We're sorry Aspose doesn't work properply without JavaScript enabled.

Free Support Forum - aspose.com

Incompatibility of Aspose generated XLSX with MetaScan software


We use Aspose Cells product in our application to generate worksheets. After generating work sheet, we use a proprietary firm specific method to transfer large files from application server to UI server. A Metascan software is used to scan the xlsx generated before its stored by the proprietary system. Any XSLX generated by Aspose is being treated as an archive file by Metascan and it is not able to identify it as XSLX and hence take over 40 seconds to scan,

When we created an XLS using ASPOSE, the Metascan works faster and is able to scan within 4 seconds.

Attached is a sample code which shows how we use Aspose to generate excel

Please look into issue and advise if this is a known issue and any fix available.

We currently use Aspose Cells

MetaScan version used is


Thanks for considering Aspose.Cells.

Please create one similar Xlsx file manually with Microsoft Excel and then see whether it can be scanned faster without being taken as an archive.

Yes, when we tried with a regular XSLX created using MS office Excel product, the scan completed within 3 seconds.


Thanks for using Aspose.Cells.

Please share both of your XLSX files. One that is generated using Microsoft Excel and the other that is generated using Aspose.Cells. We will look into your both files and then check what could be causing this issue.

SampleInvestmentList.xslx is the one created using ASPOSE Cells,

Test.xslx is one created directly using MS Excel.

We observed that the content type was missing in the one generated by Aspose.

Attached are header screenshots of both File generated by Aspose cell and MS Excel


Thanks for your posting and using Aspose.Cells.

Please elaborate what is the difference between Metascan and Metadefender? When I open the following link and click the Metascan, it takes me to Metadefender.

  • Metascan 3.8.2 Now Available!

Please also share some more screenshots and let us know the steps (or environment), how can we test your issue at our end. Thanks for your cooperation in this regard and have a good.

I will get the information requested.
In meanwhile, is there any possibility one of your team members or yourself can join a conference call if we arrange for one along with a webex so you can observe what happens within our side with scan taking longer?


Thanks for your posting and using Aspose.Cells.

We have logged your issue for investigation. We will consider all the information provided by you and joining the web conference call if it is necessary. Once, there is some update for you, we will let you know asap.

This issue has been logged as

  • CELLSNET-45390 - Incompatibility of Aspose generated XLSX with MetaScan software


Thanks for using Aspose.Cells.

We have installed the Metadefender_Core v3.13.3 and tested the XLSX file generated by Aspose.Cells component and MS-Excel. We found the scan time are same for the two files. Such as, the files' size we used are both 13M, the scan time is about 340ms. We just used the default scan engine "ClamAV" after the installation. Maybe the performance issue was caused by different engine? Please give us the engines that you used to scan files, so we can make further investigation.

They have re-branded their product suite as Metadefender. The underlying product we use is Metascan.

I am also re attaching the file creating using Aspose which takes longer time to scan

Steps to reproduce:

• Download trial version of Metascan 3.13.1 and install on their machine

• Run command “D:\apps\OPSWATMetascan\omsCmdLineUtil.exe” config eod=0

• Run command “D:\apps\OPSWATMetascan\omsCmdLineUtil.exe” getinfo

to check if scan property Extract Microsoft Office documents is set to FALSE

• Run command “D:\apps\OPSWATMetascan\omsCmdLineUtil.exe” scan

for files (Aspose generated xlsx, Excel generated xlsx)

• Time taken for Aspose generated xlsx has been observed to be much higher than excel generated xlsx

Regarding you question about Scan Engine.

We utilize McAfee Engine licensed by Enterprise. We can probably provide our current engine details in production, but cannot provide them the engine itself.

find attached the version screen shot.


Thanks for providing us further detail and using Aspose.Cells.

We have logged your comments in our database for further investigation. We will look into it and update you. Once, there is some news for you, we will let you know asap.


Thanks for your posting and using Aspose.Cells.

Because we cannot deploy the same environment as yours with MetaScan and we cannot verify the performance issue at our end. Now we need your help to trace the cause of it.

We have created two files with your provided file SampleInvestmentList.xlsx:


SampleInvestmentList_843955_0.xlsx is re-saved normally by cells component which we think, should have the performance issue when being scanned by MetaScan.

SampleInvestmentList_843955_1.xlsx is re-saved by cells component too but we make “[Content_Types].xml” as the first entry of the archive, just as you have suggested.

Please try those two files to see whether they can give different performance. Let us know your feedback.

Bot the files took more time to scan (>40 seconds) than any other which is created directly from Office EXCEL product as Meta scan is treating both as archives.
Please advise if a call and webex session can help take this forward?


Thanks for your feedback and using Aspose.Cells.

We have again logged your comment and findings in our database for further investigation. We will look into it and update you. Once, there is some news for you, we will let you know asap.


Thanks for using Aspose.Cells.

If you could provide us a way to test the performance issue by ourselves, such as, one web page that we could use to upload different files to scan and that could show us the time cost for every file. Then we will be able to try different ways to generate xlsx files to find which part caused such kind of issue. Otherwise we will have to try those ways and ask you help us to test them repeatedly.

we are evaluating your request for test page. In meanwhile wanted to check if you were able to try out what was mentioned in reply # 843955 on setting up and testing metascan?