Re: SUPERAntiSpyware Real Time Protection??

[VanguardLH]

hal wrote ...
> I've recovered from my Spy Sweeper debacle and downloaded
> SUPERAntiSpyware. I see it is supposed to have 'real time'
> protection
> built into it. Has anyone ever had it catch something in 'real
> time?'


Nope, but then I have yet to be infected (as can be so far detected by
the suite of anti-malware tools that I use). SuperAntispyware
cripples itself after the trial period so you don't get real-time
(on-access) protection. Still makes for a good on-demand scanner,
though, and why I immediately disabled the on-access protection since
it was going to disappear anyway.

[cmsix]

<hal@not.here.com> wrote in message
news:diape31ng2snb5q4ovq5jl9361opf2b3dh@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 22:59:17 -0500, hal@not.here.com wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 22:28:07 -0500, "VanguardLH"
>><VanguardLH@mail.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>hal wrote ...
>>>> I've recovered from my Spy Sweeper debacle and downloaded
>>>> SUPERAntiSpyware. I see it is supposed to have 'real time'
>>>> protection
>>>> built into it. Has anyone ever had it catch something in 'real
>>>> time?'
>>>
>>>
>>>Nope, but then I have yet to be infected (as can be so far detected by
>>>the suite of anti-malware tools that I use). SuperAntispyware
>>>cripples itself after the trial period so you don't get real-time
>>>(on-access) protection. Still makes for a good on-demand scanner,
>>>though, and why I immediately disabled the on-access protection since
>>>it was going to disappear anyway.
>>>
>>
>>You didn't think enuf of it to keep it?
>
> I meant buy it, not merely keep the freebie version.

Well I've never bought it for myself, but I have encouraged several
customers to buy it. In fact, if they demand html rendering of email I raise
hell if they don't buy it.

cmsix

[VanguardLH]

hal wrote ...
>
> "VanguardLH" wrote:
>
>> hal wrote ...
>>> I've recovered from my Spy Sweeper debacle and downloaded
>>> SUPERAntiSpyware. I see it is supposed to have 'real time'
>>> protection
>>> built into it. Has anyone ever had it catch something in 'real
>>> time?'
>>
>> Nope, but then I have yet to be infected (as can be so far detected
>> by
>> the suite of anti-malware tools that I use). SuperAntispyware
>> cripples itself after the trial period so you don't get real-time
>> (on-access) protection. Still makes for a good on-demand scanner,
>> though, and why I immediately disabled the on-access protection
>> since
>> it was going to disappear anyway.
>
> You didn't think enuf of it to keep it?

Um, did you miss my statement "still makes for a good on-demand
scanner"? How could I run on-demand scans unless it was installed? I
also have AVG's AntiSpyware and AntiRootkit products but only use them
for on-demand scanning. Same for Lavasoft's Ad-Aware and Spybot S&D.

[VanguardLH]

<hal@not.here.com> wrote in message
news:diape31ng2snb5q4ovq5jl9361opf2b3dh@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 22:59:17 -0500, hal@not.here.com wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 22:28:07 -0500, "VanguardLH"
>><VanguardLH@mail.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>hal wrote ...
>>>> I've recovered from my Spy Sweeper debacle and downloaded
>>>> SUPERAntiSpyware. I see it is supposed to have 'real time'
>>>> protection
>>>> built into it. Has anyone ever had it catch something in 'real
>>>> time?'
>>>
>>>
>>>Nope, but then I have yet to be infected (as can be so far detected
>>>by
>>>the suite of anti-malware tools that I use). SuperAntispyware
>>>cripples itself after the trial period so you don't get real-time
>>>(on-access) protection. Still makes for a good on-demand scanner,
>>>though, and why I immediately disabled the on-access protection
>>>since
>>>it was going to disappear anyway.
>>>
>>
>>You didn't think enuf of it to keep it?
>
> I meant buy it, not merely keep the freebie version.


I use an IPS (intrusion protection software) product to regulate what
can run. Regardless of all the scanners, I still control what runs or
not. Does require more expertise than relying on the static expertise
coded in a scanner. Currently I am using System Safety Monitor.
Antihook is a tad better but incurs too much impact on responsiveness
of my host.

