Kaspersky 7 still has major issues

I just want to clarify that although there is no iSwift enable/disable option in ZoneAlarm Internet Security Suite 7, the iSwift database file "fidbox.dat" and several other related fidbox.* files are still installed, and the NTFS-Identifiers (used by iSwift) are still added to the NTFS index entries of every scanned file. Perhaps ZASS isn't able to take advantage of iSwift's time-saving capabilities, but the basic features of iSwift appear to be installed and active.

 

That would be consistent with what I saw in ZoneAlarm AV. Its true: ZA has no option to enable or disable iSwift, but indeed the DAT files are there, and I scanned a few hundred samples 2-3 times using ZA, and the scan time was considerably reduced from the 2nd scan onwards (but if you update ZA then it will again take the same amount of time as the first scan to scan those files, presumably because the flags for skipping the scanning are reset). Therefore it seems to me that ZoneAlarm does indeed use iSwift.

However, I will also make it a point to note that I do not have a significant delay at stage 2 of the chkdsk scans, and hence it seems that I am unaffected by this issue (However, I also did not scan my entire hard disk with ZA even once)

I contacted ZoneAlarm about iSwift and they deny using iChecker or iStreams or iSwift in their products. I have no idea why, but I have known the ZoneAlarm support team to be wrong on a few issues from time to time. Hence it could simply be a matter of the support team not knowing that ZA uses iSwift. I'll send off another email to them later and see what happens.

For now, I am staying away from ZA's Antivirus due to various reasons, one of which is the risk of contracting this issue also.

 

Thank you, but apparantly not on this one...............i didn't ask Kaspersky, but simply asked ZA the question & the answer was short......but they said they didn't use iSwift, so ididn't think more about it as ZA is not an interest of mine, it was only to have the info if some users asked.

 

Hey Don, Does that mean the water is no longer muddied? (Only kidding )

I've been in contact with Talec and received a bunch of the most incredible emails I've ever received from a support group. I now have serious thoughts about sending them an image file that was made when Kaspersky was installed on my computer. I've received an apology so will rethink and then decide what to do.

In your opinion as a moderator in the Kaspersky forum, if I sent the image file to Kaspersky would the contents of the image file be treated securely? I would delete all aspects that deal with my banking accounts, and credit cards before sending, but obviously there would still be a risk, what do you think?

 

I can't imagine Kaspersky doing anything irresponsible with your personal files, despite my personal misgivings with their software, they are a quite reputable company. That being said, it is also not unreasonable to remove as much personal information as you can. Short of them sending a tech rep to your house, I imagine this may be the best way for them to possibly find the source of this problem. I do understand your concerns however, and would be just as nervous, I imagine.

 

They would only need binary data, raw data from the image, they are not interested in your private data.

 

The water is always muddy around here............. so yes!

Hmmm, you're basicly asking me to give a guarantee i cannot give you as a moderator in their forum, but IME there are a very security focussed group of developers and me personally would not have a problem doing it if i had this issue.

If you have reservations, then i would contact them again and insist on assurance that the image will be treated in strict confidence and destroyed after testing.

 

Thanks Don, Flyfan, and Plantextract for the advice and opinions. I've decided after reading your replies to recover the image remove the financial details and then make another image (without the accounts details) then re image and send this to Kaspersky.

Don, Didn't mean to put you on the spot, and yes, I suppose I was asking for a guarantee which was silly. Thanks for taking the muddied water part in good humour

 

No Problem. If I were still using their AV and still had the problem, I would most likely do the same. With a problem this rare it might take such an unusual approach to solve the problem.

 

Is anyone running Vista experiencing chkdsk errors?
I'm interested strictly in Vista user reports. I'm also not interested in stage 2 slowdowns.

Your help would be greatly appreciated.

You may contact me via PM if you desire to do so.

 

i'm using business vista and no chkdsk errors here.

 

Many of you here know Gavin Coe, formerly of DiamondCS, and currently a trojan analyst with Trojan Hunter. He has just posted in the dslreports thread on chkdsk and the damage from using Kaspersky products (including ZoneAlarm and AOL's AVS).

If Gavin, who is an expert regarding antivirus and antitrojan applications and HIPS applications like ProcessGuard, has this problem and is stumped by this Kaspersky chkdsk mess...well...all I can say is Kaspersky better get a tool out very soon and apologize to all of us.

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18717127-Re-Kaspersky-You-lost-me-at-ISwift

 

Please speak for yourself. I need no apology.

 

Are you forgetting Bluezannettis test(see post 190) that proves ZA does use it? And Don's statement that apparently ZA techs were not aware that it does?

 

No Prob Pete, as long as this thread is, it is hard to remember it all!!

