Kaspersky web antivirus

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by anderb, Mar 11, 2007.

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

    anderb Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Posts:
    106
    I need your opinions friends about kaspersky webantivirus,if I set to LOW would I be in danger?I´m asking cause it seems webantivirus slows down my browsing speed.
    Thanks;)
     
  2. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    hello,
    I find the high setting to be the best and doesnt seem to slow me down.
    dont ask me why the high setting doesnt slow me down but the normal setting can.
    also if you have any other questions post at the kaspersky fourm
    http://forum.kaspersky.com/index.php?showforum=13
    lodore
     
  3. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    It doesnt seem to slow down my browsing either.

    anyways if u set to the Low setting it would provide less protection, but Kaspersky will still keep you protected. the File AV is the important module.
     
  4. TonyW

    TonyW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,634
    Location:
    UK
    Could that be because the "limit fragment buffering time" is not ticked under the high setting?
     
  5. yeuxbleus

    yeuxbleus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Posts:
    90
    Web Anti-Virus on the highest setting does not slow me down either. :thumb:
     
  6. Legendkiller

    Legendkiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Posts:
    1,052
    select that "streaming scan" option and there won't be any slow-downs in your surfing speeds........
     
  7. Graystoke

    Graystoke Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2003
    Posts:
    1,502
    Location:
    The San Joaquin Valley, California
    I just started using KIS 6 again a few days ago, and I have Web Antivirus set to high also. It doesn't slow things down here either. I decided to give it a try after someone brought it up in the Kaspersky forum.
     
  8. The One

    The One Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2007
    Posts:
    246
    It's correct that the highest setting won't give you real slow down. But it will give you the right protection.
    I always test in on spy sites like seriall.com , if you got the settings on medium or high it won't allow you to download anything. It will block things on the lowest setting but on high it will block things faster.
     
  9. anderb

    anderb Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Posts:
    106
    Thanks for the quick response,I checked streaming scan option and now everything is back to normal:)
     
  10. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    What does it mean BTW "streaming scan option"?
     
  11. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    put into simple terms, Streaming scan uses less signatures and it scans as the file downloads.

    in contrast, Buffering scans waits til the file finishes downloading and it uses the full set of signatures.
     
  12. plantextract

    plantextract Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Posts:
    392
    no, it doesn't wait, it stores chunks of the file in a buffer, scans them and then makes them available to the user.
    high might not slow the speed down because the buffer isn't limited so there's no fragmentation of that file, bu i don't know how the buffer handles very large files.
     
  13. Mele20

    Mele20 Former Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    2,495
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii
    Why do you bother using it? You don't need it. Only ignorant folks who don't understand how AV's work use something like that. I hated it as it cut my internet speed by more than ONE HALF. I would have been absolutely crazy to have used it and Kaspersky should never have developed it as it is purely a marketing hype tool...it provides no more or better protection than KAV by itself. I think a lot less of both NOD32 and KAV because they stooped so low to come up with something worthless like this. It is one reason I now use avira free and it is so much better an AV because it is nice and simple, does what AV is intended to do and no more. Avira doesn't even have an email scanner...what a wonderful relief...finally an AV that respects users and expects them to understand how an AV works as an email scanner is also not needed anymore than a web HTTP scanner.
     
  14. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,042
    I use the defaults, and have seen no impact at all.

    Hi Mele20. I think you and KAV are kinda like oil and water, and just don't mix:D
     
  15. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    If I understand it corectly the there seems no difference between Buffering scan( Web antivirus) and File Antivirus. True?
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2007
  16. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    I wonder avast has so many scaners and I don,t see much issues with it. Seems very nice work by them.
     
  17. plantextract

    plantextract Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Posts:
    392
    yes there is.
    file av scans files on the disk while web av scans http streams on certain ports.
     
  18. yeuxbleus

    yeuxbleus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Posts:
    90
    Here we go again with your usual rants against NOD32 and KAV just because they include an e-mail and web scanner...quite frankly, it's getting old! Here's a news flash: Just because you've experience so many problems with those two AV's doesn't mean the rest of us do. In fact, most users of either AV don't experience nearly the same problems you do. I guess most of us are "ignorant" for getting the AV's to work right. I say, if a feature doesn't affect performance then by all means use it.

    Edit: Punctuation and some additons
     
  19. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    http scanners can block browser exploits. even if the on access scanner detects the exploit it cant stop it. that was part of a quote from an AV expert
    lodore
     
  20. TopperID

    TopperID Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,527
    Location:
    London
    Maybe it was a misquote rather than a qote. :D

    Of course the file scanner can intercept exploits. With KAV 5 it had to 'cos there was no Web scanner - it just picks them out of your TIFs. It's only in very particular circumstances that the web scanner would give better protection (ie when something can get into memory before being written to HD; but this is not usually the case).
     
  21. TonyW

    TonyW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,634
    Location:
    UK
    So that people understand - this is only true of the PersonalEdition Classic version.

    Both the PersonalEdition Premium and Premium Security Suite have email scanners so it would appear Avira realises there is a value to using them in those versions. The free version is just a stripped down version. Much like AOL's AVS is a stripped down version of KAV.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.