As I am experiencing slowdowns with the webshield recently, I have opted to give it a kick. I want to only go on with the File Sheild and the Network Shield(To block links to malicious websites). But my question is, can I be reasonably safe with the File Shield while browsing, because it can only detect infections after it reaches the PC.
You should be fine, though it’s recommended to use Web Shield as well. Though, if the problem is repeatable, report it so they can fix the problem.
I would say No as I don’t know what else you have in the way of protection and more importantly what you have in the way of a backup and recovery strategy, should your minimalist approach fail.
I would also say you should use the Web Shield is one of the most important shields as the greatest majority of malware is on the internet. To rely on the network shield to block malicious sites is not going to combat the hacked sites that aren’t going to be on the network shields malicious sites list. It takes time to build that history to include a site in the list. So in the meantime you are at more risk without the web shield. Ensure that you have the latest 5.0.545 version of avast as I believe that had some improvements in web shield compatibility.
I would also suggest the mail shield (with the Heuristics sensitivity set to High), as that may be the first indication that you have a hidden/undetected spambot on your system.
Well, in the end, pretty much all malware has to run off the HDD where File System shield catches it. Web Shield does provide additional layer for possible exploits that could potentially run directly from memory, but still. Most will simply start off from browser cache.
Web Shield is still highly recommended though. I’d prefer if you try to solve the slowdown problem instead of removing this shield permanently.
the web shield is a top weapon against malware because it stops it from reaching the hard disk, but the main shield protecting the system, all the system, remains the file system shield. So I would say if for some the web shield is a no go, sticking to the file shield only isn’t completely unreasonable. The system is still safe.
ps: adding that for Thunderbird and Windows Live mail, saving mails as separate eml files (as opposed to pst archives in Outlook), the file system shield is enough too. I could unfortunately never test that as no mail server will let through an Eicar file…
Just bear in mind that WebShield’s detection rates (when it comes to script malware, which is the major vector of web-based malware) are currently at the very top. File system shield (or should we say “detection of malicious binaries”) is good but maybe not the very best.
Leaving web shield on will shield you from ~90% of all infections.
BTW Rejzor I have to disagree here - files written to the browser cache are written asynchronously, meaning that they’re just that - a cache, to be used in case the user revisits the page. Quarantining the infected object off the cache won’t usually have any effect on the browser’s ability to execute it (I’m talking about script-based malware here).
Thanks
Vlk
okay that’s interesting, I didn’t know that. I would have thought like Rejzor.
The WebShield plays an important role in avast protection just like the FileShield also 
Reading everybody’s reply I acknowledge the fact that the Web Shield is a very neccessary component, but think about the other free protections. Avira AntiVir Personal(Free) does not have the WebGuard and thus it totally relies on the Real-time file scanning, they don not even have the Network, Mail, P2P etc. shields. So, are they less protected, I doubt it. Avira blocks and removes almost each and every virus(though it does have a very high rate of false positives. Saying that, the fact is that the File Shield and the Web Shield work on the same core i.e. on the Avast virus defintions library. The only difference is that Web Shield detects it even before it reaches the hard-disk. But active malware excecutes mostly from the HDD when it can be succesfully picked up by the File Shield. Another point is that I just do not use the Network Shield for blocking listed malicious sites, I also use it for blocking exploits.
EDIT: Most of the free antivirus solutions have only an equivalent to the Avast File System Shield as thier only real-time scanning component.
What other AVs have or have not isn’t the point here, you are asking about avast and our answers reflect that.
We have given you our advice and it is up to you to decide how to proceed. It is your system and entirely your choice, you have the information act on it as you see fit.
@ the OP: yeah, referring to other AV solutions is rather pointless, wondering why you started this thread and asked if you already drew the conclusion ;D
I think pointing out that other providers do not have the Web Shield is very relevant. Other AV companies choose to only scan things after they have actually hit the system and that may be enough. Having said that, if the web shield does not cause any problems then it should be used. If it does cause slowdowns and other things then I feel it can be disabled with very little if any protection sacrificed.
I think pointing out that other providers do not have the Web Shield is very relevant
not when you’re precisely asking if turning it off in Avast leaves a safe system. The main reference there was the remaining file system shield. In the context of a more general discussion, then yes it would be relevant to compare AVs with and without a web shield…
I use 4 shields and the rest I have off because I do not have need of them right now.
The webshield is one that is ON. It is a MAJOR part of keeping your system secure.
If you chose to leave it off, IMO is like not even having a virus scanner installed.
Ok, I hear the question…P2P, Mail, IM are the three services I do not use right now.
Before anyone hops on the wagon, I do NOT download email to my system. I do NOT use Outlook, or any other system based client. I do NOT connect P2P, nor do I have the IM service running on my system.
So, based on my usage, I chose not to use those services.
I do connect to the internet, and I do download files when needed, so I do need the webshield up and running. And since there may be times that I go to a site that is rather…umm…er…not the safest place to be, I keep the network shield up as well. I like to find and download when possible older games, and sometimes my search takes me to sites that are just not nice.
The point is, the weaker services you could chose not to use, as in my case. But the webshield is a basic backbone and should be used at all times.
yeah I don’t connect to the Internet either ;D
ROFL…y-yeah, yeah, I do not connect either…well…after this.
Ok, maybe one more time after this…but that is it…really…
Ok, lemme get the shovel…it is getting mighty deep in here 
: : : : : : : :