 

Give it a rest would you, you and StraitShoot have done nothing but complain and cry about "permanent damage" to your computers but haven't done the first thing to help resolve the issue. You have claimed KL has ignored this and even talked about a class action law suit...... you have got to be kidding me!!! There is NO "permanent damage" to your computer, there is NO proof of any performance degradation, there is only an inconvenience in waiting a little longer for chkdsk to finish, which 99% of the people out there would never notice..... the worst case scenario is you would have to reformat and reinstall Windows..... big deal, just do it and be done with it..... then the "permanent damage" is gone..... so it's NOT permanent. Two KL technicians have joined in the thread at DSLR and have asked question regarding the issue try to help find a cause/cure. If that isn't tech support then what is? Have you answered any of their questions? Have you done ANYTHING to help resolve this but complain on every forum you post on? Try being part of the solution instead of part of the problem for once.

 

How I am I supposed to help Kaspersky techs when (a) I uninstalled Kaspersky6 in December 2006 and (b) I no longer have a license for it? I was ready and VERY willing to help Kaspersky last year but Kaspersky wanted no help and stated that this was a figment of the users imagination. It is not my problem that I was ready to help and Kaspersky didn't want my help and now they want it way too late. Why in the world would I, even if I had a current license, reinstall KAV on my main computer in order to what? Incur further damage when it appears Kaspersky is acting like an ostrich when they say they are not interested in slowdown or hang of chldsk? They say they only want help from those with absolute disasters where chkdsk is completely broken. So, are you telling me that I should get a new license for Kaspersky, reinstall it, and allow it to totally break chkdsk so I might possibly be able to help Kaspersky more than one year after the problem was first reported? Sorry, but that makes no sense to me.

As for shutting up and reformatting, I have reformatted a computer only ONCE in nine years and that one time was when I was a newbie and got my only virus. Reformatting is out of the question in most circumstances (a brand new, never used computer is an exception). I have a TI image but it has the Object Identifiers on the files. Reformatting is something one does only as the extreme last resort if that is the only way they can get that computer to work again. That one time I had to reformat, I spent 4 days glued to the computer trying to get everything back tweaked exactly as I use it. It was an absolute nightmare. I didn't eat or sleep hardly...ended up with a huge bill for forgetting to send my rent check for that month by the deadline and got physically ill for over a week after I finally got my computer running again as I had it tweaked before the reformat. I went through a similar hell in Feb 2006 when I got this computer and the image from my old computer could not used on this one due to so much hardware change. I got this computer as an exchange for my older XP computer that failed (even after complete rebuild by Dell) during second year warranty. Even with an image that I could use to copy files off of to the new computer, it was still a hellious task and time consuming and stuff like OE and all my mail was very difficult to move. I spent days just solving that one problem. And you think I should just suck it up and reformat...you are being totally unrealistic!

 

Hi Mele,
Please forgive me if I am out of line. I would hope that you would consider what I am saying.
I can easily understand the frustration of having a problem that seems to go unsolved, and that you see as a lack of interest/attention by KL. However, do not forget that all this is just some software, and a computer or maybe two. In the overall scheme of things, your life, they are not nearly as important as many other things, including family, school, health, and job.

There is a lot of stress in each of our lives, and such things as the problems of KIS 7 just cause more stress if we do not give them the proper priorities.
If there were no more good security applications and new computers it might be a little different, but there are some excellent ones out there, and the cost is not all that much.
My own approach is to give a good try at correcting or helping to correct problems that I see and consider of some importance. But some things just defy my lone efforts, and subsequently I admit that I cannot change them, and that it is better to go on to something else.

Please consider just dropping your apparent goal of straightening out Kaspersky. There are some very good to excellent applications available that should suit you. Hopefully, at some point in time the problem, which I conclude must be real although I have not had the problem, will be corrected. If you then want to try it again go for it. In the meantime try to ignore it.

What you decide to do is up to you, the mods, and KL. But take this advice as coming from an old man who has been there and done that. Don't let the stress and irritation cause physical problems that will dwarf your current problem.

Best regards,
Jerry

 

I agree Jerry M. I just went back to AVG Pro and a-squared Anti-Malware that I was fortunate enough to be given license to, and when they expire sometime next year I'll just install Avira Free, Spyware Terminator, or what ever else my be available at that time. However I do take exception with what could and should be fixed by Kaspersky. Maybe they could like CA Antivirus or F Secure has done in the past, work out a deal with Microsoft to give users a 6 month free trial, if Microsoft helps out with the CHKDSK problem.

 

Hi Duke,
I had some problems with KAV6 after MP1, and removed it. I tried several that I ended up liking. Now with V7 I have installed KAV 7, and KIS 7 and both are running well. Maybe the advantage I see for KIS 7 over others that I like as well is the speed of starting and scanning after the initial scan.

I really liked AntiVir Premium, and F-Secure IS. Except for the slow loading and updating, I think I would prefer it to even KIS. I have a 3 year license for FSIS OEM, and I can always go back to it if necessary. I am not married to any of this stuff.

I think the freebies would be OK for me along with a good AS application such as SAS, AVGAS, or a-squared. I have liked Avast Home.

Best,
Jerry

 

No offense, but you're going too far with this theme again

 

First, I did´nt have the chkdsk-issue, but I have to agree with Mele and Straitshoot partially. The question in general for me is: I have to pay for this software and the vendor isn´t resolving the exisiting error. Why should I have to help him? I did pay for it!!! This arrogance is simply unbelievable.