Welcome to What the Tech! ( Log In | Register ) What tech support ought to be... Fast, friendly and free! Once registered - you'll have the ability to post your question in the appropriate forum below. Additionally, if you can assist another member by sharing your tech knowledge, please post a reply! Best of all - Registration and all assistance is FREE! Once you've completed registration, simply choose the appropriate forum below, click on the "new topic" button, and post your question! What are you waiting for? Register today! *Registered users see NO ADVERTISING.
![]() ![]() |
May 30 2009, 09:21 AM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Silver Member ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Authentic Member Posts: 436 Joined: 30-October 05 From: Maryland Member No.: 42,715 Operating System: win xp sp3 |
Hello
Is there a free program to deal with spy ware or is it true with pc's that whatever is for free is tainted in some way? I use Superantispyware right now but my Mcafee security center seems to pick up everything the other does. I browse for a day then run one program then repeat this and run the other first. Mcafee seems to do a better job. I also heard you should have more than one malware program as one company does not specialize in everything. Thank you |
|
|
|
May 30 2009, 11:46 AM
Post
#2
|
|
![]() SuperMember Group: Tech Team Posts: 1,608 Joined: 7-January 09 From: Flint, Michigan Member No.: 83,485 Operating System: Windows XP, Server 2003/2008, Linux |
Hi Grampy..
This is always such a controversial subject because so many people have so many varying opinions and loyalty to different products. Let me start by throwing some general information out there for you. You will NEVER be 100% protected. And there are no programs on the internet that can protect you 100%. If you use a good program, you can be reasonably sure you will have protection that rates in the mid 90% range. If you install a second program, you might raise that percentage by 1 more point, 2 if you are lucky. Install a third program and you might not get any improvement. Its the law of diminishing returns. By installing multiple programs, you risk having incompatibilities between programs, and massive system slow downs due to resource hogs. There is a sweet spot and you need to remember that every program you use is going to slow your computer down. Certain programs less than others. Some programs do not run all the time, and they will not slow your computer down unless you are using them. I have heard that SuperAntiSpyware is very good. I, myself, loathe McAfee, and you'd probably be hard pressed to find any mid-level tech that would recommend McAfee or feel differently than I do about it. I certainly wouldn't pay them anything for their product. Keep in mind that there are feely available programs that do everything you need and do not require a subscription fee. Most of these programs perform better and offer better protection than the paid for products. When you talk about "free" being tainted, you are absolutely incorrect. These products are more reliable, better performing, and safer than the ones you pay for. The problem is when you start blindly searching for these "free" products! At this point, you come across all the scam sites claiming to have a product for you that actually IS malware! That's why consulting with people in a place like this will provide useful information as to what products to use and to avoid. You can get overly zealous in "hunting down" spyware. A good anti-virus/anti-spyware product is going to actively monitor every file on your computer in realtime. That means, when you access the file, it is scanned before you can use it. So, it is my philosophy that if you don't suspect a problem, then you are wasting your time running manual/scheduled scans. Your anti-virus/anti-spyware software is going to block the file, if it is recognized, before you ever get a chance to download or use it. Just because the file is on your hard drive doesn't mean it is dangerous. Its only dangerous when you try to run it and that is when it gets blocked. And, if a file is not recognized during the realtime scan, it isn't going to be recognized during the manual scan, so it really doesn't make any difference. I've been dealing with malware infections on computers for a long time. I don't claim to have the best protection methods available, but I do make computers run reliable and fast! I refuse to sacrifice performance for security, knowing that the sacrifice is exponential and the increase in protection is the inverse. For my customers, and I have thousands of them, I clean their computers, tune them up, make them run really, really good, and then I install a free version of Avast! anti-virus, and turn on their internal windows firewall. That's it. Repeat customers because of malware on the same computer is almost non-existent. I prefer to educate them and offer them solutions that protect them much better than 100 different products you could install. The best prevention is a little education. I educate them on the various methods they can be infected, and how to recognize scams. I also educate them on what risky activities they or their children are doing. I also suggest to them that they set up an administrative account if they have kids that use the computer and setup limited accounts for the kids. Teenagers and computers, is like drinking and driving, pretty