dslreports logo
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery


how-to block ads

Search Topic:
share rss forum feed

Grants Pass, OR

Avira Web Protection module useless or great?

I remember when it first came out. Lots of people complained about it specifically slowing down their internet. I am still using the trial of Avira Premium 2013. So, far it has been great. But, I question this web protection feature. If it truly is needed or overkill? I did notice speed tests are off when its enabled. Once disabled. I get normal readings. Now here is another wonky thing Avira has done with this module. They say when downloading files. The speed in the browser does not reflect the real speed. They have added what you can check to enable a "progress bar" that will show you the real speed. Problem is. It only shows % of the file downloading. No hard numbers like the browser shows. That is another reason why I question this module as a whole if its needed or not.

La Merma - Vigilado

I think it has its uses. Personally, I tend to disable such module if it slows my browsing as real time protection should block any malware. If it works with minimal impact it stays on otherwise .....
"what we know we know the same, what we don't know, we don't know it differently."
Help yourself so God can help you.
Microsoft MVP, 2006 - 2012/13

King Grub


2 recommendations

reply to KoRnGtL15

The Webguard in the paid versions of Avira offers more than just signature/heuristic detection - it also has a quite large database of malicious website adresses which can be blocked, a feature that is no longer part of the free version's Webguard. In short, it improves on Avira's already great signature detection by adding website blocking, and blocks malicious code before it is written to a temp folder, always a plus in my book.


reply to KoRnGtL15

In Avira 2013 version there is a real value - when I visit a website I get immediately site rating with details about the site owner. I like it!

·Time Warner Cable
reply to KoRnGtL15

avira's "webguard" does not slow the speed of downloads.. when webguard is enabled, files that are downloaded are "cached" and so the speed-tests cannot read the files that are being downloaded, in order to measure the speed of the download..

i like avira's "webguard" because it allows me to block executable files (or any other types of files) from being downloaded... to do that, i add the ".exe" file-extension (along with many other file-extensions) to webguard's "blocked requests"..

also, it is easier to deal with malware when it is flagged by "webguard" than when it is flagged by the avira program's regular "guard"..

i think it is better that malware is flagged by "webguard", while it is "cached", before it is written to the harddrive, rather than being flagged by the regular "guard", after it has been written to the harddrive..

again, i like "webguard" because, with its "blocked requests" feature, it allows me to block executable files, as well as any other types of files, from being downloaded.. being able to use "webguard" to block files from being downloaded is the main reason that i am using the avira program, today.. being able to block files from being downloaded greatly enhances my computer's security..

korngtl15, in case you want to use webguard's "blocked requests" feature, to block files from being downloaded, unlike with other types of files, using the ".jar" file extension will not block "JAR" files from being downloaded.. to block "JAR" files from being downloaded, in "blocked requests", you have to use:

"application/java-archive" (minus quotations)

Hilo, HI
reply to KoRnGtL15

That is the worst feature that Avira or any AV has ever come up with. I had Eset when they came out with this crap...they were the first. My computer was immediately crippled. I left Eset because of it. I beta tested the one Avira has and it totally crippled my computer and crippled all speed tests. How anyone could like it, I cannot imagine. But then I don't do stupid things on the net and I have NEVER gone to an infected site except deliberately on a virtual machine out of curiosity. I have NEVER, since I got a computer in the 90/s, had an AV alert on a real virus where I was unaware that I was going to a page with a real virus on it.

If you are not a responsible surfer then maybe you need something like this. A responsible surfer does not need this. Just use the Proxomitron and you won't see any ads...they are the problem usually and there will a toggle for Java or Flash so they won't start unless you actually want to see the Flash movie, etc.

I don't use anything in the cloud and certainly would never depend on the opinions of other web surfers to determine if a page is ok or not. A nasty does not get written to your file system before Guard catches it anyway. It goes in a TEMP file. Guard is the best part of Avira and the on ly reason someone uses webguard is out of ignorance of how an AV works and who mistakenly thinks Guard is crap.
When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Thomas Jefferson

Grants Pass, OR
reply to redwolfe_98

Getting back to webguard. I have mine set for automatic mode and "deny access". From my understanding. It does not actually reach my pc correct? Say if something happened to get by it. That is when the real time would kick in yes?

King Grub


Well, if you have the same threat categories selected for both the Guard and the Webguard, they have the same detection, so the Webguard will catch it first. Unless it is downloaded on some other port than 80 or 8080, since Webguard only watches those two. In that case, the Guard would catch it (if it is in the definitions or identified by the heuristics, of course), in a temp folder usually.