Kaspersky Scan Times! (How Long?)

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by DVD+R, Jan 24, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DVD+R

    DVD+R Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Posts:
    1,979
    Location:
    The Antipodes
    How long should a full system scan take with Kaspersky 6.0.1.411 take roughly? I have a 3.62Ghz Machine with 1024MB RAM. Also installed Is Webroot SpySweeper 5.2/Comodo Firewall Pro 2.4.16.174/Super AdBlocker 4.2.0.102 and Rollback Rx Pro 7.2.1 Along with Kaspersky,all these run with Windows Startup. I just installed Kaspersky today,and found that when I ran a scan it was taking a long time, it had already scanned over 100000 files and stuff,but period the start to finish time was 90 minutes :blink: Is this normal? cause its a bloody long time if it is :blink: Everything is at default I havent changed anything in settings except the option to auto Disinfect/Block and Delete instead of prompt user and I enabled registry guard, everything else is as it was when it installed. :ninja: If something is wrong with this I'll use Rollback Rx to go back to my NOD32, I have subscriptions for both, but this Kaspersky subscription is new, I got a 3yr one from the US site :p
     
  2. SSK

    SSK Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2004
    Posts:
    976
    Location:
    Amsterdam
    First scan always takes a long time. Following scans will be faster, depending on signature updates.
     
  3. ethan_arends

    ethan_arends Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Posts:
    27
    Location:
    Romania
    It is normal because kav engine scan very slow.
    The second scan and other it won't take that long only if u will check "scan new and changed files" because av will pass/skip the files that were not changed(it suppose that were clean on first scan).
    Otherwise, every time scan will be the same, it will take long.

    It not depending on signature updates.
     
  4. SSK

    SSK Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2004
    Posts:
    976
    Location:
    Amsterdam
    Yes it depends on signature updates. A signature update will make KAV rescan files, while a scan with the same signatures will make KAV skip files that it scanned earlier.

    Even without the option "scan new and changed files" activated, KAV will skip files and use a random scan pattern to speed up scanning.
     
  5. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    well my first scan with 411 build took 3hours!
    but second scan with icheckers and iswift ticked took only 30minutes
    third scan took 15minutes
    fourth took about 7minutes.
    so the first scan is slow but after its the fastest scans around.
    lodore
     
  6. TairikuOkami

    TairikuOkami Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Posts:
    2,509
    Location:
    Slovakia
    That explains to me, why MWAV Free scans my HDD 40 minutes each time. Thanks for info.
    MWAV unpacks into TEMP folder each launch time, so it does not remember anything, too bad.
     
  7. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    if malware can infect other 'safe programs' on ones machine, using the ichecker swift or whatever its called, it wont pick up on it.

    if i were a kaspersky user, i would not use that feature, all files should be scanned, just because it was safe on full scan, doesnt mean it is now.
     
  8. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    you dont understand how the technlogy works.
    the option is called "scan new and changed files only"
    which means if something changes e.g. infects those files they will get rescanned and detect the malware.
    some files it has to keep rescanning since they change such as system files.
    the only way it wouldnt rescan it is if the malware somehow changed the checksum kaspersky made for that file and then it wouldnt get rescanned but thats knida crasy since the self defence would stop the change.
    lodore
     
  9. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    maybe, but there will always be malware to get round it, id rather just be safe and scan all files is all.
     
  10. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    read my updated post above
    it would seem the best scans are normally the longest and most through but not always
    e.g. nod32 has very fast scanning but has a great detection rate as well.
    i wish kaspersky just made the engine faster rather that adding bolt ons if that makes sence.
    why cant the kav engine be faster like nod32.

    lodore
     
  11. Don Pelotas

    Don Pelotas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Posts:
    2,257
    Using iSwift is scanning all files if you have set it to all files in the settings (default mode btw).
     
