Kaspersky AV Breaking CHKDSK

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/K...g-CHKDSK-85517
For several weeks, users in our security forum have been discussing a problem with Kaspersky
Anti-Virus they say the company refuses to properly address. At fault is the company's iSwift
technology, which speeds up virus scans by tagging (NTFS-identifiers) certain files and
tracking whether they've been changed (and thus need to be rescanned).

According to forum users, the technology all but breaks CHKDSK functionality, and the changes
are permanent even if you uninstall the software. Kaspersky blames Microsoft for the problem,
but our forum regulars insist the problem is Kaspersky's.


http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18608452

Multiposted

--
Peter

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

"MICHAEL" <u158627_emr2@dslr.net> wrote in message news:%23M4T3EJwHHA.4516@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/K...g-CHKDSK-85517
> For several weeks, users in our security forum have been discussing a problem with Kaspersky
> Anti-Virus they say the company refuses to properly address. At fault is the company's iSwift
> technology, which speeds up virus scans by tagging (NTFS-identifiers) certain files and
> tracking whether they've been changed (and thus need to be rescanned).
>
> According to forum users, the technology all but breaks CHKDSK functionality, and the changes
> are permanent even if you uninstall the software. Kaspersky blames Microsoft for the problem,
> but our forum regulars insist the problem is Kaspersky's.
>
>
> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18608452

Sorry Michael it was meant for another post not yours. Sorry ignore. Too quick after just waking up.

--
Peter

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

"Peter Foldes" <okf22@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:OkLjQYLwHHA.3508@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Multiposted

--
Peter

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

"MICHAEL" <u158627_emr2@dslr.net> wrote in message news:%23M4T3EJwHHA.4516@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/K...g-CHKDSK-85517
> For several weeks, users in our security forum have been discussing a problem with Kaspersky
> Anti-Virus they say the company refuses to properly address. At fault is the company's iSwift
> technology, which speeds up virus scans by tagging (NTFS-identifiers) certain files and
> tracking whether they've been changed (and thus need to be rescanned).
>
> According to forum users, the technology all but breaks CHKDSK functionality, and the changes
> are permanent even if you uninstall the software. Kaspersky blames Microsoft for the problem,
> but our forum regulars insist the problem is Kaspersky's.
>
>
> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18608452

* Peter Foldes:
> Sorry Michael it was meant for another post not yours. Sorry ignore. Too quick after just waking up.

I try not to "say" anything until my second cup of coffee. ;-)


Take care,

Michael

On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 08:20:08 -0400, MICHAEL <u158627_emr2@dslr.net>

>http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/K...g-CHKDSK-85517
>For several weeks, users in our security forum have been discussing a problem with Kaspersky
>Anti-Virus they say the company refuses to properly address. At fault is the company's iSwift
>technology, which speeds up virus scans by tagging (NTFS-identifiers) certain files and
>tracking whether they've been changed (and thus need to be rescanned).

>According to forum users, the technology all but breaks CHKDSK functionality, and the changes
>are permanent even if you uninstall the software. Kaspersky blames Microsoft for the problem,
>but our forum regulars insist the problem is Kaspersky's.

>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18608452

If it's just ADS added to code files as an integrity check value,
wouldn't ADS Spy in HiJackThis clean them up?

Or, is the ChkDsk delay cause by issues with security descriptors?

Google( ChkDsk Security Descriptors )

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/831375

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/873437

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro....mspx?mfr=true

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d....mspx?mfr=true

I'm glad I don't use NTFS, yet.



>---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
On the 'net, *everyone* can hear you scream
>---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -