Prevx scan speed question

Discussion in 'Prevx Releases' started by Jeroen1000, Oct 14, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jeroen1000

    Jeroen1000 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Posts:
    162
    After hearing so much about Prevx I decided to try it. Don't really know whether I like it yet because it does not seem to scan every file on the computer. A complete scan takes only 12 seconds?! I like good scans speeds but this is really impossible.

    Is Prevx meant to be used as a monitor instead of an on-demand scan tool?
    Perhaps a dumb question but an important one to me:)

    cheers,

    Jeroen
     
  2. guest

    guest Guest

    Of course it's possible! :cool:

    Prevx works different than other av-solutions. Just compare the file size with any other av-solution. - The 'magic' is done in the cloud - at their servers. The scan builds a sort of 'library' of the programs you have which is then checked online.

    But it get's better ... :D .. you will see a change in numbers of checked files. I think I read that is because sometimes Prevx decides to scan more files if it is in the mood and suspicious of something. :)

    It is both. Warns you about incoming threats through monitoring and of course you can check if you are infected on-demand whenever you like. And once you own a license it then also can *remove* malware.

    You simply can't compare Prevx to other programs you were used too. And so it looks like 'to good to be true' in terms of speed. - That's all.
    :)
     
  3. Jeroen1000

    Jeroen1000 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Posts:
    162
    I'm trying to grasp it:). It does seem to work just fine as it found the eicar test file and an older virus hanging around in my inbox I once sent to Eset.

    I still refuse to believe it will find an inactive virus somewhere on the hard drive:D if it does not scan all the files.
     
  4. guest

    guest Guest

    My problem with Prevx after using it for years is more: It produces too many false positives even if PrevxHelp is going to deny that in a few seconds! :D

    So the problem is not Prevx finding too few things. - It's like Avira which also detects a lot but I am sure often those are fp too. ;)

    But better this way than the other, right? :cool:

    So put one there and test it! :D - Maybe you have to use 'advanced scan' to check all your places and disks etc. - But one thing you have to know: unlike other av-solutions Prevx just right now doesn't scan in archives as zip etc.
     
  5. PrevxHelp

    PrevxHelp Former Prevx Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    Posts:
    8,242
    Location:
    USA/UK
    It doesn't necessarily scan every file but it considers all of them - most of the files on the disk are useless/inactive and pose no threat to the end user when just sitting dormant so there is no need to waste time looking for them.

    Regarding your detection rant, you may want to take a look at this thread: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=111264 where thousands of users have been ranting for years about similar things :)
     
  6. Jeroen1000

    Jeroen1000 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Posts:
    162
    I'm new, forgive me:). My rant appears to have disappeard though hehe.
     
  7. JRViejo

    JRViejo Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Posts:
    20,927
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    Jeroen1000, in case you are wondering, I removed your two Off-Topic posts because there is no need for any thread to turn into an A vs. B debacle, which then means we have to close it. Keep on topic and you'll be fine. Thanks!

    JR
     
  8. Jeroen1000

    Jeroen1000 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Posts:
    162
    No worries I knew it was off-topic so you were right to delete it. I thought it might have been interesting for some future reader. I like to use (in my opninion) the best AV software available.

    Anyway, I've decided to give PrevX a try. Now that I have read into it, it is a very refreshing piece of software. I'll be sure to share my findings:)
     
  9. Vikorr

    Vikorr Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2005
    Posts:
    662
    My understanding is, unless there is a signature for it, Prevx won't detect an inactive virus....then again, if it's inactive, it's not harming anything - and being inactive - it usually means it will never run...but, IF it does, then as soon as it becomes active, Prevx is 'scanning' it.

    As for false positives - I've been very happy with Prevx for quite some time - just one false positive with an online game I played, after it updated...but that disappeared almost immediately (presuming Prevx eventually determined it was okay). Most of the 'false positives' I encountered were when I used to play around with Beta security software (a while back), and that's not surprising at all.
     
  10. guest

    guest Guest

    Well .. in my experience Prevx produces *much* more false positives than for example NOD32. - Using cracks :D with Avira is really no fun at all: *DANGER* signs wherever you look! ;) - And Prevx is very 'sensitive' regarding this too.

    But Prevx also managed to find many, many 'legit' programs, drivers etc. to be suspicious over time and that with default settings. - I had to report or override so many false positives .. this posting would be very long If I would try to name them all! ;) - One time I remember it managed to be unhappy over every 7-Zip sfx exe file I created and I got really mad too. Sorry! :D

    Sure .. those things get fixed *very* fast if you report them to Prevx support. And honestly, you won't find any company that is faster in this I believe.

    But it is nevertheless a problem or can be one having programs running that produce (too) many false positives like I do (Avira, Prevx). - Because you are in danger to drop your guard over time and suspect then a fp *again* when it one day indeed *IS* malware! :eek: -> SO DON'T DO THAT! :cool: - I liked NOD32 much more in this single area! If this is shouting at you then there is in most cases really something going on. ;)

    But since the day some malware slipped through Eset's safety net and only Prevx covered my .. system ;) afterwards I am a very happy Prevx customer too. No matter how often I have to override some ominous detection. :D

    And again: I never got any answer from Eset or Avira when sending things in for example. - Joe (and btw his neglected collegue :) ) is always here to help and if you are lucky you can watch him doing his 'magic' on your own machine! - So support from Prevx is top-notch and it really is no problem to get fp's fixed ASAP! ;)

    But still I really would appreciate seeing further improvement in this area and at least this must be allowed to say, right? :D

    O.K. - maybe not here as it is a bit OT! :D
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2009
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.