  12. bugsy_pal

    bugsy_pal Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Posts:
    76
  13. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    ok, to answer the thread.....

    kasperskys scanner is slower than panda, avira, avg, trend micro, norton, nod32, ca, BD10

    but its faster than dr.web and f-secure.

    sure, it will be faster if that setting was on with kaspersky, but the others would be too if they were not set to scan all files or a similar sort of setting.
     
  14. Cstrike dish

    Cstrike dish Lurker

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2007
    Posts:
    8
    But it is very useful for protecting my computer. That is enough!
     
  15. ethan_arends

    ethan_arends Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Posts:
    27
    Location:
    Romania
    Usefull for scaning so slow?...i don't know...but because it's a very good av, u can live with that...and me too.
    I wish, u wish, we all wish that...:D
     
  16. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    couldnt they just have tighter coding so the engine runs faster?
    or something similar.i know bitdefender scanning engine is slow as well.
    lodore
     
  17. ethan_arends

    ethan_arends Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Posts:
    27
    Location:
    Romania
    I guess they have to rebuild the engine...from zero.
    I notice that every av's engine it's not so different from version to version. Or the different it's so small.
     
  18. CJsDad

    CJsDad Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2006
    Posts:
    618
    Fast scan, slow scan, doesn't matter.
    KAV/KIS can scan my computer slower than molasses for all I care but if my PC is getting protected from a quality AV such as Kaspersky than I can definitely wait until the scanning is done.
    If a slow scan was such an issue then set the AV to run a scan when you will be away from the computer for a while.
     
  19. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    I do not believe risk is increased by using the tools that KAV has to not scan files that are not new or changed. The same for the IChecker and ISwift. If it bothers one, then disable those.

    My first scan was about 45 minutes, but now they take about 6 minutes.
    "You pays your money and takes your choice."

    Jerry
     
  20. Don Pelotas

    Don Pelotas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Posts:
    2,257
    It's not because of poor coding, it because they made a very thorough engine which can unpack a lot of archives. Instead of wanting everything from your AV, you should decide what is most important, being effective or being fast. I always get the same scantime using iSwift/iChecker which in my case is fast, too much confusion reins in this thread, some are talking about iSwift/iChecker, but mean the "Scan only new & changed files" option which is another feature (not default), which despite the name does not mean files will not be scanned again btw.

    I must admit i do not understand the fuss about on-demand scan times, i mean i'm sure even DrWeb & VBA32 users are content with what they have despite being by far the slowest scanners, if they detect what they should...............surely this must be the most important thing?
     
  21. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    i am very happy with kis6.0.
    i agree slow scan times dont matter to much but its nice that after the first 3hour scan that because of "scan new and changed files only" it only now takes around 15minutes.
    i will have to do a full 3 hour scan when kis6.0 mp2 comes out but so what after that it will be fast again.]
    your right you cant have everything but kis6.0 is close.
    im lucky atm since my pc hasnt hit the bad ram recently i still need to get new ram soon thou...
    lodore
     
  22. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    :D :D
    fast scans are 'not needed' but everyone would like a faster one, if it does the same job.

    yep, im happy here with dr.web, although i do want a faster scan, if i fill my machine it can take a few hours.

    but, dr.web are bringing a faster scan, very fast so i hear.
    its nice to know they listened to what people wanted

    i wonder when though..... erm.
     
  23. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    i think once that update of faster scan is done they wont be alble to do another for ages since they need to look in all the locations for new malware and may need to add more packing and unpacking support in the furture.
    lodore
     
  24. TonyW

    TonyW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,635
    Location:
    UK
    If an AV can do a fast scan, be sure it is thorough.
     
  25. Simon6776

    Simon6776 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Posts:
    282
    I may have got this all wrong, but is there really any need for regular on-demand system scans, regardless of how long they take? Surely, if a security product is running in real time, and is regularly updated, it should prevent any infections getting in in the first place, so there shouldn't be any need for additional system scans. If a bunch of infections are found during, say, a weekly full system scan, then doesn't this indicate that the real time protection isn't doing it's job?
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.