Three Cheers for Microsoft's AntiSpyware Beta

[iamme]

cool. i've been looking for a realtime/auto spyware scanner for family computers. saves me the hassle of making monthly visits because "my computer's so slow!"

 

[imported_Phil]

Interface doesn't work properly (you have to click on a menu heading rather than hovering between them to get them to open).
Very slow - tested against Ad-Aware and Spybot and the MS AntiSpyware tool took 12 minutes to remove spyware that took Ad-Aware 3 minutes.
It also left behind many desktop icons, which both Ad-Aware and Spybot removed.

Sure, it's in beta, but I'm avoiding it for those reasons.

(NB: This testing was done under VMWare with a non-persistent disk image to give a fair test. The installation was loaded with spyware beforehand, and then disconnected from the network.)

 

[Fritzo]

Originally posted by: Dopefiend
Interface doesn't work properly (you have to click on a menu heading rather than hovering between them to get them to open).
Very slow - tested against Ad-Aware and Spybot and the MS AntiSpyware tool took 12 minutes to remove spyware that took Ad-Aware 3 minutes.
It also left behind many desktop icons, which both Ad-Aware and Spybot removed.

Sure, it's in beta, but I'm avoiding it for those reasons.

(NB: This testing was done under VMWare with a non-persistent disk image to give a fair test. The installation was loaded with spyware beforehand, and then disconnected from the network.)

We have it on over 40 workstations in our office and haven't seen the menu problem nor have we seen the icon problem you described. It's slower because it's scanning more thinkgs than Adaware, and can also repair more things as well as actually do file restores.

 

[ultimatebob]

Originally posted by: xospec1alk

Originally posted by: ultimatebob
Yeah, I made the mistake of accidently opening IE instead of Firefox yesterday and searching for some game cheat codes. All it took was ONE site, and my system got nailed with 350 pieces of spyware! Amazing... This evil app even went as far as bundling it's own pop-up and spyware blocker, just to keep another spyware company from uninstalling their software

Fortunately, I noticed the little system tray icon that it installed before I rebooted, and was able to remove them with a combination of AdAware and Spybot. I don't even want to imagine how badly it would hosed my system if I let all the processes that it installed launch on startup.

Should be more careful when clicking on popups....

It wasn't a pop-up... It was a cheat code site link that I got off of Google of all places. I pretty much knew that I was screwed when the browser crashed, and then my hard drive started grinding away like crazy

 

[shilala]

I messed with it and came away unimpressed.
I'll look at it again in 6 months or so and see if it's got anything more to offer.
It stands to reason that Microsoft would be best situated to build an excellent spyware remover considerith all the info they gather.

 

[imported_Phil]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: Dopefiend
Interface doesn't work properly (you have to click on a menu heading rather than hovering between them to get them to open).
Very slow - tested against Ad-Aware and Spybot and the MS AntiSpyware tool took 12 minutes to remove spyware that took Ad-Aware 3 minutes.
It also left behind many desktop icons, which both Ad-Aware and Spybot removed.

Sure, it's in beta, but I'm avoiding it for those reasons.

(NB: This testing was done under VMWare with a non-persistent disk image to give a fair test. The installation was loaded with spyware beforehand, and then disconnected from the network.)

We have it on over 40 workstations in our office and haven't seen the menu problem

The menus don't work the same as a regular Windows program. Say you click on the File menu in IE. Move the mouse to the Edit menu, and that opens when you hover over it.

The same behaviour is not seen with MSAS. You have to click the equivalent of the Edit menu to get it to open. I find that extremely irritating,

nor have we seen the icon problem you described.

There's no real "icon problem" per say, just that it doesn't remove as many of them as Ad-Aware.

It's slower because it's scanning more thinkgs than Adaware, and can also repair more things as well as actually do file restores.

It's not that much slower than Ad-Aware and I don't think you'll find that the difference in the amount of items that the two programs scan for is responsible for as much of a speed difference.
I was talking more about the removal time, which is agonisingly slow with thousands of objects [edit] which is precisely what I said in my OP.

Lastly, is it really that wise to be using Beta software on a company network? :Q

 

[jjones]

I use IE and Outlook Express, don't run an active real-time virus scanner, and have never run a spyware scanner. I've been running this latest install of XP for a year and a half and the only active protection I use is a hardware firewall, Zone Alarm and general intelligent computer use. I fire up my virus scanner with the latest updates (usually every 3 months or so): no viruses found. I just now installed this MS AntiSpyware: only found E-donkey and KazaaLite++ which I allow. Installed Spybot: only found a few tracking cookies which I don't care about anyway.

I've never had a virus on any computer and the only malware I've ever had was that stupid CoolWWWsearch that took over my home page one time. System Restore took care of that.

 

[Fritzo]

It's not that much slower than Ad-Aware and I don't think you'll find that the difference in the amount of items that the two programs scan for is responsible for as much of a speed difference.
I was talking more about the removal time, which is agonisingly slow with thousands of objects [edit] which is precisely what I said in my OP.

