BD Conflict with Office 2007 Save Functions

Not sure if this topic has been brought up on this forum yet, so I wanted to take a minute and bring it up. We have been experiencing an issue when saving MS Office 2007 files (excel and word) on our small business network. Specifically, when we try to save a document on a network path we are receiving the following error:

'\\<network-share>\document.doc' is currently in use. Try again later.

The technical solution that I found online is to deactivate BD virus scan (see the following link):

http://www.tabletquestions.com/microsoft-o...ice-2007-a.html

When we un-check the "Real-time protection is enabled" box (in the "Shield" tab in the Antivirus section), the files save without a problem.

It's entirely possible that BD has another solution that allows us to save our Office files while maintaining our real-time virus protection. I would appreciate any input. Thanks.

Dan

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Niels

Hi Trucking Dan

You can try this open BitDefender go to antvirus,shield,adjusted level,press don't scan this path on all levels. Then press on add new item and browse to the network path. Then confirm by pressing on ok. I only use the home edition. This is only a temporary solution for not disabling the entire realtime protection.

Regards

Niels

Trucking Dan

Hi Niels,

Thanks for the reply. Based on your suggestion I did the following:

- went into the shield tab of the antvirus section and then pushed the custom level button (I don't show an "adjusted level"),

- then selected the "exclude path from scan (applies to all levels)" option.

- then pressed the "new item" option and then selected the network path (and confirmed by pressing on ok).

Unfortunately, after making this change I still received the error message when I tried to save my Excel 2007 file. I then tried moving the Protection Level Setting to Permissive and the error disappeared. I then went back in and undid the changes outlined above and tried saving my files on the Permissive setting and the error did not occur, also.

To summarize, it looks there are (at least) a couple of options for avoiding the MS Office 2007 Save File error:

1) Uncheck the "Real-Time Protection is Enabled" box, or

2) Set the Protection Level Setting to Permissive.

Am I right in thinking that it would be better to choose the second option so that I continue to get some protection?

It seems to me that this problem will begin to appear more frequently as more people move to MS Office 2007. Any discussion by the BD team about possible changes to the program that would allow users to avoid these types of errors while maintaining aggressive or default protection settings?

Thanks again.

Dan

Niels

Hi Dan

I would definitely choose for the second option.

Because when you perform the first option you are unprotected. I am only a volunteer and I am not related to BitDefender you have to wait till someone of them replies. When you want an answer to your office 2007 problem. I don't have any problems with office 2003.

Regards

Niels

m0gely

I'm experiencing this same problem at my work after upgrading to Office 2007 and at another small network I maintain. At work we use BD Standard (v8) for enterprise. It's hit and miss and sometimes I can successfully save. I'm going to do more testing with Office 2K3 and disabling the AV on the server to try and narrow it down and will report back.

At the other small network of around 4 computers and no server, they use the consumer BD v10 client. This is very frustrating problem and requires disabling the full time protection for people to function on their computer. There's no point of having BitDefender even on the computer under those circumstances.

lcopeland@computercc.com

Same here. I deployed 30 new workstations WITH BD client security and Office 2007. Big screwup. BitDefender has to fix this. I have been playing with do not scan network drives and I think this should take care of it as a workaround but this is a pain for deployment as I have to go in and set a do not scan path for every client and then go test it.

kyle.gaines

I'm also having this same issue and have ran into it on numerous other forums. This is very dissappointing considering the recommendations I recieved from others causing me to switch to BD. Has anyone heard anything from BD directly? Are they working on a fix for this problem? has anyone come up with any better work arounds that don't involve me turning off my AV scan? Even excluding a folder from realtime scan doesn't really interest me. Any addition help would be wonderful.

To clarify though. This is a problem with the client BD not the destination BD where the share is located? Or are both a problem?

Got it, client side

Kyle G.

m0gely

This is not a solution, but it's the best I could come up with until the BD guys fix this. Exclude network paths from your clients. How yuo do it will vary slightly depending on the version of client you use, then just make sure those file types are getting scanned by the server (or machine in that role). Previously I had scanning of Office extensions excluded on my BD for File Servers for performance reasons, and since the clients scanned them anyway.

The BT client will accept \\servername\%username% if you're needing to exclude users home folders stored on the server via Folder Redirection, but the client (at least the enterprise v.8 client) won't accept just the server name \\server, it expects a folder to be specified. So for large organizations or people who have many drive letters, exclude all those as well.

