Unable to scan archive file

[Ken2009]

Hi,

After i have performed a thorough scan (scan archive file is enabled), there are a total of 5270 files that avast av is unable to scan. It prompt me that : unable to scan: archive is password protected. Im using a Lenovo laptop and have recently peformed a full system recovery. Is there something wrong with the scanner or with my laptop?

below is one of the file that is unable to scan

C:\SWTOOLS\APPS\rnr\Z503AZB1113U500\TVT\preboot\warnt\service-text_fi.ini

Sorry for asking 2 questions in a day

Rgds
Ken

[hlecter]

Just what it says: The archives are password-protected and Avast doesn't have the pw
so it can't open the archives to scan inside them.

Nothing to worry about.

Regards
HL

Edit: No limit on number of questions per day on Avast forums. 

[Lisandro]

avast can't scan files that are password protected, it doesn't know the password.
There are many legitimate reasons why a file was password protected. For instance, Lavasoft Ad-aware and SpyBot store their data in a password-protected ZIP archives (to prevent other similar tools from messing up with them). It's really nothing to worry about - it's normal.

By examining 1) the reason given by avast! for not being able to scan the files, 2) the location of the files, you can get an idea of what program they relate to. You may need to expand the column headings to see all the text.
Files that can't be scanned are just that, not an indication they are suspicious/infected, just unable to be scanned.
Also, the packaging of the file could have some error, or use a non-standard pattern...

[Ken2009]

Hi all,

thanks for the prompt reply. Guess I have made the right choice to switch to avast after my Norton Internet Security subscription has expired. Thanks again.

Rgds
Ken

[Lisandro]

Guess I have made the right choice to switch to avast after my Norton Internet Security subscription has expired. Thanks again.

Ken, I'm an ex-Norton too. I do not regret at all

[norel]

I've also had some archive files that avast! was not able to scan; it says they are corrupted. But I'm not convinced they are corrupted; they may be, but it may simply be that avast! can't read them for one reason or another and  this might be a good thing. They could be encrypted to keep malware or something else from getting into them.

With the commercial software that's out there you get a big green check mark or something similar saying "Congratulations! No malware found." But you can't see what's going on; there are probably files they aren't reading as well, you just never see or hear about it. avast! reports that no infections have been found and my system is operating normally so it's not anything I'm too concerned about.

I'm glad I got rid of Norton. I haven't been using avast! long enough to say how I will like it in the long run, but so far so good.

[DavidR]

Corrupted Archive file, this could simply mean that avast is unable to unpack it to scan the contents of the archive and assuming it is because it is corrupt. Even if it were corrupt there is nothing that a user can do to resolve any corruption, short of replacing the file. This I wouldn't recommend (especially if this is for archives in the \System Volume Information folder, part of the system restore function) unless you are getting problems relating to that file outside of the avast scan.

[Lisandro]

Files that can't be scanned are just that, not an indication they are suspicious/infected, just unable to be scanned.
Also, the packaging of the file could have some error, or use a non-standard pattern...

[Hally]

Hi Ken & norel  

I've also had some archive files that avast! was not able to scan; it says they are corrupted. But I'm not convinced they are corrupted; they may be, but it may simply be that avast! can't read them for one reason or another and  this might be a good thing. They could be encrypted to keep malware or something else from getting into them.

With the commercial software that's out there you get a big green check mark or something similar saying "Congratulations! No malware found." But you can't see what's going on; there are probably files they aren't reading as well, you just never see or hear about it. avast! reports that no infections have been found and my system is operating normally so it's not anything I'm too concerned about.

I'm glad I got rid of Norton. I haven't been using avast! long enough to say how I will like it in the long run, but so far so good.

Don't Worry!
It's been about 4 months for me now  
Since I got rid of Norton 09 from my Laptop  - & -  AVG 8.5 from my Desktop Computer
Replaced both of them with Avast Home 4.8  

And you know what?
I Have Only One Regret!  
And that is... I Didn't Find Avast Sooner  

No Way! ..  Would I ever want to back to the misery and stress of AVG or Norton  
Or any of the others that I've tried in the past 3 years - Like.. McAfee, Kaspersky
Never Again!  

So Don't Worry!
You've definitely made the right decision .. Ditching Norton For Avast  

Coz...

Avast Rocks!  

[norel]

I'm starting to believe that the whole idea of scanning archive and compressed files is a bit overrated. After reading through all the threads here about it, it seems clear that a lot of the files don't get scanned anyway. I've always assumed that the more files you scan the better, right? Not necessarily. Even if archive files do have a virus it's perfectly harmless unless it tries to execute in which case the resident scanner will get it. Scanning compressed files simply prolongs scan time and doesn't really help that much.

[hlecter]

I'm starting to believe that the whole idea of scanning archive and compressed files is a bit overrated. After reading through all the threads here about it, it seems clear that a lot of the files don't get scanned anyway. I've always assumed that the more files you scan the better, right? Not necessarily. Even if archive files do have a virus it's perfectly harmless unless it tries to execute in which case the resident scanner will get it. Scanning compressed files simply prolongs scan time and doesn't really help that much.

I will say you are partly correct.
When archive-scanning is on a lot of archive-types are indeed scanned.
But not pw-protected, damaged and some types of archives.
It take time, but why not start the scan when you are not going to use your computer?

The modern word in security is 'layered protection' and that's what it's all about.

But scanning archives is not neccessary very often.

As a sidenote, Avast Webshield scans archives by default.

My advise: scan archives now and then.


Regards
HL

[DavidR]

I'm starting to believe that the whole idea of scanning archive and compressed files is a bit overrated. After reading through all the threads here about it, it seems clear that a lot of the files don't get scanned anyway. I've always assumed that the more files you scan the better, right? Not necessarily. Even if archive files do have a virus it's perfectly harmless unless it tries to execute in which case the resident scanner will get it. Scanning compressed files simply prolongs scan time and doesn't really help that much.

Which unsurprisingly enough, if you leave the avast default on-demand settings as they are, it doesn't scan archives and runs on standard sensitivity

Thorough is also by its design very thorough (it scans all files) and perhaps a little overkill for routine use, were a Standard scan without archives should be adequate. Archive (zip, rar, etc.) files are by their nature are inert, you need to extract the files and then you have to run them to be a threat. Long before that happens avast's Standard Shield should have scanned them and before an executable is run that is scanned.

I have only ever done a Through Scan with Archives once shortly after installation just to ensure a clean start state, but with XP for example avast will do a boot-time scan after installation if you select it, this I believe will be quicker and reasonably effective. Like everything in life things are a compromise.

[hlecter]

I think it all boils down to the level of paranoidity and other factors like surfing habits, risklevels and so on.

I still think an archive-scanning now and then can be useful, and give you a peace of mind, if so needed.

One thing for sure: It does no harm.   Don't let the messages about corruption etc stop you. They are harmless.

The boot-time scan(scheduled) is much earlier in Windows loading process and has a possibility
to catch things not catched by an ordnary thorough scan. On the other hand I think it still has fewer
unpackers than a thorough scan.

I think each and everyone has to decide for themselves...

Regards
HL