Lastly, is it really that wise to be using Beta software on a company network? :Q

Our company is an authorized Lavasoft reseller as well as a Microsoft Gold Partner, so we get the inside scoop on a lot of these things, and I have full confidence in the MS Spyware product. It's in beta right now because it's collecting database info from users on "what's good-what's bad". The program is essentially in the form it is going to be released in right now. It is able to detect and restore changes in system files, which is unique in spyware cleaners, and it also gives exact information about what it is cleaning off. Active protection is also provided.

Adaware, while a good product, has an engine that is not capable of detecting many types of trojans, dialer software, and has problems removing variants of V2 malware. You also have to pay $29.95 ($19.00 is our wholesale cost) in order to get active protection, and it does not collect data from users on what's out there so the company may be missing out of critical user data on new variants of spy/malware.

I work for a medium sized national ISP, and one of the services we offer is our customers local to our headquarters can actually bring their spyware infected PC's to us and we will clean them off for a bench fee of $20. We see a huge amount of typical user's PC's in our office, and can safely recommend MS's beta product over Adaware at this point.

 

[imported_Phil]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

It's not that much slower than Ad-Aware and I don't think you'll find that the difference in the amount of items that the two programs scan for is responsible for as much of a speed difference.
I was talking more about the removal time, which is agonisingly slow with thousands of objects [edit] which is precisely what I said in my OP.

Lastly, is it really that wise to be using Beta software on a company network? :Q

Our company is an authorized Lavasoft reseller as well as a Microsoft Gold Partner, so we get the inside scoop on a lot of these things, and I have full confidence in the MS Spyware product. It's in beta right now because it's collecting database info from users on "what's good-what's bad". The program is essentially in the form it is going to be released in right now. It is able to detect and restore changes in system files, which is unique in spyware cleaners, and it also gives exact information about what it is cleaning off. Active protection is also provided.

Adaware, while a good product, has an engine that is not capable of detecting many types of trojans, dialer software, and has problems removing variants of V2 malware. You also have to pay $29.95 ($19.00 is our wholesale cost) in order to get active protection, and it does not collect data from users on what's out there so the company may be missing out of critical user data on new variants of spy/malware.

I work for a medium sized national ISP, and one of the services we offer is our customers local to our headquarters can actually bring their spyware infected PC's to us and we will clean them off for a bench fee of $20. We see a huge amount of typical user's PC's in our office, and can safely recommend MS's beta product over Adaware at this point.

:thumbsup: Good to know, but I'll stick with tried-and-tested for now

 

[Double Trouble]

Originally posted by: archcommus

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze

Originally posted by: archcommus87
The IE bashing needs to stop. Honestly, people don't know when a topic has been BEATEN INTO THE GROUND.

It has been proven on countless occassions by countless users that IE can be perfectly fine when you aren't an idiot. The bottom line is, everyone's a fanboy.

About MS's tool, I will get it and try it out if someone can 100% verify for me that I can disable it on startup.

Err....name ONE occassion. I'm sorry, but I just don't believe you.

Do a search and read the tons of multi-page arguments on the topic. It always starts off with someone saying that Firefox rules their life, then other people agreeing, and then of course lots of people saying "You're wrong, shut up, IE is fine."

Basically, if you're n00, yes stick with Firefox to protect yourself. If you're not, go with whichever one your prefer. IE is fine.

Well, I used to believe that IE was generally OK, because basically as long as you didn't do anything stupid (like clicking on "yes" to install software etc), it was pretty much OK. That's simply not the case anymore. Even the most sophisticated user can get his system messed up without doing anything simply by visiting the wrong sites with IE. Yes, it helps when you keep everything up to date, but the reality is that a product that requires that much patching and updating all the time (and still new holes are found all the time), is simply a poorly designed and implemented product. Firefox has the advantage of not being as much of a target right now, but I believe it's also inherently somewhat better in terms of not allowing activex controls and other such garbage.

 

[imported_Phil]

Originally posted by: tagej

Well, I used to believe that IE was generally OK, because basically as long as you didn't do anything stupid (like clicking on "yes" to install software etc), it was pretty much OK. That's simply not the case anymore. Even the most sophisticated user can get his system messed up without doing anything simply by visiting the wrong sites with IE. Yes, it helps when you keep everything up to date, but the reality is that a product that requires that much patching and updating all the time (and still new holes are found all the time), is simply a poorly designed and implemented product. Firefox has the advantage of not being as much of a target right now, but I believe it's also inherently somewhat better in terms of not allowing activex controls and other such garbage.

Actually, there was a small discussion about this recently, with one member asking for proof that IE can be infected / can infect a system with spyware without being asked or told to.

I'm not flaming, just asking if you can supply a site that does in fact infect a system when running IE without any interaction from the user - I for one would be very interested to see how they're doing it.

 

[Rockhound]

Originally posted by: forcesho
Yeah they were on the news 2 years ago about buying out Giant, etc.. the latest is a few more anti-virus company, one being sybari.. we used them for exchange protection and now ms bought it.. or tried to buy it.. if they can't fix it, they'll buy someone that can...

Isn't that what they always do - buy someone else's product because they can't or won't do it themselves? Whatever you do, don't give MS credit for this program because they didn't write it much like a lot of the software they currently "own". Someone always seems to be writing better stuff than MS or even writing stuff for that matter.