soon you're going to get into a head on collision. I know that this isn't really an answer to your question, but I did want to explain to you how getting carried away with this anti-virus/anti-spyware thing can cost a lot more than it benefits. I can't tell you any other products to try or use because I don't use them, endores them, or recommend them. I might even shock you by telling you that I don't run any anti-virus/anti-spyware or firewall software, and I probably have over 50 updates that need to be installed on my computer at home. Its simply because I know when to click and when not to click and I don't visit websites that cause me problems and I sit behind a router using internal private IP addressing (eliminates my need for any firewall) as most people with high-speed internet do. I also know when I am infected or not infected. I've only been infected twice in my entire computing existence and I knew about it before either infection was able to do any damage. I even wrote the program to remove the first infection back in the DOS days. It was called Doom2Death. Occasionally I run manual scans by a good product like MalwareBytes anti-malware. My point is not to brag, but to say, staying safe on-line, really isn't about the software you install at all. I must disclaim the above statement by saying that I DO NOT recommend this to the average or beginning user. I only do this because I am confident in 20+ years of skills as a computer technician. |
|
|
|
May 30 2009, 01:03 PM
Post
#3
|
|
![]() Advanced Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Visiting Tech Posts: 630 Joined: 15-May 09 From: UK Member No.: 85,793 Operating System: Win 98se, Windows 2000, xp Home sp3, xp Pro sp3, Vista Ultimate 32bit\64bit. |
To add to the above great advice, albeit from a paranoid perspective lol.
I may not help as broad a base of people as appleoddity, I do regularly help mates etc with their problems, and I load everything I can which I feel helps them stay safe, but as said above, safe surfing is your main defence, the ONLY 100% safe solution is to pull the plug, it's as simple as that, but safe surfing and certain preventative tools are as good as you can get, and I wont use tools that impact performance either, not noticeably at least. There is 1 very strict rule about protection, it applies to protection running real time cover, basically the firewall, anti virus and anti spyware, you must NEVER run more than 1 of each of these types of cover in real time at the same time, or else they will conflict and can end up fighting each other instead of the nasties your trying to block. You can of course have as many standalone scanners as you like, it never hurts to double check the real time protection, because no single package can catch everything, BUT, before running a standalone scanner you must first disable\pause\exit real time cover of the same type before starting that scanner, then you will be fine. I agree about McAfee, I class it along the same lines as Norton, mainly because of the way it infiltrates the system making removal a nightmare sometimes, there is however 1 tool from them I add to peoples systems, it is SiteAdvisor, and it is a great tool for beginners IMHO because it is a simple traffic light warning system, it adds an icon to the browser and needs no explanation, green is good, red is bad, and amber is take care, so if you go to a page that is bad you know straight away, although I don't allow it to load the secure search from Yahoo as I prefer Google, and allowing Yahoo to be added adds more to the browser window. Now the following is a list of tools I use regularly, I do use a software firewall that makes applications ask permission to go online, I also have a router which has a hardware firewall (as above), but quick note, this is the only exception to the 1 at a time rule, and thats because it is not on the PC, unlike the software. Back in the day a major infection hit the headlines, it was that big even the anti virus people couldn't produce a solution into the updates for a few weeks, and it was only by having a firewall asking permission to allow something to go online that I was aware something was wrong, thats why I do use this. Anyway here is my list:- a-squared Free, the paid version gives real time cover, but the basic one is a standalone scanner. avast! 4 Home Edition, My preferred anti virus. Avir, an alternate anti virus (remember the 1 at a time rule). Belarc Advisor, scans and warns of missing updates from m$. CWShredder, a standalone cleaner for the nasty CWS infections. Hosts file, an underrated tool that adds known bad sites to your hosts file. Iconix, an addition to your email, online or PC, it warns against fake mails for the company's that subscribe, the list is continually growing, but PayPal, eBay and banking are the biggest examples, it will warn if you get a mail from someone trying to trick you into parting with your details. Malwarebytes Anti-Malware, the paid version offers real time cover. SiteAdvisor, as covered above. Spybot-S&D, note that the tea timer component is counted as real time cover. SpywareBlaster, a flash based version as the Hosts file. SpywareGuard, an extremely lightweight but effective tool, don't let the date of the last update worry you, it's still good. SUPERAntiSpyware, the paid version gives real time cover. ThreatFire, This does work fine with your anti virus, but goes a lot deeper. WinPatrol, may not seem like protection, but it is a fantastic tool that gives control over start up items etc as well as protecting your Hosts file and home page. ZoneAlarm, my preferred software firewall, although some do have issues with it, in which case an alternate is Comodo. This post has been edited by 8210GUY: May 30 2009, 01:04 PM |
