Since I installed the new version, my laptop moves at a crawl whenever I load any page from any website. I went to one of my own websites that is flat html and does not use any java scripts. Even that runs at a crawl
I found that Script Shield is hogging my resources, I can see my CPU usage as high as 67% when scanning each page.
On closer inspection I noticed that is is scanning Firefox’s cookie-jar-selector.js which takes about 40secs with each new page I visit. (If you think that isn’t long try watching a clock for 40 seconds before reading a new screen on your computer )
Is there a way to reduce Script Shield’s overhead?
Thank you.
2) If not, is there a way to downgrade to the last version?
How do you determine that this is the script shield, as it isn’t a split resource, all shield activity comes under avastSvc.exe ?
What extension does the cookie-jar-selector.js belong ?
I use cookie monster and I don’t see any of this issue, but then again I have firefox 6.0.2 installed. I don’t have the cookie-jar-selector.js file on my system.
is there any particular reason for sticking with ff4 ?
I’ve been out of town and couldn’t get back to this thread until now.
When I disable script shield I no longer have the problem
What extension does the cookie-jar-selector.js belong ?
FireFox.
I use cookie monster and I don't see any of this issue, but then again I have firefox 6.0.2 installed. I don't have the cookie-jar-selector.js file on my system.
That's because cookie-jar-selector.js isn't a cookie, its the file where Firefox stores cookies.
When Advast locks up I see in the Advast window that it is accessing that file.
is there any particular reason for sticking with ff4 ?
Yes, there are addons that I use that are not yet compatible with newer versions. With FireFox recent quick updates I found that I don’t have the time to check them as quickly as I should.
I found and reinstalled a copy of 6.0.1125 that seems to have “fixed” the problem.
I don’t know you could add an exclusion for the cookie-jar-selector.js (full path or wildcard needed) in the File System Shield. This might cascade to the script shield as the only exclusions in the Script Shield, appear to be URL related, see image example.
So I don’t know if this is a UI wording glitch and local HDD paths would also be covered. You could certainly try entering it and see.
EDIT: I have just tried entering a local address with wildcards and at least it accepted the local address, so give it a try.