I just loaded AVG's free Anti-spyware program and I see from other forums and newsgroups, many recommend Spyware Terminator because of its HIPS detection ability. Of course, the one drawback for many is that its publisher is Crawler.com, which is or was a known adware/spyware site.
Spywarewarrior.com however removed it from their list of rogue anti-spyware, and along with Wilders seem to view it very favorably.
Comments?
Removing an anti-spyware from SpywareWarrior's Rogue/Suspect Anti-Spyware Products list doesn't make it reputable. It just means it doesn't meet the criteria for inclusion anymore.
It's a bit like the pirate Jack Sparrow from the movie Pirates of the Caribbean: he may stop hijacking and robbing but that doesn't make him good enough to marry your daughter.
doesn't make him good enough to marry your daughter.
In general you are right! But think: his daughter isn't culprit by reason of to have such father...
I use it and SuperAntiSpyware. They've replaced AdAware and Spybot on my PC. I think Super is the better of the two. The HIPS feature is nice, but there are other programs to cover that.
I use it and SuperAntiSpyware. They've replaced AdAware and Spybot on my PC. I think Super is the better of the two. The HIPS feature is nice, but there are other programs to cover that.
Did you ever use Spybot's resident progam, "Teatimer"? I've found it quite effective and it always catches registry and BHO changes. Others like Winpatrol for that.
I don't think it could hurt to still run Ad-Aware as it's free anyway. Lavasoft is going to be testing a major update to the program next month.
Do you use the free or pro version of SuperAntispyware?
The free version is not a resident program while Spyware Terminator provides real-time scanning and is freeware.
Currently, I have AVG Anti-Spyware 7.5 running, but if I read that Spyware Terminator is better, I would uninstall one for the other.
Has any magazine reviewed these yet? The class of the field is supposed to be the payware programs - PC Tools' Spyware Doctor and Webroot's Spy Sweeper. I know Spy Sweeper is very hard on a CPU. My feeling is that several of the freeware programs do the job of Spy Sweeper.
I don't think it could hurt to still run Ad-Aware as it's free anyway. Lavasoft is going to be testing a major update to the program next month.
A completely new version you mean - AdAware 07 isn't an update its completely rebuilt new program.
SpywareTerminator - I like it. In addition to it's own definitions, it also incorporates the signatures deved by ClamAV...a rising star.
If I still needed the false security of malware scanners, it would be high on my recommendations.
I don't really like spywareterminator.
As far as cleaning up an infected computer it doesn't seem like anything special.
I don't like realtime antispyware programs, since they aren't really necessary.
Of course I've already told my view of HIPS programs.
I use it. I like it. (Must be a doofus.) I haven't had an infestation worthy of the name since installing it. The screen shots show apparent malware; they are (sort of) false positives, actually harmless txt files installed by Malware Immunizer.
Apart from WindowsDefender, AFAIK it's the only freeware resident antispyware. And it appear to be constantly on the improve. Although the scan might be considered inferior to some of the others, it's improving in comprehensiveness all the time, as any newcomer should. (I also have on demand SAS and AVG, for routine scans.)
I've found that the realtime shield, without HIPS enabled, is generally adequate. The realtime shield is more comprehensive than S&D's teatimer (which I've deselected) and faster than Winpatrol (free). With HIPS enabled, nothing can install or run - in the areas it guards (It's not a full HIPS) - without user approval. (Means it's best to disable it before installing new software-if you trust the software.Else, many pop-ups.)
Current version is 1.8.3.951. Definitions are updated regularly. Forum is active.
I just loaded AVG's free Anti-spyware program and I see from other forums and newsgroups, many recommend Spyware Terminator because of its HIPS detection ability. Of course, the one drawback for many is that its publisher is Crawler.com, which is or was a known adware/spyware site.
Spywarewarrior.com however removed it from their list of rogue anti-spyware, and along with Wilders seem to view it very favorably.
Comments?
Hello, I'm a newbie here, and I, too have put many antispyware freeware programs to the test and have settled on Spywareterminator, and as Tarq57 states " Although the scan might be considered inferior to some of the others, it's improving in comprehensiveness all the time, as any newcomer should." Also, heed his advice on deactivating the program before you "Run" a known safe file for installation.
...(It's not a full HIPS)...
I'm a bit curious as to why you say that. As a process filter/firewall it works at kernel level to block ?all? unruled processes. In my side by side testing, it rivals SSM and PG for control of initiation. A process firewall is just as much a HIPS product as a sandbox and IMO better for those who actually know their sys. Ref; As I See It - Two Types of HIPS Have you seen something that I missed? It is quite possible that I missed something in my review of it. Any heads up will be greatly appreciated.
TIA
Is SpywareTerminator a firewall, too? If so, can that part be deactivated if you run another firewall such as ZA?
Is SpywareTerminator a firewall, too? If so, can that part be deactivated if you run another firewall such as ZA?
Most folk think that the common firewall(end point packet filter) like ZA is the only type of firewall and cant grasp the reality of the word after so much bombardment of the propaganda that folks much like myself have created over the past decade.
"HIPS...Some would argue that this type of tool isn't a firewall. I disagree. Firewalling is really a very simple concept. No matter how much techno mumbo jumbo you hear, a firewall is just a filter...plain and simple. There are two types of firewalling predominantly in use today; process filtering and content filtering."
The common firewall like ZA incorporates a little of both process and content filtering but not all of either...which therein is the prob and why malware still infects folk every day. The technology to prevent malware infections has been around for many years. However, it doesn't allow for the bogus security community to continue collecting revenues from folk who know no better.
I personally use my own packet filters including my various local proxies to control and study content delivery. However, even tho I have control of connecting process, protocol, IP, and port, my packet filters serve only a marginal security layer while my HIPS type process firewall is the top and most important layer.
So, in answer; Yes, ST is a firewall but not like ZA. There are many types of firewalls.
I'm a bit curious as to why you say that. As a process filter/firewall it works at kernel level to block ?all? unruled processes. In my side by side testing, it rivals SSM and PG for control of initiation. A process firewall is just as much a HIPS product as a sandbox and IMO better for those who actually know their sys. Ref; As I See It - Two Types of HIPS Have you seen something that I missed? It is quite possible that I missed something in my review of it. Any heads up will be greatly appreciated.TIA
I based that on one of the comments by one of the ST forum administrators.
http://forum.spywareterminator.com/Default...posts&t=856
3rd post.
Although exactly as to what is meant by "not a full true HIPS", I confess to ignorance.