[JD]

VanguardLH wrote:
> hal wrote ...
>>
>> "VanguardLH" wrote:
>>
>>> hal wrote ...
>>>> I've recovered from my Spy Sweeper debacle and downloaded
>>>> SUPERAntiSpyware. I see it is supposed to have 'real time'
>>>> protection
>>>> built into it. Has anyone ever had it catch something in 'real
>>>> time?'
>>>
>>> Nope, but then I have yet to be infected (as can be so far detected by
>>> the suite of anti-malware tools that I use). SuperAntispyware
>>> cripples itself after the trial period so you don't get real-time
>>> (on-access) protection. Still makes for a good on-demand scanner,
>>> though, and why I immediately disabled the on-access protection since
>>> it was going to disappear anyway.
>>
>> You didn't think enuf of it to keep it?
>
> Um, did you miss my statement "still makes for a good on-demand
> scanner"? How could I run on-demand scans unless it was installed? I
> also have AVG's AntiSpyware and AntiRootkit products but only use them
> for on-demand scanning. Same for Lavasoft's Ad-Aware and Spybot S&D.
>

Thanks! I didn't know about AVG's free AntiRootkit and AntiSpyware. Do
they do a good job?

http://free.grisoft.com/doc/5390/us/frt/0

--
JD..

[VanguardLH]

"JD" wrote ...
> Thanks! I didn't know about AVG's free AntiRootkit and AntiSpyware.
> Do they do a good job?


AVG AntiSpyware was called eWido before AVG bought it. It was okay,
mostly for trojans. It was far better than a-squared which had dismal
coverage.

I don't about the effectiveness of AVG AntiRootkit - until it finds
one to then see if it can get rid of it - or until something catches
the rootkit to see if AVG AntiRootkit missed it. I'm not really
trying to get infected so I can test all these different anti-malware
products.

I also have the SysInternals Rootkit Revealer. I also run an IPS
(intrustion protection software) program: using Safety System Monitor
(free version) right now but I'd like to use Antihook instead (since
the free version is a full but older version but it impacted my host's
responsiveness way too much). There was a webcast recently from
Russinovich that wrote the SysInternals utilities acquired by
Microsoft
(http://www.microsoft.com/emea/spotli..._Cleaning.aspx)
of which part focused on rootkits. Considering the expertise of the
rootkit writers and the active communities in which they belong and
their exploration into OS programming, I'm not sure what if anything
will be a viable deterrent in 2 to 3 years from now.

At one point, using VMs (VMWare, VPC) and sandboxies were considered a
method to protect while testing new software but now malware is
breaking out of those or it remains quiescent so they aren't seen as
malware under those environments. I attended a seminar on malware
under VMs and sandboxes and found it illuminating how easy for malware
to detect when it is in a VM or sandbox and then hide. Each month the
malcontents await Microsoft's periodic security patches to discover
what were the vulnerabilities to then deploy them before all Windows
users manage to get updated.

[cmsix]

"VanguardLH" <VanguardLH@mail.invalid> wrote in message
news:1eudnSrRxeXWM3DbnZ2dnUVZ_vCknZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> <hal@not.here.com> wrote in message
> news:diape31ng2snb5q4ovq5jl9361opf2b3dh@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 22:59:17 -0500, hal@not.here.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 22:28:07 -0500, "VanguardLH"
>>><VanguardLH@mail.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>hal wrote ...
>>>>> I've recovered from my Spy Sweeper debacle and downloaded
>>>>> SUPERAntiSpyware. I see it is supposed to have 'real time'
>>>>> protection
>>>>> built into it. Has anyone ever had it catch something in 'real
>>>>> time?'
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Nope, but then I have yet to be infected (as can be so far detected by
>>>>the suite of anti-malware tools that I use). SuperAntispyware
>>>>cripples itself after the trial period so you don't get real-time
>>>>(on-access) protection. Still makes for a good on-demand scanner,
>>>>though, and why I immediately disabled the on-access protection since
>>>>it was going to disappear anyway.
>>>>
>>>
>>>You didn't think enuf of it to keep it?
>>
>> I meant buy it, not merely keep the freebie version.
>
>
> I use an IPS (intrusion protection software) product to regulate what can
> run. Regardless of all the scanners, I still control what runs or not.
> Does require more expertise than relying on the static expertise coded in
> a scanner. Currently I am using System Safety Monitor. Antihook is a tad
> better but incurs too much impact on responsiveness of my host.

Since I work for individuals I don't have the luxury in denying them the use
of any software they want. If they don't take my advice then they give me
money again when it is broken again. Sounds fair to me.

cmsix

>