Slashdot Mirror
Two Reviews of Microsoft AntiSpyware
jasondubya writes "PC Magazine released their review of Microsoft's Anti-Spyware Beta 1. While they agree with most that it has great potential, it has yet to take over their top spot. In an informal test, it removed about two-thirds of the spyware detected and blocked about fifty percent of the threats they attempted to install. After removal, they ran Webroot's Spy Sweeper 3.0. It was able to detect '900 traces of 48 distinct threats still present, including two keyloggers and three Trojans.' With that, it looks like Microsoft still has work to do before they are on top of the market." Several other readers sent in link to Mossberg's review in the WSJ.
I've used it and ...
I liked it! It scanned like 500 spywares in my computer, all of them due to Internet Explorer Bugs(hey, i've used it only for 2 days since I formated my computer). The software is fast, gives information about the spywares and asks you what you wanna do. If I had to rate it I would give 9/10.
need to make a correction there at the end ...
With that, it looks like Microsoft still has a few more companies to buy before they are the market."
vodka, straight up, thank you!
MS AntiSpyware is /extremely/ fast - faster than anything else I've tried - but didn't catch any advertisement cookies in Mozilla Firefox and only caught a very small number of them from IE. It also complains loudly about a number of things I use on a regular basis - FTP server, VNC, even a copy of SoftICE (which, yes, I use legitimately to debug device drivers).
Could be good with some work, though.
This flies in the face of science.
Anything good about this program is attributed to Giant and anything bad is attributed to Microsoft.
I've tried it and it found some stuff that ad aware didn't even pick up. It also correctly identified tight vnc as a possible spyware app, but labeled it as low priority. I was more then happy with it.
Even though it says you need to "validate" Windows, it prompts you after you click the download link, and then you can click "no." Good news for me^H^Hthe pirates out there with illegitimate XP copies.
1. Does it work well? (not as well as many others)
2. Does it uninstall cleanly? (HA!)
3. How much does it cost for support (Better put, IS support even reasonably AVAILABLE for it?)
No thanks, I'll stick with what I've got.
Take the 90-Day Challenge! http://rwmurker.bodybyvi.com/
While these articles are mostly true, they seemed still to be biased against microsoft. Although i value /. and go along with its beliefs against a certain company, there are more balanced views out there...
n =s how&id=84
http://www.flexbeta.net/main/articles.php?actio
In the articles here, they only say that some stuff was not removed by antispyware. But they never said if microfsoft antispyware picked up stuff others missed. Article above does this test.
-SystemERRor
Let me get this straight, Microsoft buys another company, does a badge job on the product to slap their logos all over it, and suddenly it's something new and exciting? We might as well be reading the last review of Giant's software.
I guess it's news because it's Microsoft, just like a divorce is news if your name is Brad and Jennifer or whatever...
If thou see a fair woman pay court to her, for thus thou wilt obtain love
Problems with these reviews:
1. It really isn't fair to issue a review of a product in its beta form. Yes it can be argued that Microsoft throwing out this software in the public domain pretty much gives people the write to issue opinions on it, but it seems to me that in a respected news source like the WSJ should take there ability to influence people to heart and wait for a final version before issuing reviews.
2. The reviewer faulted this tool for not finding cookies. Big whoop. Seriously, cookies are highly overrated. Ad-Aware is a pretty good tool, but its insistance in clearing out all my cookies causes me to have to redo passwords and such for websites that I would have rather left alone. This utility ignoring the cookies is a good thing.
3. Resets hijacked home pages to MSN. Buyer beware? Oh thats right this software is free. The problem with hijacked home pages is that there is a script that keeps resetting them to the hijacked page, you can't get rid of it. I haven't tested this, but I imagine that the Microsoft tool simply resets your home page to MSN. You are free to change it back to whatever you want. I imagine it would be a simple enough thing for Microsoft to reset it back to what it was originally, but that requires that your home page wasn't hijacked when the tool was installed. All in all if Microsoft want's to make MSN the default home page with this tool, and the tool is free, I say we got what we paid for. Let them have it.
4. Doesn't support Firefox. Let me get this straight. Microsoft offers a product for free that a good many of us would be willing to pay for and they don't offer support for there competing web browser? Say it aint so!
