What is it with Avast and Comodo Internet Security Suite Install file??

[igor]

However, i would like to point out an interesting thing. I momentarily disabled the Standard shield. then right clicked the Comodo file and did a quick scan. ashquick.exe worked fine without any freezes. Scan report was:
"Number of scanned files:147
 Total size of scanned files: 120MB"

Thats huge compression. May be causing the freeze. But strange why only Standard Shield freezes, not the Quick Scan.

I'm sure the quick scanner also took a few seconds to scan the file (actually, the unpacking of the big chunk here takes place before the quick-scanner progress starts to appear, i.e. when the window shows "initializing engine..."). It's exactly the same for the resident protection - just a bit worse because the scanner has higher priority.

Also Standard Shield is expected to run more in depth scan than quick scan.

Not really - the "quick scanner" is called that way because it's expected to be used for quick checking of single/downloaded/... files. However, it uses the highest possible sensitivity/depth.
Anyway, the most CPU consuming task here is the unpacking of the outer layer - which is the same both for the quick scanner and Standard Shield.

[mkis]

Thanks for correction Igor.

[cimmind]

Thanks Mkis for the positive comments,

but I think your point about compatibility issues is more important. Necessary to work out a layered defense where everything works together without issues.

      Yes, totally. Thats the main point.. If there are products that are leader in their own fields, i think compatibility issues should be taken seriously. However, i have an apprehension. Comodo has recently introduced their own AV product, and they are wanting it to piggyback ride in on the popularity of its existing Firewall. Thats the reason why they offer only a CIS suite (the recent version is a mammoth 72MB installer!), and not separate installers for the AV and the Firewall. You need to download the full suite installer, then uncheck the AV option while installing, if only firewall is needed.
        I am really skeptical that compatibility with Avast would be anywhere on their priority list, now that they have their own rival AV product. I have a hunch that the freeze issues are only due to AV packer. Probably they would not be there in case the installer file was for a standalone firewall only.    
  

Also Standard Shield is expected to run more in depth scan than quick scan. I'm not sure about quick scan. I use quick scan with Mbam. I dont use it much at all with avast.

Thanks Igor for clarifying on that. Mkis had got me worried by stating that quickscan is not as deep as Standard shield.
Mkis... need a clarification on your quote. MBAM is a anti-malware product, not a AV. I do also have it. How can its quickscan be a substitute for Avast quickscan?    

There has been some talk of avast hogging CPU but I have noticed also that CPU running max has settled down to lower percentage with Standard Shield still running.

On the contrary, i chose Avast precisely because of its low CPU usage. Its nothing compared to the monstrosities like Norton! I do not know how CPU intensive AVira is, but i can definitely vouch for that Avast is better than AVG in resource usage.
In case ppl are experiencing high CPU use, rest assured other AV engines would hog even more in the same situation. The best thing i like about Avast is its modules, i can switch off temporarily or permanently the modules that i do not need, to save on system resources (e.g.  P2P shield, Outlook shield). Did a lot of research on this. the modular structure, the memory use, the incremental virus database updates.. all are great for a low-resources config.  

[mkis]

Hi Cimmind

Good move to reply post to the forum. There will be interested readers. Obviously I wont be looking to go comodo because I already have my hands full. I still haven't fully mastered my Online Armor yet, but so far I have reason enough to be confident.

MBAM is a anti-malware product, not a AV. I do also have it. How can its quickscan be a substitute for Avast quickscan?

My mistake. I meant Mbam Quickscan compared to Mbam Fullscan. I used to do full until I was advised that quick is sufficient, provided it has latest update. Initially I had intended to use avast Quickscan a lot, but for some reason I just never did - its so fast, and the files are so small - so perhaps thats why I got the idea about less sensitivity / depth (all cred to Igor's reply). But I do have both Mbam and avast quicks at the ready. I use the Mbam regularly.

See link - http://pics.livejournal.com/emkis/pic/0002gak2/

[mkis]

I then redid this after putting on Process Explorer, and its ashserv.exe (the Standard Shield module of Avast) that hogs the CPU and records furious I/O activity.

