Slashdot Mirror


New Ad-Aware Offers Behavioral Detection

With the latest release of the popular anti-malware tool Ad-Aware, Lavasoft has added what is being referring to as "Genotype," a heuristic-based behavioral detection engine. In addition to a new (and what appears to be faster) method of detection and elimination, there are a few incremental updates like the simple/advanced toggle and a potentially always-on "gaming mode," which attempts to do real-time filtering while you are playing games, watching videos, or just browsing.

20 of 68 comments (clear)

  1. Warning by Romancer · · Score: 5, Funny

    Warning, The page you are about to view contains P0rN and a small malware virus, would you like to continue?

    Options:
    Yes give me the Virus
    No Block the P0rN.

    --


    ) Human Kind Vs Human Creation
    ) It'd be interesting to see how many humans would survive to serve us.
    1. Re:Warning by gnick · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Followed by the pop-up in the lower-right corner that annoyed me to the point that I stripped Ad-Aware off of my system despite previously having shelled out for Ad-Aware Pro (one of the previous versions):

      Thank you for using Ad-Aware. To further protect your system, please click here to visit Lavasoft and upgrade to Ad-Aware Professional Edition.

      I like their product, but I hate being badgered.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    2. Re:Warning by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 5, Funny

      Do you not want to continue?

      [Enable] [Disable]

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
  2. I'm sorry by Jurily · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Malware writers are smart enough to overcome heuristics-based solutions. Just like spammers.

  3. Slightly Offtopic: Not Genotype by drunken_boxer777 · · Score: 3, Informative

    As a trained biologist, I take exception to the failure to analogize properly. A genotype is the genetic description of an organism. This has nothing to do with a system that learns from experience.

    Those who create software: Please, if you are going to use a word from a different field to name or describe your program, try to pick a word that creates some sort of sensible analogy rather than choosing one that sounds cool and is unused. Otherwise, you risk sounding like an idiot.

    1. Re:Slightly Offtopic: Not Genotype by gnick · · Score: 2, Informative

      From Wikipedia:

      Inspired by the biological concept and usefulness of genotypes, computer science employs simulated phenotypes in genetic programming and evolutionary algorithms. Such techniques can help evolve mathematical solutions to certain types of otherwise difficult problems.

      I'm not saying that you're wrong, I'm just saying that once it's on Wikipedia you need to fight it there or give up the ship...

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    2. Re:Slightly Offtopic: Not Genotype by Interoperable · · Score: 5, Funny

      As a trained physicist I would like to extend that to include not just software developers but also Sci-Fi writers, politicians, the media, the general public and anyone who incorrectly uses the word "exponentially". In fact, people who use the word exponentially incorrectly are exponentially worse.

      --
      So if this is the future...where's my jet pack?
    3. Re:Slightly Offtopic: Not Genotype by SleepingWaterBear · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Genetic programming and evolutionary algorithms are both completely distinct from what they're describing here. In those cases, the metaphor is quite appropriate since we're talking about serially encoding an algorithm, and then letting mutations of the encoded algorithm compete subject to a fitness function. Ad-Aware's "Genoytpe" has nothing to do with genetic programming or evolutionary algorithms, and the analogy makes no sense at all.

    4. Re:Slightly Offtopic: Not Genotype by melikamp · · Score: 2, Funny

      And as a trained mathematician, I would like to extend it to all the people who use the word "normal" to describe anything but a non-trivial group G whose only nontrivial subgroup is G itself. Normal people don't make stupid mistakes like that.

    5. Re:Slightly Offtopic: Not Genotype by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Because the average guy is mean?

      Here all night!

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  4. People still use Ad-Aware? by Ka+D'Argo · · Score: 5, Informative

    I used to love it back in the day, removed all kinds of spywave, simple gui, updated easy enough, you ran it when you wanted, etc

    These days it keeps half a dozen processes running in the background with more to be opened if you do any kind of scan. I realize having real-time protection is a nice feature, having to go in and auto disable all these is a pain. If you're still getting malware on the go, so to speak, from websites, and aren't using a browser than's got security or at least security add-ons (Firefox + Noscript + ABP + Flashblock) then I could understand the need for it.

    Add in an anti virus software that does the same X number of processes in the background plus Ad-Aware thats way more bogged down software than ever. Ad-Aware used to be simple, clean and sleek, now it's just bloated shovelware (how quickly did they move from Version X to SE, to Version X.1?)

    Stick with Spybot, Malwarebytes, HijackThis and a decent backup like Nod32, Avast or AVG, imho.

    --
    Aw Frell this
    1. Re:People still use Ad-Aware? by gnick · · Score: 3, Funny

      Stick with Spybot, Malwarebytes, HijackThis and a decent backup like Nod32, Avast or AVG, imho.

      But do any of those have "gaming-mode"? That sounds kind of sexy. When you're out on the web and engaging in especially risky behavior that could earn you an infection, you're in "gaming-mode" - Yeah, right.

      "Mom! Don't you know how to knock??? I could have been in gaming mode!"

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    2. Re:People still use Ad-Aware? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      With all the background processes now, I keep programs like ad-aware uninstalled. Then when I want to perform a scan I install it, run the scan, and uninstall it again.

    3. Re:People still use Ad-Aware? by antdude · · Score: 2, Informative

      SuperAntiSpyware and Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware (thanks to the folks in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/security,1 for suggesting these) also don't hog your system like Windows' services. Run, scan, and clean on-demand. :)

      Don't forget Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool (W2K SP4 has it too) with mrt.exe command.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  5. In other news ... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The reason for the mysterious death of many computer users in the last time has been found. It turned out they all had an anti-malware program running which tried to detect and eliminate malware through analyzing its behaviour. Apparently the software detected dangerous behaviour from the computer users and therefore decided to eliminate them in order to protect the system.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    1. Re:In other news ... by arkenian · · Score: 2, Informative

      I can't decide whether I find your post or the patent filing in your sig more amusing.

  6. IDK about new Ad-Aware, but Nortons back on top... by DRAGONWEEZEL · · Score: 2, Insightful

    according to several major computer publishers the '09 version of Norton did a lot better than all other antivirus software according to MaximumPC.com http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/protect_your_pc_from_guys_like_this

    and PCWorld.com
    http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/product/44052/review/internet_security_2009.html

    Not that either are like security mags I'm an MPC fanboy, so take this as you will.

    --
    How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
  7. Does it really matter though? by DRAGONWEEZEL · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you have 1 detection on one software suite, how many do you have on any other suite?

    My gues is N +X where N is the number of suites you try and X is any positive integer >1.

    That's why the solution really is this: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1388939&cid=29619053

    --
    How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
  8. Re:Phenotype vs. Lamarckian inheritance by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Funny

    Well I haven't seen much evidence of intelligent design...

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  9. What's new? by mhajicek · · Score: 2, Funny

    What's new about heuristics?