Is KAV working on chkdsk ?

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Bls440, Sep 20, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bls440

    Bls440 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    Posts:
    82
    Hi,

    I'd like to know if Kaspersky Labs are working on that issue, which is annoying many users right now.
    I'm about to get a complete new setup, I don't wanna get any hard drive defects with it (at least, that early ;) ).
    Also, does the feature causing the problem can be disabled right away before making any damage ?

    If not, I guess I'd go for F-secure/Avira/Trustport ; haven't made my choice yet on these 3, since the best solution which fits my needs is Kaspersky, but I don't feel very confident now ....

    Any help appreciated !
    Thanks
     
  2. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Official Kaspersky response here. .

    LONG post over on the KAV Forum on chkdsk and KAV.

    Very nice summation on the problem by BlueZannetti in this thread; posts 482 onwards;

    Overall, those users with problems seem to be few, but they seem to be genuine. So it will be your call whether this issue will influence your buying decision on your next AV.

    As you probably know KAV 8 will not depend upon these object-identifers and therefore should not show this same behaviour.
     
  3. Bls440

    Bls440 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    Posts:
    82
    Thank you so much. I've read it all already, but I'm kinda surprised Kav doesn't seem to care that much since only a minority of the users experience those troubles.

    You're refering to Kav8, I guess I should wait for 2008 then ?
     
  4. Mele20

    Mele20 Former Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    2,495
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii
    The DEFINITIVE thread on this issue is not here and not at Kaspersky forums. It is at dslreports. If you have not read it, I strongly recommend that you do so before making your decision.

    http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18608452-Kaspersky-You-lost-me-at-ISwift

    F-Secure uses the Kaspersky engine so stay away from it also and stay away from Zone Alarm as it also uses the Kaspersky engine. Both of these will have the same effect on chkdsk that using Kaspersky 2006/2007 will have.

    KAV 8 will not use the ISwift technology but I would not trust it either. I say that because Kaspersky used Alternate Data Streams in KAV 2005 to make scanning faster. When KAV 5 (even just a short trial) was removed all the ADS tags on all files on the computer remained. They were not removed. There were complaints and finally after the complaints reached critical mass Kaspersky issued a tool to remove the ADS tags after KAV was uninstalled. This caused a huge mess and again the DEFINITIVE thread was at dslreports (Kaspersky engineers participated).

    What did Kaspersky do after the KAV/KIS 2005 mess? They came up with ISwift for KAV 2006 to make it faster since IStreams (the ADS tagging) had been dropped for the 2006 version. There was a thread started almost immediately after 2006 went Gold in the KAV forums and that thread is still going. Kaspersky paid no attention to what users were reporting and even went ahead and put the same ISwift technology that users were saying was causing chkdsk problems into the 2007 versions of KAV/KIS. It was not until Straitshoot started the dslreports thread and way, way into it when the publicity got so bad that Kaspersky finally contacted Microsoft about the issue and got slapped down for misusing object identifiers.

    Kaspersky has shown no effort to help those of us with computers damaged by their software. They have finally stated after Microsoft's response that they will abandon ISwift and Object Identifiers in the 2008 products. I suggest being extremely cautious though even with their 2008 products because of their history. They caused a big problem on many computers with System Restore and severe, very rapid fragmentation in XP because of the ADS tagging used in KAV 2005 and the fact that all the tags remained on the computer after KAV was removed. Finally under great pressure from users and former users they issued a tool to remove the ADS tags. Then they turned around and did something even worse in terms of damage by using ISwift in 2006, stonawalling all complaints and being arrogant enough to add ISwift technology and the object identifiers to KAV/KIS 2007. So, I would be extremely cautious about using 2008 also as Kaspersky is an arrogant company that cannot be trusted.
     
  5. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,786
    I used to like KAV and KIS, but after reading and hearing about all this I now won't go near it. There are just too many good alternatives to take any chances...
     