Let me be the first to say that if you wan't Firefox support then maybe you should look at an open source solution or possibly a pay client that supports Firefox. As long as Microsoft is giving this thing away faulting them for this is bias pure and simple.
Just a note: I have a copy of Back Orifice 2K on my laptop for running some chores on several machines on my home network (the boPeep plugin is very handy) which is detected by NAV2004, and Spybot as a trojan (it can be) but it is not detected by MS Anti-Spyware. Interesting.
I would HATE to have BO2K on my machine without knowing it.
Running spy sweeper afterwards and detecting traces of spyware still on the machine does not mean that you should assume that spy sweeper can detect all the stuff that MS anti-spyware has already detected and removed.
Youd be better off running the two products on identically infected machines and see which detects and removes the most etc. If you were to run spy sweeper first and then MS anti-spyware, youd probably see similar results. (ie, MS anti-spyware detecting stuff that spy sweeper missed).
I.O.U One Sig.
"[Few] seem aware that chopsticks originated in American mining communities" because it didn't - chopsticks have been in use in China for at least 4000 years.
Get a clue.
Their anti-spyware software doesn't work on older versions of Windows. Poor ol' me with WinME will continue to use measures that work on older versions of Windows.
Don't worry about it, it is getting to be so difficult to target older versions of Windows with the new APIs and development tools that even the adware guys will probably just throw up a dialog asking you to upgrade to XP before they can install their spyware. So you'll be sittin' pretty with your WinME install!
I'm not the world's biggest fan of Microsoft -- I've pretty well shorn myself of everything but XP and Word -- but I have to admit that it's not bad. Caught some minor stuff after I hadn't done a scan with Ad-Aware in a while and cleaned them up. Not the best, nowhere near the worst.
Interestingly, one service still says "GIANT Antispyware Data Service". I guess they didn't rebadge it all yet.
You want to know who isn't running Firefox 2.x? They spell it "definately" and "rediculous".
Largely, this beta is little more than a rebranded GIANT Antispyware, which was already pretty good to being with. (Yeah, it doesn't support 95/98/ME any longer, but GIANT's software was a little flaky there.)
(It would be interesting if one could go back in time, send the same software to the reviewer with the GIANT brand and see if the name, "Microsoft," somehow changed the review, but I digress.)
I am less concerned with Microsoft's changing the underlying structure of the product than I am with their ability to keep up with the threat. Malware demands that an anti product get updated very, very often, sometimes daily. Microsoft, to date, has never demonstrated that they can keep up with the threat. How are they going to go from releasing one to two security updates every couple of weeks to keeping up with a threat that can change hourly.
Sure, it'll piss us all off if Microsoft -- who presumably has more knowledge of and access to Windows' under-pinnings -- doesn't live up to this challenge, but the worst that will happen to it is this nice product they bought will quickly become irrelevant. And the community (or communisits, I'm not sure which) will, again, rise up to fill the vacuum.
m
If Nalgene water bottles are outlawed, only outlaws will have Nalgene water bottles.
...can be found at:.
I have to say, I'm basically at a loss to explain why there's been a lot of positive press about Webroot's Spy Sweeper 3.0 recently. This PC Mag. review is just the latest in "shoot-outs" and reviews I've read that gave Spy Sweeper top (or near top) honors.
My personal experience, doing on-site PC service calls for a living, is completely different. I've cleaned literally hundreds of spyware infested PCs for customers in the last year or so, and I *often* find they have Spy Sweeper already installed and running, despite all their problems.
People occasionally ask me if Spy Sweeper is "any good" since companies like Gateway like to try selling it to them over the phone when they call with problems. I've been advising to save the money and skip it.
It may have a nice interface and claimed "feature set" - but from what I've observed, it doesn't really seem to be that effective at keeping spyware out, or detecting it after the fact.
In the past, I've been an advocate of the SpyBot and Ad-Aware SE combo, but the new Giant/MS Anti-Spyware solution has done an impressive job for me so far. Just last night, I had a PC that both SpyBot 1.4 beta (w/latest update sigs) and Ad-Aware SE with latest update sigs. reported completely clean of spyware problems. Despite that, ads were randomly popping open in IE windows every 15 seconds or so. MS Anti-Spyware completely cleaned it up.