This could be a big pain if you're using the consumer version on a network with many computers as you will have to update each machine separately. Consider getting the enterprise version for central management.

I just got off the Live Chat with a BD guy, and I got him to read this thread (after 30 minutes...). I gave him some contact info and he said he would forward the issue to corporate. I will reply any new info I get from them if I get to talk to these people. Hopefully they see this and listen, and at least reply as to whether or not they acknowledge a problem exists.

kyle.gaines

Thanks m0gely

james.stuart

Just wanted to chime in that we're experiencing the same problem at one of our client sites. The response I've received from Bit Defender is that they're looking into the issue but can't give me an estimated time to resolution or an estimated time at which they will update us as to the status of the issue.

I will mention that this problem does not appear to effect versions of Office prior to 2007. We have also been able to reproduce a similar issue with Dreamweaver 8.

As I did not find a description of it above, Office 2007 programs appear to leave a .tmp file in the directory to which they are attempting to save files. Each save attempt will drop another .tmp file.

Dreamweaver has slightly different terminology and behavior. Instead of claiming that the file is in use, it simply says 'Sharing Violation'. When an existing file is saved, the save will fail. After the save fails, the existing file will no longer exist. The file can then be saved without an issue. This is a very dangerous chain of events in terms of potential data loss, as if you do not attempt to save the file again and instead choose to close it, the file will no longer exist.

As a final note, we have also determined that with Bit Defender Professional Plus 8, the issue with Office 2007 is actually introduced when the program is updated. When we performed a clean install, without updating Bit Defender, we did not experience any issues. We have not run tests to determine whether the error introducing update is a program update or a definition update.

David-B

My two ppennies worth as well, deployed 4 machines in a new network with Office 2007 Win 2003 R2 as the file server, all 4 won't save to network but will save locally, now I haven't put the FS or enterprise server on this due to problems with the Exchnage plugin. I spent an age looking on the MS forum looking for an answer then saw this. Interestingly all machines are V 8 Pro and have had a BD news error as well. Haven't got the specific error as I'm not on this network at the mo, but will post that as well, as a just incase.

David-B

Ok guys this is what BitDefender have to say

"For the moment for the client and file server versions the only workaround

available is the exclusion from scanning of the specific office 2007

extensions such as docx xlsx etc.

We are aware of this situation and there is already a fix available for the

v10 desktop versions, but for the versions above the issue will be fixed later

this summer by the release of the future versions of corporate products.

We apologize for the discomfort created and we are counting on your

understanding regarding this issue, keep in mind that the upgrade to the new

versions will be free when the time comes."

iI'm not so sure about the docx xlsx etc e.g 2007 specific files as we had problems with 2007 saving .doc's as well. I guess wait and see if you are a corporate customer..

mplatel

I am having the same problems with Excel 2003. When users go to save files on network shares, they get an error similar to "Your changes could not be saved to 'filename.xls', but were saved to a temporary directory names '414C5100'." When I disabled BD on the client or excluded the directory, it saves fine.

What's wrong with BD ???

m0gely

I am having the same problems with Excel 2003.

<snip>

What's wrong with BD ???

You need to introduce an exclusion list for certain file extensions. I exclude things like fonts, various text and DB files and temp files from being scanned. It will get rid of what you're experiencing I think. I don't believe your problem is the same as what 2007 users are experiencing. Here is my list, but let not hi-jack this topic anymore: .tmp;.dat;.ttf;.fon;.log;.fpt;.pca;.dbf;.dbc;.cdx;.dcx;.idx

@ Brooky: docx and the new formats aren't the only problem. It happens if your '07 application is set to save as the older formats too. I think it's best just to exclude scanning network drives for the clients and have the server pick up the scanning of those file types on that end. It leaves less holes. Office documents are too prone to infection to leave unchecked.

On another rant... I can't believe BD is waiting until later this summer for a fix. They said the same thing about having an enterprise client for Vista. grr...

AndreiASM

I am having the same problems with Excel 2003. When users go to save files on network shares, they get an error similar to "Your changes could not be saved to 'filename.xls', but were saved to a temporary directory names '414C5100'." When I disabled BD on the client or excluded the directory, it saves fine.

What's wrong with BD ???