  6. Sjoeii

    Sjoeii Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Posts:
    1,240
    Location:
    52?18'51.59"N + 4?56'32.13"O
    Mele20

    Grow up!
    You are talking about one simple issue you had with this product. And now |Kaspersky can't be trusted? Sounds to me you have very large toes.
    Offcourse this chkdsk issue is something some people are having probs with but majority don't!!!
    When looking at your posts across the internet where you are cracking Kaspersky I believe there must be more than this issue involved. Because everywhere i read you are trying to influence innocent people.
    Let's give people a free choice


    Sjoeii
     
  7. btman

    btman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2006
    Posts:
    576
    He's ranting. I've used Kaspersky since early version 6 and I've never had the problem he's describing. Kaspersky is the best product I've used to this date.
     
  8. King Grub

    King Grub Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Posts:
    814
    Same here. There is obviously a group of users who are experiencing real problems, but they are a minority, but a very vocal one, and more often than not vocal in the worst way (ranting, fanatic).
     
  9. Stephen2_Aus

    Stephen2_Aus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Posts:
    37
    Agreed with King Grub and btman.

    KAV is the best anti virus I've used, and I was an AVID NOD32 fan for a long while.
     
  10. Mele20

    Mele20 Former Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    2,495
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii

    One simple issue! I submit that maybe you should do what you told me to do. I would also suggest that you actually read the threads. It is obvious that you have not or you would not say "one simple issue". What was the chkdsk time on your computer before you installed KAV? What is now? Every single KAV user has this problem. You just may not have had it surface enough yet to realize you have the problem also. There are several factors that determine how long it takes for the problem to become obvious on a given computer.

    I ask all of you: what is the current time for chkdsk to complete at boot as opposed to what it was before you installed Kaspersky? I don't understand how anyone could be thrilled to have to wait over one hour to use their computer after booting when before they installed KAV they only had to wait two minutes. How could you claim that is not a problem?
     
  11. King Grub

    King Grub Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Posts:
    814
    A 6-8 second delay at stage two, after, compared to... what? 1-2 seconds, perhaps, before. With a very large hard drive and lotsa lotsa files. This on Vista. I had the same issue on XP before buying a new computer. Non-issue, that is. No slowdowns at any other stage with KAV/KIS; those chkdsk times are similar.
     
  12. Bls440

    Bls440 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    Posts:
    82
    Does it mean that disabling iSwift can prevent from getting this issue?
     
  13. Antarctica

    Antarctica Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Posts:
    1,618
    Location:
    Canada
    @Mele20,
    I agree that it is not funny when you have problem with Software. But they are only Software after all and they are plenty to choose from Internet if they are not compatible with your system.

    I was one of those who was affected with the chkdsk problem when I used KIS last year. What did I do? Just reformat my PC after my Kaspersky licence ended and now I am a happy user with another AV.

    I think life is too short to struggle with your AV.;) Just my 0.02$ anyway, no offense.:)
     
  14. kinwolf

    kinwolf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2006
    Posts:
    271
    I do have the problem on the system where KIS 7 is installed. Brand new system too. The delay for stage 2 isn't 6-8 seconds in my case, it's hours. As far as I can see, Chkdsk is simply inoperable on that system now.
     
  15. Banshee

    Banshee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    543

    I had that delay problem when using kis 6. Not with Kis 7.Kis 7 runs as smooth as silk and no chkdsk pain either.
     
  16. fax

    fax Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Posts:
    3,730
    Location:
    localhost
    No, regardless the setting you may have the problem.
    BUT you will not know up to when you try it.
    Not all users are experiencing this problem. I don't.

    KAV/KIS 8 will remove this feature and implement iswift/ichecker differently without affecting chkdsk.

    You should ask to KAV forum about the foreseen release plan for KAV/KIS 8.
    For sure not before the end of the year.

    Cheers,
    Fax
     
  17. mike21

    mike21 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    416
    I never had any chkdsk problems with KIS and I am using it since v6 in 2 PCs
     
  18. Bls440

    Bls440 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    Posts:
    82
    Thanks for all your answers.
    I guess using some backup software like Acronis True Image I should be able to give Kaspersky a try without risking anything.
     
