Spybot S&D 1.6.2.46 right click malware search is much slower as in previos versions

[bastik]

Hello,

I updated recently to 1.6.2.46.

The previous version(s) didn't take long for examination per right-click menu. 1.6.2.46 does take much longer to check files. 5 times longer or even more.

Even trivial txt-files (2kb in size) take over two seconds. (Loaded a folder of it to speed it up) It isn't the initialization process that is slow it seems to be the scanning itself.

You should note that the scanning process of the main application is much faster as in previous versions.

Version 1.6.2.46
Version of SDFiles.exe: 1.6.1.7 (SHA1: 3bbcd56323409aefb42a94e16c844476353854e0)
OS: XP (32bit) SP3 + latest patches applied

My system (including hardware) hasn't changed during the update process.

Thank you for any help.

bastik

EDIT: I should tell you that I haven't removed the previous version, before I installed 1.6.2.46. But I never did before.

[129260]

you remove all instances of spybot, and then download a whole new copy and see if that helps; since you stated that you have the previous version still on there...

I have noticed that when there are older versions of spybot on the system, it causes spybot to slow down in some areas. It couldn't hurt to try this out and see if it solves the problem.

See this link to completely get rid of spybot. Then download the newest version and let us know if that makes a difference.

[bastik]

Thank you for you fast reply. I will try that.

I was about to do that, but I wanted to ask first.

[bastik]

I removed Spybot S&D like described in the instruction, but the behavior still exists. (I removed it completely)

Avira AntiVir 8 is installed. Disabling doesn't change anything.
Comodo Internet Securtiy is also installed. (AntiVirus component (on access scanner) is always disabled) Disabling both doesn't change anything.

Should I try and older version of Spybot S&D?

[bastik]

I have an installer for 1.5.2. Thought that would be the newest after 1.6.2.(46), but I found an installer for 1603 final on my comupter. So I could try it with this version. Or if you have an archive with older version I could download the version 1.6.2.0 to try it. I haven't found the archive (if existing) yet.

I saw that testing of version 2.0 is in progress. If it is stable enough I wouldn't have a problem with trying it.

I will wait for further instruction.

Thank you,
bastik

[bastik]

I noticed a difference between 1.6.0 or 1.6.2 to 1.6.2.46.

The previous version(s) showed "waiting" for the files in the list for checking. It was so fast that I can't say what it showed in the moment as it checked the files. (Can't remember) I haven't found any malware so I can't tell what should be shown in this case. "Nothing found" was shown.

Now it shows "queued" for files that are not checked. "Scanning [filename]" while checking. "Nothing found".

[bastik]

I ignored my plan to wait for instruction and installed 1603 final.

1.6.2.46 takes 30+ seconds to scan a folder containing 18 JPG's and 2 TXT-files. (9,5 MB all together)

1.6.0.3 (final) takes less then 3 seconds for all files.

CPU usage is not high. 1.6.2.46 doesn't consume more resources as 1.6.0.3.

I was wrong 1.6.0.3 shows "queued" too. "waiting" is only showed as the list of files is loaded.

Should I stick to 1.6.0.3 for the moment?
or switch forward to 1.6.2.46?

[bastik]

I removed 1.6.0.3 again to try 1.6.2.46. The problem does still exist.

Any suggestions about this?

Thank you.

[129260]

I have thought long and hard, and i am not sure what else can be done. You have done everything i was going to suggest haha. I personally do not feel like there has been a slowdown, but it is possible I just do not notice it. Hopefully another member will be able to assist/give more information. Sorry I could not help you any further...

[bastik]

Don't care about that.

If you don't feel anything it is related to my system. It is such a slowdown for me. The search for malware is fast as usual, but analysis of specific files is so slow. This can't be just more signatures to check or a new scan method..

I never did, but with the older version a whole analysis of all files on C would take an hour, with the new version it would take the whole day... (maybe not that long)

It came with an update and I hope it will be gone with an update.

If anyone else has a suggestion please do not mind to tell me.