|
|
|
May 30 2009, 04:56 PM
Post
#4
|
|
![]() SuperMember Group: Tech Team Posts: 1,798 Joined: 16-January 08 From: Denmark Member No.: 76,005 Operating System: WinXP SP3 |
@Appleoddity
QUOTE Its simply because I know when to click and when not to click and I don't visit websites that cause me problems You can't be sure there either. You can visit websites and do nothing, and still be infected. A couple of years ago, we had multiply attacks on government sites, newspaper sites and the like here in Denmark, almost simultaneously, and before any could react, thousands were infected...by reading. It is a must these days to have some form of HIPS available in the defence line. As you pointed out, not all have 20+ years of experience. But still, those 20+ doesn't count when you get hit by a XSS attack or similar, you get to react when you are infected, not before. Still, you sure you don't have a well-concealed rootkit somewhere? Anyways, it is good politics and thinking, to have protection from malware. I know some of it, is hype, but the hype disappears when you get infected. Simple as that. You also still wear your seat-belt and glad you have air-bags, just in case, not because you expect to crash into something |
|
|
|
May 30 2009, 08:37 PM
Post
#5
|
|
![]() SuperMember Group: Tech Team Posts: 1,608 Joined: 7-January 09 From: Flint, Michigan Member No.: 83,485 Operating System: Windows XP, Server 2003/2008, Linux |
Everything you say is absolutely correct Abydos. Thats why I was clear to say that I was not suggesting that someone actually do what I do.
I also agree that it is possible to be infected without doing anything. I usually do keep my patches up to date. My computer at home is used in such a way that for the most part I do not worry about viruses. And, as I said, I am able to "detect" malware without anti-virus software. Here's an interesting story I can share with you though. Recently I took a friend's laptop that was new and had Vista on it. I told her I would try to put XP on it. So, I installed a copy of XP w/ SP2. Because it was a newer machine, with Vista, and the manufacturer offered NO XP support whatsoever, I was actually just demoing this installation and gathering drivers and information to see if it could be done. I planned on reformatting after knowing the exact order to install everything and knowing that everything that I downloaded and tried was correct. Because of this I was not real cautious about the websites I went to to try and find drivers. However, I did use my keen sense. I was taken to a couple of slow, over seas sites just digging and digging for drivers because I couldn't find everything. The next thing I know I was getting pop-ups. I immediately recognized I was infected. So, I continued to work, killed a few processes to eliminate it and shortly after finished up what I was attempting. As a test, I took everything that I had downloaded and tried to run and scanned it for malware. I was nearly sure that nothing I downloaded had malware, because I am very keen on recognizing "legitimate" websites, and the anti-virus products I ran on it did not detect anything. So, basically, the point is, simply by using a bare bones XP w/SP2 installation and browsing the internet, I somehow ended up infected. I did not recognize that I went to a bad site, and I didn't experience any "errors" or "problematic" webpages to signal anything was wrong. Just all the sudden, pop-ups! Kind of interesting. Thats really the first time I have experienced a drive-by infection personally. This post has been edited by appleoddity: May 30 2009, 08:38 PM |
|
|
|
May 31 2009, 01:59 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Silver Member ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Authentic Member Posts: 436 Joined: 30-October 05 From: Maryland Member No.: 42,715 Operating System: win xp sp3 |
Hello
It seems as though the experts, although susceptible, come from one approach and others from another. Experts rely more on hardware firewalls, well configured, and their skills. Others, need more baggage like programs to help them do what the experts know. We average users are slowed down by some of these cumbersome programs due to our innocence. Any of us can be infected so as is with most issues, education is a great help. Nothing here is profound but I am grateful to those who provided their skilled adive to help us to try to stay as functional as possible. Thank you all for your contributions and, safe surfing.. |
|
|
|
May 31 2009, 02:17 PM
Post
#7
|
|
![]() Advanced Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Visiting Tech Posts: 630 Joined: 15-May 09 From: UK Member No.: 85,793 Operating System: Win 98se, Windows 2000, xp Home sp3, xp Pro sp3, Vista Ultimate 32bit\64bit. |
Yes this is very true, there are many ways to approach things, and each of them depend on the user knowing how to, and that comes down to education, so while you are learning you rely upon the tools of protection (software) to keep you safe while you learn, then you can cut back if you feel you no longer need as much as you can get.