Are you sure you added Microsoft Excel to the BD Firewall permisions? You should create a new rule for office programs, to be sure that they can acces the network, and you should be able to save documents across network. Go to Firewall -> Traffic and seek that programs. If they are blocked, change the action to "Allow".

m0gely

We are aware of this situation and there is already a fix available for the

v10 desktop versions, but for the versions above the issue will be fixed later

this summer by the release of the future versions of corporate products.

Can anyone confirm that v10 now works? I'm not seeing it...

jacorob

Can anyone confirm that v10 now works? I'm not seeing it...

I can't confirm about office 2007, but I have Dreamweaver 8 and trying to save a file on a network drive still causing the access violation error. Disabling scanning .tmp files resolves the problem, though as discussed before that is a temporary fix.

Computerkliniek

Just installed it (v10) and still the same problem.

Has any one got a workaround (that works !)

I've tried everything in this post, but with no luck

m0gely

Here is a workaround that works. You need to disable scanning of network shares two different ways. Exclude the drive and the UNC path. So if you have N: mapped to \\server\share, both of those need to be excluded. Only excluding one won't work. Just make sure you have AV on the server as well and you should be OK. I have no idea why the BD people didn't chime in here. I was told this by my vendor who I just renewed my BD through. They confirmed having to enter both paths was a known bug.

tritechits

Here is a workaround that works. You need to disable scanning of network shares two different ways. Exclude the drive and the UNC path. So if you have N: mapped to \\server\share, both of those need to be excluded. Only excluding one won't work. Just make sure you have AV on the server as well and you should be OK. I have no idea why the BD people didn't chime in here. I was told this by my vendor who I just renewed my BD through. They confirmed having to enter both paths was a known bug.

Thanks m0gely, your workaround worked for me as well.

dreamgear

I can also confirm that m0gely's workaround works, but what a pain this is going to be. I did some tail-chasing trying to figure this one out, made the more difficult by the fact that most of my O2K7 users were also running BD. For a while I was blaming my Samba config but then I noticed it was happening on a Windows server too.

I would even settle for a setting for the Shield component to not scan any network drives at all, but it isn't there.

A new version "later this summer" will be great, and while I well know about the difficulty of splitting development efforts between Vx+1 and Vx.y, I hope it's worth the obloquy.

Lacking a better place, I'm going to log all my enterprise 2.x bugs to the products/enterprise forum.

Ivo

BitDefender will not fix this issue in version 10. And is not investigating in creating a solution for it because every resource has been put on the new BitDefender.

This issue will supposedly be fixed in the new version of BD. So if you are experiencing this problem use the workaround and wait for the new version. As you know you are entitled to upgrade for free.

dreamgear

BitDefender will not fix this issue in version 10. And is not investigating in creating a solution for it because every resource has been put on the new BitDefender.

This issue will supposedly be fixed in the new version of BD. So if you are experiencing this problem use the workaround and wait for the new version. As you know you are entitled to upgrade for free.

OT, but are you the same Ivo from achievo.com in The Netherlands? If so, then this is a way small world.

Ivo

OT, but are you the same Ivo from achievo.com in The Netherlands? If so, then this is a way small world.

No I am not the same, although I do come from The Netherlands. But now live on the other side of the world.

Ivo is just a popular name in The Netherlands.

leeinq

We are using v 10 and having this problem. Has it been solved in the latest version?

SILO

Is there a "fix" for this? After uninstalling & reinstalling MS Office 2007, I was still experiencing this same problem. I did a Google search & found a bunch of other people having this issue. We're running BD Client PRO Plus 8.0.2 & we're having more & more users moving to Office 2007. <img class= " />

SILO

Bueller? Ferris? BD support? Anyone? <_<

jdhowlett

BitDefender Business Client - Build 11.0.16 still has this same problem. When you perform a save as from any microsoft office product, the save as dialog stops responding and you have to wait. It eventually comes back after a couple of minutes. It does this for each network folder (and subfolder) you browse to. Very annoying. We recently switched from NOD32, which didn't do this. We have also had symantec in the past with out this problem.

SILO

BitDefender Business Client - Build 11.0.16 still has this same problem. When you perform a save as from any microsoft office product, the save as dialog stops responding and you have to wait. It eventually comes back after a couple of minutes. It does this for each network folder (and subfolder) you browse to. Very annoying. We recently switched from NOD32, which didn't do this. We have also had symantec in the past with out this problem.

Unfortunately help from BD is limited to non-existend in these forums, very dissapointing. <img class= " />