Jump to content

How to disable NOD32 v4 from updating?


Recommended Posts

v4 Seems to be the lightest NOD32 that is useable on Windows 7. How to keep the definitions udpates on but disable it from checking for the program version update?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

V4 has worse detection of zero-day threats and relies on updates instead of cloud technology when it comes to detection of threats. V7 should be generally the lightest version as LiveGrid helps to skip scanning files that are clean or popular among users. If one has a performance issue with v7, it's better to troubleshoot it and find the culprit rather than downgrading to an older version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It may be the lighter on your end, but as Marcos stated, your gonna have nasties creep in and ruin your machine in reply to using an outdated program with worse detection. :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If one has a performance issue with v7, it's better to troubleshoot it and find the culprit rather than downgrading to an older version.

Yes always  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well here is the thing,

 

I have a program called Photo Zoom Pro 5,

 

here is the link, it's the demo version not a cracked one: hxxp://www.datafilehost.com/d/d85b4b36

 

With even the heavy kaspersky AV installed, the moment I choose my options and the installation starts, it ends in less than 1 second. with NOD32, it takes about 3 to 4 seconds, you can actually see the progress bar moving whereas with other AVs it happens instantly. Why is it NOD32 checking it so rigorously slowing down the installation to a crawl?

 

I know that is not a factor to judge performance, but still, being that slow definitely tells me NOD32 isn't as light as other AVs anymore

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well here is the thing,

 

I have a program called Photo Zoom Pro 5,

 

here is the link, it's the demo version not a cracked one: hxxp://www.datafilehost.com/d/d85b4b36

 

With even the heavy kaspersky AV installed, the moment I choose my options and the installation starts, it ends in less than 1 second. with NOD32, it takes about 3 to 4 seconds, you can actually see the progress bar moving whereas with other AVs it happens instantly. Why is it NOD32 checking it so rigorously slowing down the installation to a crawl?

 

I know that is not a factor to judge performance, but still, being that slow definitely tells me NOD32 isn't as light as other AVs anymore

It's possible ESET does a more detailed check of the file/installation process than Kaspersky does wich is why it takes just a tiny bit longer.

 

But that doesn't have anything to do with whether ESET is light on the system or not.

 

It would be an issue if the system would respond slowly while you are actually using Photo Zoom Pro 5.

 

But saying ESET is not light on the system only because some softwares takes just a few seconds longer to install because the engine may do a more thorough job is not correct. When ESET does a cloud-lookup on a file during installation or execution (wich can result in a real-time cloud block) it can take a couple of seconds, so maybe that's what happened in this case.

 

An example, when I do the "cloud lookup" test here: hxxp://www.amtso.org/feature-settings-check-cloud-lookup.html

 

It takes 1-8 seconds (on average) before the detection warning shows up on my screen wich is normal.

Edited by SweX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Well here is the thing,

 

I have a program called Photo Zoom Pro 5,

 

here is the link, it's the demo version not a cracked one: hxxp://www.datafilehost.com/d/d85b4b36

 

With even the heavy kaspersky AV installed, the moment I choose my options and the installation starts, it ends in less than 1 second. with NOD32, it takes about 3 to 4 seconds, you can actually see the progress bar moving whereas with other AVs it happens instantly. Why is it NOD32 checking it so rigorously slowing down the installation to a crawl?

 

I know that is not a factor to judge performance, but still, being that slow definitely tells me NOD32 isn't as light as other AVs anymore

It's possible ESET does a more detailed check of the file/installation process than Kaspersky does wich is why it takes just a tiny bit longer.

 

But that doesn't have anything to do with whether ESET is light on the system or not.

 

It would be an issue if the system would respond slowly while you are actually using Photo Zoom Pro 5.

 

But saying ESET is not light on the system only because some softwares takes just a few seconds longer to install because the engine may do a more thorough job is not correct. When ESET does a cloud-lookup on a file during installation or execution (wich can result in a real-time cloud block) it can take a couple of seconds, so maybe that's what happened in this case.

 

An example, when I do the "cloud lookup" test here: hxxp://www.amtso.org/feature-settings-check-cloud-lookup.html

 

It takes 1-8 seconds (on average) before the detection warning shows up on my screen wich is normal.

 

alright makes sense, i'll live with it I guess since i've tried every AV out there the past few months, each one has its quircks, with Kaspersky, NERO Platinum Suite 2014 sometimes fails with the burn process. With Qihoo Internet Security and Webroot, although light as hell, they are monsters of False positives!

 

Heck, Qihoo Internet Security detected my legitatmae VPN service as a virus, and detected the fact that I don't have IE installed as a virus (missing critical IE files)

 

at least NOD32 doesn't have these kinda jokes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

According to my investigation, the installer file is 21 MB in size and is packed with UPX. It takes 4 seconds to scan. In an unpacked form, the size of the installer is 23 MB so the difference is negligible and the scan is completed in less than a second. I assume that disabling advanced heuristics on file execution would help in this case (was disabled in v4 and v5 by default). Of course, we don't recommend disabling this option but you can try just to confirm my assumption. Subsequent execution (scanning) of the file should be very quick with LiveGrid and Smart optimization enabled.

 

If you have v4 installed, you can try enabling Advanced heuristics on file execution to make the setting set up the same way as in v7. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to my investigation, the installer file is 21 MB in size and is packed with UPX. It takes 4 seconds to scan. In an unpacked form, the size of the installer is 23 MB so the difference is negligible and the scan is completed in less than a second. I assume that disabling advanced heuristics on file execution would help in this case (was disabled in v4 and v5 by default). Of course, we don't recommend disabling this option but you can try just to confirm my assumption. Subsequent execution (scanning) of the file should be very quick with LiveGrid and Smart optimization enabled.

 

If you have v4 installed, you can try enabling Advanced heuristics on file execution to make the setting set up the same way as in v7. 

bit too late, I already restored back my image before instgalling anything and installed v7 again. I wouldn't wanna disable anything as I need the AV to work with its full potential. Not a big deal I guess, just wanted to confirm why NOD32 takes much more time than every other AV. I'm sure Kaspersky And Bitdefender are well resptected AVs and even though they are known to be resource hogs, they allow the installation to finish almost instantly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

As I wrote, one of the main differences between v4/v5 and v7 is that in v7 advanced heuristics is used by real-time protection on execution by default. Emulation by advanced heuristics is a resource and time consuming process, however, thanks to LiveGrid files with good reputation may be omitted from scanning which substantially improves the whole performance. There are several reasons why you don't notice this "lag" with other AV products:

1, Some vendors may not attempt to unpack such large files at all due to an adverse impact on the scan time. While such approach improves performance on one hand, it leaves a potential security whole on the other hand as malware spreading in similarly large files wouldn't be unpacked.

2, I dare to say that no other vendor has such an efficient and powerful emulator like Advanced heuristics employed by ESET's products which can emulate the code very deeply, allowing to detect many new malware variants utlilizing different envelopes.

 

You can play with settings, such as advanced heuristics on file execution as well as with LiveGrid and Smart optimization to see what impact it has on scanning this particular file.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...