I use every single tool in the above list, but I am in a high risk category, because I help to run web sites (well only 1 these days), I often have to click on links to make sure they are safe for the other users, but as big as the list looks, only a couple of those are running in real time, the rest are standalone scanners so have no impact on the system, but you pick these things up over time. |
|
|
|
Sep 17 2009, 04:01 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Authentic Member ![]() ![]() Group: Authentic Member Posts: 91 Joined: 8-May 08 Member No.: 78,920 Operating System: Win 98, 98se, win xp, Xp Pro, Vista, and & 7 |
I know this topic is old but very good write up folks. I started looking over this section to see who and what is being used to scan or look for aware type files or infections. I been using Ad-aware, se, 2007 for a long time and even went to 2008. But their new program AE 09 Edition just loads the snot out of the cpu upon boot up and even drags the system.
As of late each time I have updated 2008 it or it's problems are getting worst and worst, it's like LS does not even care about the free vers anymore, it's to a point when I visted their tech forums all past topics has been purged. So time to give up of using AD-Aware 2008 and move on, been doing the google search of trying to find a good scanner tool like AD-Aware or even better, but they are so many claiming or as the term I use to have a better mouse trap. So I was going to post here to ask which do you or which one you consider is the best to use with other tools on your pc. This is what I been using on my system till now. AD-Aware 2008 - run the scan manually Spybot Search & Destroy - run the scan manually Malwarebytes Anti-Malware - run the scan manually AVG 8.5 - This one in Auto mode. As I said with all of the problems I been running into with AD-Ware 2008, time to put AD-Aware out pasture and replace it with one that the same or better. So what do you or each of you think? |
|
|
|
Sep 17 2009, 05:32 PM
Post
#9
|
|
![]() Advanced Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Visiting Tech Posts: 630 Joined: 15-May 09 From: UK Member No.: 85,793 Operating System: Win 98se, Windows 2000, xp Home sp3, xp Pro sp3, Vista Ultimate 32bit\64bit. |
TBH Ad-aware se was the best, haven't rated it since they upgraded that, and have seen nothing but negative comments about it since, as to AVG (A\V), it is OK, but I find Avast far superior personally, but everything in the above list is pretty much as good as it gets for free currently.
|
|
|
|
Sep 18 2009, 08:07 AM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Authentic Member ![]() ![]() Group: Authentic Member Posts: 91 Joined: 8-May 08 Member No.: 78,920 Operating System: Win 98, 98se, win xp, Xp Pro, Vista, and & 7 |
TBH Ad-aware se was the best, haven't rated it since they upgraded that, and have seen nothing but negative comments about it since. Nods Ad-aware se was a work horse and still have a copy of it. Like Ad-aware because of what it did and as I said now with the problems it has this is why I am looking to see who out their is the same or better than Ad-aware. |
|
|
|
Sep 18 2009, 08:33 AM
Post
#11
|
|
![]() Advanced Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Visiting Tech Posts: 630 Joined: 15-May 09 From: UK Member No.: 85,793 Operating System: Win 98se, Windows 2000, xp Home sp3, xp Pro sp3, Vista Ultimate 32bit\64bit. |
TBH in simple terms everything listed above is better than Ad-aware these days, they are all the main tools most people use currently.
|
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
Similar Topics
| Topic Title | Replies | Topic Starter | Views | Last Action | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
16 | thunder420 | 151 | Today, 03:32 PM Last post by: thunder420 |
|||
![]() |
29 | 83valentine | 342 | Today, 11:38 AM Last post by: ken545 |
|||
![]() |
24 | 83valentine | 319 | 31st October 2009 - 07:15 PM Last post by: LDTate |
|||
![]() |
4 | 00civicex | 78 | 30th October 2009 - 02:11 PM Last post by: oldman960 |
|||
|
Time is now: 7th November 2009 - 05:19 PM |