Great news...unlike v3... so far v4 seems to be much more compatible with ZAP!

Discussion in 'ESET NOD32 Antivirus' started by SoCalReviews, Mar 5, 2009.

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

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    I was running NOD32 v3.x on one of my systems along with ZAP 8.0.059.000 and there was an incompatibility problem related to using a password and having access to secure web sites requiring cookies. This happened when the custom privacy settings were enabled in ZAP. I never knew the exact cause of the conflict but it seemed to be related to the proxy based design of NOD32 v3 engine interfering with the normal working of the privacy settings in ZAP. This conflict existed on every machine that used ZAP v7.x or v8.x along with versions of NOD v3.x.

    Because of this nagging conflict when the privacy settings were enabled in ZAP v7.x and ZAP v8.x I have been using NOD32 v2.7x on most of my systems. I only used NOD32 v3 on one system for testing the latest versions of NOD32. That system was just upgraded to NOD32 v4 with what appear to be surprisingly positive results.

    I still have more testing to do before I will be certain of the results but so far it seems like the previous compatibility problem that existed with NOD32 v3 no longer exists in NOD32 v4.

    I don't know whether or not there was a deliberate attempt by ESET developers to correct this particular compatibility problem with ZAP...but if these positive results continue I would like to express my appreciation to ESET and their NOD32 v4 developers for making these improvements. I might finally be able to upgrade all those other machines that have been running v2.7 with the latest v4! :D :thumb:
     
  2. ASpace

    ASpace Guest

    "In NOD v2.7 We Trust"

    "In NOD 4 We Trust !" :D :D :D
     
  3. SoCalReviews

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    These are the early positive results but if they hold up I will be very psyched about upgrading all the rest of my systems to v4! More testing is needed...we shall see! :cool:
     
  4. funkydude

    funkydude Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    6,855
    Maybe it's because ZoneLabs are also using Vista's WFP?
     
  5. SoCalReviews

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    I don't know what changes were made to NOD32 v4 or to ZAP v8.x but currently all of my systems are using Windows XP Pro SP3.
     
  6. SoCalReviews

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    It seems that the champaign bottle might have been opened too soon. I ran into similar NOD32 v3 conflicts with ZA privacy settings on another system after I installed NOD32 v4. I need to compare the configuration settings on both systems to determine what (if any) differences exist. :doubt:

    Anyway...besides this nagging conflict with ZA...NOD32 v4 seems to be a good program and it runs well. :)
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2009
  7. SoCalReviews

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    UPDATE: I thought I had a solution figured out but it looks like as long as NOD32 v3 or v4 has WEB ACCESS PROTECTION enabled then ZAPs privacy settings stop working properly. I use those ZAP privacy settings to control which web sites are allowed for cookies, mobile code (java, etc.), and pop ups. It is funny because the old IMON module in v2.7 does not effect ZAP's privacy settings from working properly. I am sure that NOD32 v3 and v4 with web access protection are effect at detecting threats. However, it seems that IMON in v2.7 is a much more compatible way of filtering web content than the proxy method in the new NOD32 v3 or v4.

    The main nagging effect of the break is that when browsing on secure web sites....you enter the password for the site then click on a different page and it asks again for the password and re-directs you back to a log on screen over and over as you try to access any different pages on that web site. It gets really annoying. The only solution is to turn off web access protection in NOD32 v4 or to turn off privacy controls in ZAP. So I have to choose whether I want my web pages scanned by NOD32 v4 and NOT have privacy controlled by ZAP or I can NOT have my web sites scanned for viruses by NOD32 v4 and have ZAP control privacy...cookies, mobile code etc. . With NOD32 v2.7 I can have both those features but I don't get the new scanning engine, interface and technology of NOD32 v4.

    I would also have to guess that ZAP is not the only other security program that the web access protection feature has compatibility problems with. It's too bad because v4 is such a great program in every other way. In the meantime if I find a solution or work around I will post it here.

    NOTE: I understand that this thread along with my numerous posts about NOD32 v4 are compatibility related issues with the ZoneAlarm firewall. This is not a new compatibility issue since it also happened with v3. For future posts I might be continuing this topic in another more appropriate section of this forum for future posts...maybe in the "Other Firewalls" section.
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2009
  8. funkydude

    funkydude Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    6,855
    Well I found it surprising anything changed at all. If it was Vista ok because it uses a better filtering method but for XP the methods are the same over v3 and v4.
     
  9. SoCalReviews

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    It would have been great if the NOD32 developers had included a configuration option for an IMON type of technology in v4 for web access protection instead of an ALL or NOTHING choice with the newer proxy based method.

    I know that this exact incompatibility problem has effected other users in this forum who like use other security products along with NOD32. This is one reason why many were forced to use v2.7 instead of v3. It seems that v4 has some of the same incompatibility issues. If and when support for v2.7 is ever discontinued there will be a number of NOD32 users who will have to make some serious choices on what combination of security software they will use even if that means choosing a more compatible AV solution.

    I realize that insuring compatibility with other competitor's security software is a very difficult issue for developers to deal with. Before this current era of promoting all in one security suites the developers of different companies used to work to solve some of these issues. There is probably less incentive than ever before for security software companies to solve these kinds of incompatibility problems.
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2009
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.