  19. BlueZannetti

    BlueZannetti Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Posts:
    6,590
    If it is hours for stage 2 (i.e. verifying indexes) only, then that is a problem. What I'd recommend, regardless of your future decision on KIS 7, would be to:
    • Fully uininstall KIS and try to run chkdsk after the uninstall reboot. Do you still see the very extended stage 2? Note - with any reasonably sized system, stage 2 after KIS/KAV should take minutes to run, not seconds. By reasonably sized, I talking upwards of a million files with a heavily nested directory structure. On a very lean system, it will take seconds and stay under a minute.
    • If you are still in the hours domain after the step above, run the command line invocation to remove file object ID's. To do this, open the Command Prompt window (Start>Accessories>Command Prompt). Navigate to the root directory of the drive in question (that would be typically C:, so execute
      the command
      Code:
      cd\
      at the command prompt. Following this, execute the command
      Code:
      FOR /R %a IN (*.*) DO @ECHO. && @ECHO - %a && @FSUTIL ObjectID Delete "%a"
      at the command prompt. For large file systems, this could take a few hours. After this command completes, try to rerun chkdsk.
    As for the chkdsk issue in general, my personal opinion is that the polarized opinion on both sides are equally unproductive and uninformed. KL has soft pedaled this issue and handled it in a completely pathetic manner. I really don't believe their handling of it has improved to this date either.

    On the other side, the hyperbole has ratcheted up to levels that strains credulity. Every KAV/KIS owner is not impacted by the "problem" since the "problem" occurs when chkdsk cannot complete and a cascade of file system corruption can, in principle, follow. This is distinct from the lengthening of a successful stage 2 scan and completion of chkdsk that every KAV/KIS user will experience.

    The two issues have not been unambiguously tied together. However, I can see where constant manipulation of the file system via creation of file object ID's may be an inherently unstable situation on a system prone to crashing for any reason (beta testing, software compatibility issues, a bad install, power issues, etc.).

    Blue
     
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2007
  20. kinwolf

    kinwolf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2006
    Posts:
    271
    @ BlueZanetti: I'll try that tonight, thanks.
     
  21. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,049
    I guess one reason I've never taken the problem to seriously is one of the biggest ways to thrash the file system is running chkdsk. I never run it. One my machines has a set of nvidia drivers that causes anything run at that point like chkdsk,offline defrag etc not to display. When I was talking about this with the support folks at velocity micro, they didn't even know what blue screen I was talking about for two reasons. First if they ran chkdsk they ran it from the windows CD, and secondly they almost never ran it. There advice to me was run it as little as possible. My solution is if I have a hard crash and suspect it might have impacted the disks, I just restored an image, and any damage to the file system if any was fixed.

    As to instablity from crashing, with the beta testing I've done, my machines have been thru crash after crash, and both had KAV 6.0 and 7.0 on them, and I saw zero ill effect. I've taken KAV off but that wasn't because of the problem, but because I've decided not to run any AV's.

    Also as to Microsofts response, I don't take that as any evidence of wrong doing on Kaspersky's part. They created the system, and while they didn't intend for it to be used that way, apparently they also neglected to warn people not to do it. I take it as a sign they didn't want to address it. Other examples of MS stuff. VistaPE, you can't run it with out it messing up your system clock. Nasty bug in the routines that access your partition table. All imaging and partitioning software use that. Hope you don't get it by that.

    Point is yes some folks were bothered by the problem, so move on. The ranters, had problems for sure, but geesh, enough is enough.

    Pete
     
  22. GrailVanGogh

    GrailVanGogh Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2007
    Posts:
    97
    Location:
    US
    Now that makes perfectly good sense.

    :thumb:
     
  23. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,049
    I believe when you image the objectID's go with the image, and so would be restored. Personally I don't think there is much risk, but just be aware.
     
  24. Bls440

    Bls440 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    Posts:
    82
    let's say it doesn't work, can a Zero fill format fix that problem ?
     
  25. Zombini

    Zombini Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Posts:
    469
    Kaspersky's issue talks about what appears to be a solution for the temporary hang during chkdsk,but there is no solution to the indexing errors I got when running chkdsk. Thats what caused me to get rid of it, not the temporary hang.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.