What On Demand Scanner do you use?

General Topics
1

Hello virus scanners,

We all share our enthusiasm for Avast as a resident scanner, and so do I. But what On Demand Scanner do you use for a second opinion. Is this ClamWin 0.86.2, like I do, or is this Bitdefender Free Edition 8?

I am rather curious?

polonus

2

I use neither. I always use online scanners as backup. That way you can also detect malware if it has prevented av from working on your system(s).

3

I don’t use second ON DEMAND SCANNER too. I prefer online scanners. I use online scanner once in two weeks.

4

Yep. Using only On-Line Scanner. Personally I’m using TrendMicro HouseCall. :wink:

5

Since I started using Fedora I no longer run online scans and dont have a resident scanner.

I am using avast! for linux workstations , on demand scanner.

But for those interested,

======================================
PersonalEdition Classic UNIX: Advance Notice

We have decided to orient the version 6.32 which will be released on
September 6, 2005 much more towards the successful PersonalEdition
Classic Windows.

This means that version 6.32 will be released with a graphical user
interface which will make it much easier to work with the program. It
will also no longer be necessary to register for the program before
downloading it.

That will be my resident scanner when it comes :slight_smile:

Unless avast do a Home Edition for linux 8)

6

say can trend micro housecall(online scanner) remove viruses or does it just detect them?

thanks,

tim ;D

7

Yes it can, to a certain extent depending on the virus, like avast! it will experience similar problems in removing a virus. like it being in use and protected by windows.

The easiest why to have found this out would have been to visit the web site.

I don’t have an installed secondary on-demand scanner and use an on-line scanner for a second opinion if I have any suspicions.

8

i have only avast installed and i go to trend micro housecall from time to time,this seems to do the job for me,bri

9

I’ve tried both BitDefender (7.2, I think) and ClamWin as “second opinion” a-v.

Bitdefender seems faster. But I like ClamWin, personally. Doesn’t hurt that it’s open source.

I intend to go Linux. At the moment, though, I’m still running from a Knoppix live cd, so I haven’t bothered with a Linux a-v yet.

10

I’m using Bitdefender.

11

I also use on-line scanners mostly Housecall :wink:

12

Hi

I use on_line scanners mainly housecall

I used to use bitdefender 7 ( i think), anyway i downloaded Bitdefender 8 but it wouldn’t install just got the hour glass and then nothing happens it just dissapears.

Cheers

13

I have just installed ClamWin and really like it for it’s simplicity but at the same time plenty of options for scanning. It also offers all kinds of methods for updating the signature DB including hourly. Also is incorporated into the context menu for quick scanning of files by right clicking on them. In my view it seems to be an excellent (none-resident) on demand (or scheduled) scanner to compliment Avast.

But I have one problem so far, ClamWin takes much to long scanning CHM files. It really appears to be a bug since the difference is as much as 25x slower on the same file as with Avast. I was wondering if anyone else has experienced this problem.

An example would be the Office95.chm file which takes a rediculous 24 minutes to scan with ClamWin and just for comparison takes just under one minute with Avast to scan the same file.

The CHM file has 4,821 files and is 27.1 mb according to Avast.

I have a WIN98SE system.

On a WIN98 system a lot of the CHM files can be found in Program Files>microsoft visual studio>MSDN98>98VS>1033.

I know Tech uses ClamWin (among other scanners) as support to Avast.

Could anyone tell me if they are experiencing the same problem. I have ClamWin 8.7.1 version (most current).

Could someone do me a big favor and try comparing by scanning the CHM file above or similar CHM files with both Avast and ClamWin and let me know if they give you a similar problem in regards to ClamWins scanning time on those files ?

Thanks in advance.

