avast & norton conflicts

[Spyros]

If you can't design it to work correctly with NAV (or any other AV) installed but disabled, I guess thats too bad for your company and too bad for your lost potential customers.

Since avast! has no serious problems with the presence or remains of other AV's (except of NAV) I, as an x-costumer of NAV, would refraise your sentence to this:
" Dear Norton, If you can't design it to work correctly with avast! (or any other AV) installed but disabled, I guess thats too bad for your company and too bad for your lost potential customers."

[teknojnky]

Here is my point, and I will try to make it as succint as possible:

If all NAV files and services are disabled from start up, then as far as any other virus scanner is concerned, resident or not, NAV should have no effect on them.

The files may be there, but are not loaded.. then how could it possibly conflict unless there is something within the other program which is poorly programmed that somehow still conflicts with inactive files?!?!?

Now, I would agree completely that one should not be trying to actively use multiple virus scanners simultaniously... but there is no excuse for inactive files to be affecting active programs.

And besides, Windows has long had the ability to support multiple drivers and programs running concurrently anyway (provided they are programmed correctly)... this is a core basis of a modern pre-emptively multitasking operating system such as xp/2k/x64. So in theory, multiple virus, spyware, defrag, etc programs should ALL work fine together... even simultaniously because the OS is supposed to keep them separated (whether or not the OS does is an entirely different arguement).

@ Spyros, touche. However, as a current NAV customer, which doesn't appear to have any issues with avast being installed, only avast having issues with NAV, it appears to me to be a problem with avast.

[RejZoR]

No offense,but you really don't understand.
It's not about only services and processes. Antiviruses work on a low driver level. So even if it's (visually) fully disabled,it's parts are always "online" low below system visual shell (Explorer).
And this is the exact reason why avast! doesn't want to work with NAV in any case.

[Lisandro]

If all NAV files and services are disabled from start up, then as far as any other virus scanner is concerned, resident or not, NAV should have no effect on them. The files may be there, but are not loaded.. then how could it possibly conflict unless there is something within the other program which is poorly programmed that somehow still conflicts with inactive files?!?!?

Sorry to say but this is not truth.
Check, for instance, these Windows Registry keys in your system?

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\VirtualDeviceDrivers\\VDD
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\VirtualDeviceDrivers\\VDD
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet002\Control\VirtualDeviceDrivers\\VDD
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet003\Control\VirtualDeviceDrivers\\VDD
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet004\Control\VirtualDeviceDrivers\\VDD

You'll have problems with any, but any, 16bit file executable lauched, you'll have problems with DOS applications under XP.
Definitively, I worked with NAV a lot of time and have to uninstall it from lots of computers. I'm absolutely sure about what I'm posting.
By the way, avast is not poorly programmed. In fact, it's one of the best antivirus round  
Now, I would agree completely that one should not be trying to actively use multiple virus scanners simultaniously... but there is no excuse for inactive files to be affecting active programs.

And besides, Windows has long had the ability to support multiple drivers and programs running concurrently anyway (provided they are programmed correctly)... this is a core basis of a modern pre-emptively multitasking operating system such as xp/2k/x64. So in theory, multiple virus, spyware, defrag, etc programs should ALL work fine together... even simultaniously because the OS is supposed to keep them separated (whether or not the OS does is an entirely different arguement).

Again, this is not true for drivers at the same programming level, in this case, low programming level and access to disk. Only in theory, and theory is not the practice in computer land  

[igor]

If all NAV files and services are disabled from start up, then as far as any other virus scanner is concerned, resident or not, NAV should have no effect on them.

First, the question is how are they disabled. For example, AVG was (is?) known to load the drivers even if you disable the resident shield from its user interface.

The files may be there, but are not loaded.. then how could it possibly conflict unless there is something within the other program which is poorly programmed that somehow still conflicts with inactive files?!?!?

OK, let's say they are not loaded. But - the corresponding records exist. It may simply mean that avast! is started a few milliseconds earlier than NAV - and Norton executable will load the drivers a few clockticks later, resulting in a system crash. That's the way it is. (Norton doesn't have any checks for avast!, of course, so it would attempt to load the drivers).

And besides, Windows has long had the ability to support multiple drivers and programs running concurrently anyway (provided they are programmed correctly)... this is a core basis of a modern pre-emptively multitasking operating system such as xp/2k/x64. So in theory, multiple virus, spyware, defrag, etc programs should ALL work fine together... even simultaniously because the OS is supposed to keep them separated (whether or not the OS does is an entirely different arguement).

I'm afraid you are talking about ordinary Win32 application... but not about drivers. Imagine this scenario: an application is trying to access a file. Resident protection of antivirus 1, that happens to be on "top" of the chain, detects the access, and redirects it somewhere else to scan the file. Now, the other antivirus detects the scanning of the file (which is just another access), redirects the request to its own code and tries to scan the file itself. Now, this file access is detected by the first antivirus again... and you're in an infinite loop (which will crash the system, of course).
And I'm not speaking about occassions when a virus is really detected... then the actions become even more interesting - it may actually result in the virus being missed, and possibly activated! (i.e. those 2 AV somehow "anihilate" each other).

[bob3160]

However, as a current NAV customer, which doesn't appear to have any issues with avast being installed, only avast having issues with NAV, it appears to me to be a problem with avast.

If your computer had avast! installed and you then attempt to install NAV you will get a warning message advising you of the fact that
you have another AV program installed on your computer and it should be removed before installing NAV.

