something. Because of those possibilities I can't really give you a hard and fast rule for what settings you should use as it boils down to your acceptable level of risk.

    Personally, if I was a home user I doubt I would be running full system scans on a regular basis since the real-time scanning is what is going to do the job a majority of the time. Because of this, I would leave the settings at their defaults so scanning can do the most thorough job possible in the event that I launch a manual system scan (and to be clear here, v2.7 may be faster but is nowhere near as thorough as v3 or 4). If this was in a business environment where I was running regular system scans that could affect productivity during office hours, I would turn off advanced heuristics on the manual system scans and rely on the advanced heuristics on access or new file creation in the real-time scanner.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.