My mistake again. Bit confusing. I read you wrong. In the meantime I ran a few tests of my own. The results can be found in the pictures below. Autoruns were IrDa mouse and keyboard, and a SmartRam module (IObit) which I run because PC only has 384 Rambus (sells at a phenomenal price second-hand - recently 2GB in 4x512 sticks went second-hand for $1000 at auction - I'm not that much of a devotee). Otherwise, only basic XP engine running and what you see in the pictures.

Anyhow, in the first capture, provider Standard shield has been running for one and half hours. You can see it in the picture. For (all but)all that time, avast GUI has been scanning thorough with archive checked. I should say that the scan through Docs and Setts was more demanding than through System32, so I am showing the easier run as far as CPU performance goes. I have two performance monitors running - to the left is the SmartRam module, and to the right is Windows Performance monitor in MMC Console.

[mkis]

The second capture is taken about five minutes later, after avast GUI has been stopped and turned off - took a few minutes to close down. A red line has been added above MMC module to show how far the reading has progressed through its current cycle. Some earlier fluctuations in CPU can be seen, probably from when CPU picks up request to close down avast scanner. Otherwise the readings look good - granted, like I said, the scan through System32 was the easier run. Standard shield is still on. I think avast comes through alright. I'm not sure how robust are my testing parameters but I do have time constraints. Someone else might run more stringent tests.

Anyway, best regards and thanks for reply.


Edit - I guess I should have run these tests with the internet hooked up. Anyone got an idea of how difference it would make.

[cimmind]

.. which I run because PC only has 384 Rambus (sells at a phenomenal price second-hand - recently 2GB in 4x512 sticks went second-hand for $1000 at auction - I'm not that much of a devotee).

Mkis, you keep shocking me! :-)
Whats 'rambus'? I hope you are referring to RAM.
You only have 384.. i am running on 256MB RAM! And till a few months back, on 128 MB RAM!! Hell, i ran XP SP2 WITH AV WITH A FIREWALL on 128 MB RAM for nearly seven years!!! And played GTA III on it!!!!
Running out of exclamation marks..

Whats with the price of RAM you have quoted, i couldnt believe the price you wrote.. Agreed, it may be NZ$ you may be quoting in, but still.. $1000!
Here in India, 2GB DDR2 RAM stick costs the equivalent of US$25.

Reason i dont upgrade my own RAM is that unfortunately my RAM stick is SDRAM, thats twice as expensive as DDRAM here, as its an older less available technology.

{you can find a fun international comparison i started here:}
http://forums.comodo.com/general_discussion_off_topic_anything_and_everything/in_terms_of_pepsi_and_apples_an_international_comparison-t40425.0.html      

Btw, do u follow cricket? You guys beat us in the T20 warmup ydy.


I just observed your siggy.. You have a very good defence set up. Even i was contemplating OA before i turned to comodo. MBAM rocks. Might i make a suggestion.. why are you using IE? Why not switch to Firefox? I think thats one of the most imp security measures you can take.

[mkis]

Hi Cimmind

Sorry about the delay. I've been busy doing things.

I will do my best to reply to you question by question. You might have guessed that I’m firstly a hardware tech. In fact, I think I might start a thread in the forum specifically on hardware.
 

Whats 'rambus'?

I dont really know where  to start here - probably best I just post a link to answer this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RDRAM - the story of Rambus, rdram, RIMMS.

Edit - link disappeared ! !  Try this one - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambus

My system is an Intel server board. At the time of manufacture, sdram was still most commonly used ram. Rambus were considered to be very fast technology. Compared to DDR, however,  they are not. But they are stable. The two PCs I've got with RIMMS are identical - one runs an even set(= all exact same brand) of 4 x 64mb, the other, 2x 128mb and 2 x64mb and the two sets are different brands. In which case, I'm lucky they do run. That not all brands of ram will run together, is even more true with Rambus.