14

Hi laksrool,

I use ClamWin too. I put this to the test and scanned C: WINDOWS/HELP on a WIN98 SE of 30.09 MB in a time of 723.058 sec (12 m 35), not that fast scanning results, but actually not that dramatic. Maybe you have to check database to version or make a fresh re-install. I have ClamWin on for half a year now, after someone in the forum proposed it, and I can say I like it a lot as a non-resident second opinion scanner,

greets,

polonus

15

I use AsQuared on demand scanner. Recently I’ve started Using TrendMicro’s “Sysclean” . You have to download fresh Virus Pattern Files , and ocassional New Scan engine, but I like it as it’s very thorough. :wink:
Also Dr.Web’s cureit , which is a fresh download situation per use also.
Online Scanners also.

16

polonus wrote:

I use ClamWin too. I put this to the test and scanned C: WINDOWS/HELP on a WIN98 SE of 30.09 MB in a time of 723.058 sec (12 m 35), not that fast scanning results, but actually not that dramatic.

Thanks a lot polonus , :slight_smile:

I decided to scan the same file you scanned (windows/help)

What I got with ClamWin:
Scanned files: 314
Infected files: 0
Data scanned: 46.48 MB
Time: 1254.989 sec (20 m 54 s)

your scan: 30.09 MB in a time of 723.058 sec (12 m 35)
my scan: 46.48 MB in a time of 1254.989 sec (20 m 54 s)

I’m not that far off actually as your scan breaks down to about 6 m 17 s / 15 MB and my scan had 16.39 more MB so by adding another say 7 minutes to your time on 30 MB it would total nearly 20 minutes. Comparable to my around 21 minutes, and the difference could be I suppose CPU speed as my system is only a 400 mgz, pentium II, and I would guess your machine is likely much faster than my 400 mgz.

It is interesting how much faster Avast is (which is not really as fast as some others at scanning) at scanning the same file.

Avast stats on the same file (folder):
Number of scanned files: 8144
Total size of scanned files: 44.5 MB
Number of infected files: 0
Time of Test: 1 min 49 sec

Also interesting to see the number of files and total file size difference as well. The total size stat is close between the two, but the number of files scanned is dramatically different. It turns out that ClamWin is accurate on that count since there were 314 files in my help folder, so I have no idea how Avast comes up with that huge number (8,144) of files scanned.

Conclusion: No question ClamWin is a considerably slower scan engine, but I like the interface, simplicity and I feel confident in the accuracy of ClamWin. I also have found a lot of documentation that supports the fact that ClamWin’s signature Virus database (DB) is very dependable and maintained well as far as keeping up with new known viruses. I have read where there are a number of email application servers that now use ClamWin’s Virus DB a few of which have just recently switched to ClamWin based on the speed at which they keep up with updates on new Viruses. It is my impression that ClamWin is concentrating on maintaining a state of the art DB which is probably more important than speed anyway considering that ClamWin is used as a backup scanner for most likely smaller files to verify Avast scanning.

Thanks again for you help :wink:

17

Abraxas wrote:

I use AsQuared on demand scanner...

I was strongly considering this as it sounds pretty good, but a little idiosyncrasy of mine is that I don’t like programs where half of the options that show on the interface are non-functional (with the free version) and only available if you buy the paid version.

A-squared interface:
http://www.emsisoft.com/images/en/startcenter.jpg

As far as on-line scanners that’s fine, but in my case using a dial-up it’s also nice to have a program that is resident on the computer to verify scanning of local files. The one other AV program I was considering was AntiVir but I was not convinced that they keep their DB up to date as well as others including ClamWin.

18

AntiVir is a good backup scanner. It allows incremental updates since last versions.

19

Does the Free version of Antivir incorporate a scan option in the windows file context menu. Can a scan can be started directly from Windows Explorer, by clicking a folder or a file with your right mouse button and selecting the corresponding choice from the menu.

In other words when you RIGHT CLICK on a file does the Free version of Antivir have a scan selection on the context menu for that file (like Avast) ?

20

I think I started using a Trial version of A-Sqaured, and found the extras like " Background Guard " & " HiJack Free " more of a nuisance than anything else. The free version has a regularly updated VDB , manually initiated ; plus in the " updates " are posted here UPDATES ;D
I find it a handy compliment to my AV arsenal.
Just started using ClamWin Free Antivirus 0.87.1. ClamWin Free Antivirus 0.87.1.