MALWAREBYTES scan slows on vi.lib/addons

[tsunami]

Has anyone had an issue with their anti-spyware (in my case MALWAREBYTES) halting or slowing when scanning vi.lib/addons?  If so what should I do?

[Ray.R]

I don't use Malwarebytes, but I have observed slower response from older PCs when the anti virus scan kicks in.

Seems like the newer versions of anti-virus require more horsepower from the PC when doing their scans.

Many AV have a throttle feature where you can adjust how much of the CPU they take when doing scans.  Alternatively, you can program the AV to scan at night or when the PC is not in use by yourself.

[tsunami]

Yep, I am aware of what you speak of, but this was very peculiar behavior & I was wondering if anyone stumbled on the same thing.  It appeared that when the program was scanning some vi's within the subdirectories for Control Design it then saw the subVi's being called via the primary VI then started scanning them & they may reference other VI's & the thing just spiralled into a dysfunctional loop.

I do not know if that is what it was doing, but it appeared as such because it displays the pathname of the file being scanned & it precipitated to a pahname such as C: \Program files\National Instruments\LabView 2009\vi.lib\addons\Controls\Control Design\Simulation\Controls\Control Design\Simulation\...  The pathname kept getting larger & repeated itself to the point it expanded beyond the view capability of the display.

I put in an inquiry to MALWAREBYTES as well.  Maybe I have to stop using their package.

[Ray.R]

I've never seen it that bad.  Strange behavior indeed.

[tsunami]

Here is a screenshot. 

You can see the hierarchy of the Control Design directory & there is only 1 _Model Conversions subdirectory.  Note that the file CD Predictive Observer_ModelSelect.vi is within the _Inplementation subdirectory.  It seems to me that MALWAREBYTES is chasing subVI’s within primary VI’s.  If this is indeed the case since many primary VI’s have common subVI’s then superfluous iterations will be encountered in these scans & run times could balloon to unpredictable scales.

Can we circumvent this other than using different malware scan packages?