The purchase of 4 x 512mb Rambus was on local trade and exchange website - trademe.co.nz - about a year ago, and well before the market slowdown. The sticks were an even set. Very rarely do you see even sets Rambus of that size. With 2 GB of Rambus on my PC I would need to tie the machine down to the desk.  I don’t know what price the 4x512mb would fetch today. I think perhaps a little less, but there will always be enthusiasts who will bid the price up, regardless of a depressed market. Here is a current auction item for Rambus though the memory is EEC, which is not much use to people whose mainboards only support NON-EEC (which is the majority who has Rambus, in this country anyway). http://www.trademe.co.nz/Computers/Components/Memory-RAM/1-GB-or-more/auction-222409444.htm. More realistic pricing.

These Rambus that I have were discontinued about 6 or 7 years ago. DDR were simpler, cheaper to make, and compatible across most motherboards. But people still do run Rambus machines as servers. They are not just hobby projects. The person who bought the 4x512 set will likely be putting the rambus to work, which is what they re good at. I always thought they make a good hardware firewall.

Here in India, 2GB DDR2 RAM stick costs the equivalent of US$25.

I buy DDR 1GB brand new from a retailer for bout $NZ50, and bit cheaper from within the trade. DDR2 a bit more expensive. And there's loads of sdram around. But like you say, not that cheap to buy.  http://www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/SearchResults.aspx?searchType=0002-0359-0164-&searchString=SDRAM&searchregion=100&type=Search&pay=paynow&buy=now&Y=0

i am running on 256MB RAM! And till a few months back, on 128 MB RAM!!

384mb is not much memory. check out some of the profiles in the avast Forum for some real big rigs.

Hell, i ran XP SP2 WITH AV WITH A FIREWALL on 128 MB RAM for nearly seven years!!! And played GTA III on it!!!!

I used to run P3's with sdram with avast for years (first introduced to avast 2006 and never looked back). Actual just finished a machine to go out to a client - small form factor IBM NetVista with two IBM 128mb sticks, 677 CPU, tiny 10GB hard drive with 5GB spare, No Office installed, Adobe Reader, Player, Shockwave installed, and of course avast Home, in this case a new avast installation. This PC has been used by so many people over the last three years, while I work on their machines, and the PC has always been well protected by avast Home, without incident, despite being such a tiny unit by today's standards. The lady who gets this PC is the one who only uses internet to bet on the horse races. She will probably keep it for good this time, and return my laptop to the company, and I now use P4's for lending out as courtesy service, while I repair. All these people such as her, my clients, have accepted avast and often remark how much they like it. Thats whats most important. And surprising how many people round here know about avast. I get good feedback, avast Home works good across many different platforms.

I just observed your siggy.. You have a very good defence set up.

My defense setup is good, but likewise I dont think its foolproof. I am using Firefox, I just hadn’t brought my profile up to date.

As for Rambus 2009, they look like they might possibly sort out the legal issues they have had with lots of different chip conmpanies, like Nvidia and Hynix, that have kept them tied up for years. Whether things go their way or not, we dont know yet. http://news.google.co.nz/news?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=s&hl=en&q=RAMBUS&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=etsnSujTOZaIkAXHzKDoDQ&sa=X&oi=news_group&resnum=4&ct=title

Rambus are now looking for their XDR line to take the PC market beyond DDR3 memory. I have a feeling we will be hearing a lot more about them in future. http://www.rambus.com/us/products/multicore.html?utm_source=rambus&utm_medium=link_home_page&utm_campaign=beyond_ddr3


As for the cricket, India always lose their warm up matches, then come out blazing in the real games. But New Zealand are very tenacious and hard to get on top of when they're on their game. Plus we play the short game well. I pick NZ to win the tournament (but then I would, wouldn't I?).


Best regards

[dell boy]

i have no problem with the cis installer on my computer.
as for avast being fast/slow compared to others, i used avira free for approx 10 months and i always thought it was the fastest ever, but now i use avast and i recon its about the same.
i have intel core2 duo with 3gb ram on vista 32 SP2 and i dont notice any performance loss with avira/avast, however my isp offered me mcafee, i tried with it and uninstalled in a matter of days because its slow and generally just sh/t.
i think avast is perfectly fine with performance, its not slow so it has no problems, every av program will have some degree of performance loss but its so small with avast that its not worth bothering with.
in my opinion if its creating less performance drag than firefox then its perfectly fine with me.