ClamWin Free Antivirus Forum Index
ClamWin Free Antivirus
Support and Discussion Forums
Reply to topic
New Install, Getting Errors, Slow Scanning
greenknight


Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 0
Location: In the shadow of Mount St. Helens
Reply with quote
When I scanned C:\, I got these: https://img260.imageshack.us/my.php?image=clmwnscrnry3.png

The "Can't remove..." message repeated 23 times. At some point later. more of the "untested big block size" messages appeared, followed by a long series of "Can't create temporary directory" messages.

The one scan I completed took an incredibly long time. The partition contains 14.8 GB - I let it run by itself for 6 hrs, then went online and left it running in the background, in 5 hrs more it finished. I've tried adding some filters, it doesn't appear to be dramatically faster.

OS is XP sp2; AMD Duron CPU, 700 MHz; 512 MB SDRAM.
View user's profileSend private message
sherpya


Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 0
Location: Italy
Reply with quote
the unpacking code isn't 100% flawless, so you have got some non standard archives, about the temp directory cleanup, the problem should be addressed by the gui when then scan finishes, next release will skip binary files and media files so big disk scans should be faster
View user's profileSend private message
greenknight


Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 0
Location: In the shadow of Mount St. Helens
Reply with quote
I tried scanning just C:\Documents and Settings (.99 GB) twice, adding more filters. The error messages still appeared. Got scanning time down to under 76 min. from 103+. Still pretty slow, but better... any idea when that next release is coming?
View user's profileSend private message
File Extensions
GuitarBob


Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 9
Location: USA
Reply with quote
Until then, here is a Web site that lists some dangerous file extensions. The list isn't exclusive, but you might scan for those those extensions--should help scan time, and you will probably get decent coverage for malware. I guess you could add compressed/archive extensions like ZIP, RAR, TAR, etc.

https://www.novatone.net/mag/mailsec.htm

Regards,
View user's profileSend private message
drgoa.r


Joined: 20 Nov 2006
Posts: 0
Location: Bulgaria
Reply with quote
excluding GIF and JPG from scanning will increase speed, because in your case you probaly scan internet browser cache also, which is full of those.
there was some problems with infected jpg's, but Microsoft eliminated the problem a long time ago.
Quote:
Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-028
Buffer Overrun in JPEG Processing (GDI+) Could Allow Code Execution (833987)

...............................................................................................................................

Non-Affected Software
..................
� Microsoft Windows XP Service Pack 2
..................

as i see - your station is not affected, so excluding JPG is good idea.
View user's profileSend private message
sherpya


Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 0
Location: Italy
Reply with quote
nah images scanning doesn't take too much, I suggest you to skip .cab and .msi files since it's almost a waste of time and the unpacker is 100% working
View user's profileSend private message
greenknight


Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 0
Location: In the shadow of Mount St. Helens
Reply with quote
I already had .cab excluded, but not .msi. Thanks, I'll add that.

It'd be nice if it would skip Firefox cache folders - they seem to scan slowly, and there's no point to scanning them; the way Firefox handles caching, any malware in there is disabled. I clear my cache, but I have other users on this computer who don't, and it's a pain to individually exclude those folders.
View user's profileSend private message
greenknight


Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 0
Location: In the shadow of Mount St. Helens
Reply with quote
Actually, excluding Firefox Cache folders wasn't that hard, I just used
C:\\Documents and Settings\\username\\Local Settings\\Application Data\\Mozilla\\.*

Nothing in there except Cache folders and XUL.mfl and XPC.mfl files, I don't think those are infectable files. Afterwards, I wondered if I could have used * in place of the usernames, filtered all user Caches with one entry. Would that work?
View user's profileSend private message
alch
Site Admin

Joined: 27 Nov 2005
Posts: 0
Reply with quote
you can use any regular expression enclosed in <>
View user's profileSend private message
greenknight


Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 0
Location: In the shadow of Mount St. Helens
Reply with quote
Thought so, too bad I didn't think of using a wildcard there before I entered 4 individual filters. Oh. well...
View user's profileSend private message
New Install, Getting Errors, Slow Scanning
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
All times are GMT  
Page 1 of 1  

  
  
 Reply to topic