"Dick Hazeleger" <Dick@post_it_in_the_newsgroup.com> wrote in message
news:vhm87qakn3b949@corp.supernews.com...
> tony@well.com wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 20 Jul 2003 16:57:52 -0400, "mto" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >
> > >The free version is
> > >just a basic firewall. Pro version adds capabilities like ad
> > blocking (not >just pop-ups - all ads) and allows you to block
> > scripts, cookies & mobile >code on a site by site basis as well as
> > across the board. Worth every dime >since much of the newest spyware
> > seems to be magically appearing along with >those ads even at
> > otherwise very respectable sites.
> >
> > Is it correct to say then, that once such a firewall prevents the
> > intrusion of baddies, it also becomes unnecessary to use a spyware
> > hunter (except to eliminate the baddies that have already infected the
> > OS)?
> >
>
> Hi Tony,
>
> No, spyware hunters are not unnecessary. There are still spyware
> programs floating around that will use your browser (HTTP, port 80) to
> contact their "evil mothership", and since you will have to give your
> browser permission to access the Internet... the spyware will have that
> permission too, and that is the point where a spyware detection /
> hunter program comes in. It will detect the spyware and "destroy" it.
>
> Spyware is more than "infecting an OS", you'll be able find it
> anywhere, in your browser, in your eMail (in spam), in useful programs
> (more trojan alike) and in separate programs (for instance keyloggers).
>
> Hope clarifies your thoughts about this issue a bit: Besides a FW, you
> still have to check out your system with HiJackThis, AdAware and
> Spybot; perhaps it also would be a good idea to run (regularly updated)
> JavaCool's Spyware Blaster to prevent spyware from being installed.
>
> HtH
> Dick

Anybody compared Spyware Blaster to Pepi's Immunize in the SpyBot S&D?