I'm a former Kaspersky user. To reduce scanning time, the program would only scan those files that changed from the last scan.
If I understand Norton's process, it doesn't scan trusted files to reduce scanning time.
This doesn't seem logical. Can't a virus or other malware alter a file? ..Even a "trusted" file?
So even if the file is initially considered good, if it becomes infected/altered by a virus, shouldn't it be scanned?
I'm not trying troll and start an arguement about which program is better. I'm just trying to understand the process.
Thanks,
BC