[teknojnky]

I'm afraid you are talking about ordinary Win32 application... but not about drivers. Imagine this scenario: an application is trying to access a file. Resident protection of antivirus 1, that happens to be on "top" of the chain, detects the access, and redirects it somewhere else to scan the file. Now, the other antivirus detects the scanning of the file (which is just another access), redirects the request to its own code and tries to scan the file itself. Now, this file access is detected by the first antivirus again... and you're in an infinite loop (which will crash the system, of course).

And I'm not speaking about occassions when a virus is really detected... then the actions become even more interesting - it may actually result in the virus being missed, and possibly activated! (i.e. those 2 AV somehow "anihilate" each other).

Regardless of where a program, process or driver resides within the various system levels of an OS, it can not (or should not) assume that that it will have exclusive access to any other part of the system (other than thru system allowed mutex api's). In fact for low level system drivers, making that assumption results scenarios alot like the above example (this happend frequently in the win9x days).

Similar to riding a motorcycle, 10% of the time you make sure YOU are not doing anything stupid or reckless, while 90% of the time your watching out for someone ELSE to do something stupid or reckless.

So, whether or not NAV may be making assumptions (which is bad), avast does not handle the situation gracefully either (which is bad too) and from and end user point of view, it doesnt matter which programs are at fault, they just want it to work.

Besides, I can't comment or complain about about other AV programs for which I have not tried to use.

In any case, I've said my piece. I appreciate the opportunity to voice my opinion and feedback.

[Lisandro]

OK, let's say they are not loaded. But - the corresponding records exist. It may simply mean that avast! is started a few milliseconds earlier than NAV - and Norton executable will load the drivers a few clockticks later, resulting in a system crash. That's the way it is. (Norton doesn't have any checks for avast!, of course, so it would attempt to load the drivers).

Another point: Windows does not have a deterministic start order. Programs are loaded without a know order. The crash will happen for sure. It's a Windows limitation too.

avast does not handle the situation gracefully either (which is bad too) and from and end user point of view, it doesnt matter which programs are at fault, they just want it to work.

The user could want bad things from time to time and the programmers should avoid this wrong choice. Not all the times the user is right 
I don't think it's an avast limitation. It's a computer architecture limitation. You're trying to do what a lot of people alert to do not do: using two antivirus at the same time. Sooner or later, problems.

[RejZoR]

Oh boy
IT'S NOT AN AVAST! FAULT if Norton is poorly coded. Why should Alwil guys waste resources and time on work thats not their own?
Trash Norton from SystemWorks package,install avast! and live happy ever after.
You can do that by Change option in SystemWorks installer.

[bob3160]

RejZoR
100% correct. I have Systemworks on my system but, MINUS the AV part
and neither avast! nor Systemworks is complaining and or both doing their jobs in harmony.

[niko]

Une vérité vraie!

Trash Norton from SystemWorks package,install avast! and live happy ever after.

Today my new boss ask me:
"Tell me what you want concerning your laptop Niko"
My answer:
"I don't mind, Bernard, only one thing is important for me: a laptop without Norton, PLEASE".

[kamulko]

Hi, Niko! The same thing I said this afternoon to a Doctor who called me 'cause the problems on his personal laptop: he has Zone Alarm free and NAV. Tomorrow I will have an annoyng unistall of NAV junk files... many hours of work  (I'm converting all my Institute to Avast! eheheh  ). Thanks for the croissant... yum yum... french croissant & cappuccino: the best cure of the early morning!

[niko]

Hi Kamulko,

Tomorrow I will have an annoyng unistall of NAV junk files...

Tomorrow I'll pray for you

[kamulko]

I'm afraid you are talking about ordinary Win32 application... but not about drivers. Imagine this scenario: an application is trying to access a file. Resident protection of antivirus 1, that happens to be on "top" of the chain, detects the access, and redirects it somewhere else to scan the file. Now, the other antivirus detects the scanning of the file (which is just another access), redirects the request to its own code and tries to scan the file itself. Now, this file access is detected by the first antivirus again... and you're in an infinite loop (which will crash the system, of course).

And I'm not speaking about occassions when a virus is really detected... then the actions become even more interesting - it may actually result in the virus being missed, and possibly activated! (i.e. those 2 AV somehow "anihilate" each other).

Regardless of where a program, process or driver resides within the various system levels of an OS, it can not (or should not) assume that that it will have exclusive access to any other part of the system (other than thru system allowed mutex api's). In fact for low level system drivers, making that assumption results scenarios alot like the above example (this happend frequently in the win9x days).

Similar to riding a motorcycle, 10% of the time you make sure YOU are not doing anything stupid or reckless, while 90% of the time your watching out for someone ELSE to do something stupid or reckless.

So, whether or not NAV may be making assumptions (which is bad), avast does not handle the situation gracefully either (which is bad too) and from and end user point of view, it doesnt matter which programs are at fault, they just want it to work.

Besides, I can't comment or complain about about other AV programs for which I have not tried to use.

In any case, I've said my piece. I appreciate the opportunity to voice my opinion and feedback.

I work in a Clinic:"Better to prevent than to care!"... old wise proverb! Translation:"Better avoid to install NAV than waste many time for uninstall it!" eheheh

[kamulko]

Hi Kamulko,

Tomorrow I will have an annoyng unistall of NAV junk files...

Tomorrow I'll pray for you

Thanks for your prayers... but I prefer another croissant! :-) Are you right, friend?