Internal Errors

Discussion in 'ESET Smart Security v3 Beta Forum' started by JeremyWW, Aug 25, 2007.

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

    JeremyWW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Posts:
    237
    OK, first off - I'm not getting any!!! - Internal Errors that is! ;) except this one in the scan log:

    24/08/2007 23:03:56 D:\APPS\INSTALL PACK\Microsoft\Powerpoint Hotfix\258563_intl_i386_zip.exe » ZIP » office2003-KB912022-GLB.exe - internal error

    I'm running the AV Beta. Seems very nice...some people here are saying they won't run the Beta until this 'internal error' thing is fixed. Could someone enlighten me with the 'facts' please. I'm not inclined to worry about myself, unless someone has a genuine reason...

    Thanks
     
  2. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    Ok, I had over 3200 of them using both ESS and NOD 3 Beta, I submitted a few files for them to take a look at, they replied that it is a problem scanning password protected archives and would be fixed some time next week through auto update. My problem is none of my archives are password protected except the common ones, Super Antispyware and Spybot's quarantine files and the like(and those show as password protected in the log for NOD 2.7 but not for the betas). The Beta engine also appears (to me at least) to not handle Office 2007 xml files correctly as it shows every xml on my system as a ZIP file and reports these internal error messages.

    As I said though, the word is it will be fixed next week sometime. In theory, it should not be a big deal as archived malware should have to be uncompressed to execute at which point it should be caught, I chose to go back to 2.7 for now.
     
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2007
  3. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    Could you please confirm or deny that the zip file is password protected? If it is, then it's just a wrong error message and the program should tell you instead that the file could not be scanned.
     
  4. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    If the file exceeds 5 MB, please upload it somewhere and PM me the link. Otherwise send it to support[at]eset.com along with this thread's url in the subject.
     
  5. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    How many people are seeing these errors in your demand scan logs? Of those who are seeing it what OS are you running? I think it may be related to Vista's UAC.
     
  6. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    Just Installed the beta on an XP Pro system and I get no errors even when scanning over the network to files that received the error on the Vista machine, so it is related to Vista's UAC.
     
  7. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    The XP machine does report the error only on password protected files.
     
  8. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    As a further check, turning off UAC resolves the problem.
     
  9. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    Jeremy confirmed that the file was actually password protected. We'll fix this error and we'll investigate the issue with UAC as soon as possible. I assume both issues will be fixed via automatic update within next week.
     
  10. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    Awesome!!:D
     
  11. JeremyWW

    JeremyWW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Posts:
    237
    Appears to be fixed after the last update - at least for me. Log now states correctly that the file is password protected.
     
  12. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    Can't check at the moment because I am on a system that still has 2.7 on it. Will check it later.
     
  13. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    I can confirm, it was fixed yesterday. However, the error can still be reported on Vista with UAC enabled as we have not found a common pattern for this yet.
     
  14. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    I have faith that you guys will get to the bottom of it. Let me know if you need any other files although it sounds like you guys can reproduce it.
     
  15. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    Error message has changed from "internatl error" to "decompression could not complete"
     
  16. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    This error used to occur with v2 if NOD32 did not have write permission for the temp folder or if the disk was full.
     
  17. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    I am not out of RAM and the hdd is less than 30% full, 2GB RAM and 200GB hdd.
     
  18. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    Let me try disabling UAC to see if that helps.
     
  19. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    Yes, the messages go away with UAC disabled.
     
  20. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    No probs with UAC here. However, it might have sometihing to do with the fact that UAC denies access to the temp folders for the current user. However, this should not be a problem as the Eset service is running in the LSA account. Just in case, make sure that both the user and system temp variables point to a folder that actually exist.
     
  21. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    Yes both folders exist, isn't this the same from 2.7 though? Why does the beta give me problems with this when 2.7 doesn't?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.