Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

malware and spyware programs


  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#1 Hakyme

Hakyme

  • Members
  • 25 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:04:30 PM

Posted 24 July 2017 - 06:37 AM

I have been using super anti spyware for some time.. the problem is that it doesn't really find much besides cookies... I have tried adwcleaner and it found a lot of items that super anti spyware didnt find... my question is do i need to use super anti spyware if im using spywareblaster? is spywareblaster worth it? would it be best to just go with adwcleaner instead? should i wait until adwcleaner gets implemented with malwarebytes?



BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


m

#2 britechguy

britechguy

    Been there, done that, got the T-shirt


  • Moderator
  • 4,941 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Staunton, VA
  • Local time:10:30 AM

Posted 24 July 2017 - 09:09 AM

As has been repeatedly stated on these forums, this is not surprising because while there is some overlap between adware and spyware the two are not the same thing and scanners for one will not likely find the other.

 

This is why security is a multi-layered approach.

 

I am not specifically aware of Malwarebytes integrating a specific anti-adware feature but until that time I would still continue doing occasional scans with an adware remover since it's clear that your browsing behavior is such that you are having scads of it downloaded.  Better yet would be figuring out how and when that's occurring and not doing what it is you do to make it happen.   Most of this stuff doesn't sneak in via some back door, but is directly (or indirectly, but still from pretty obvious user actions) invited in by the user.

 

I've used Spywareblaster for a very long time as one part of my overall security practices.  It does not have a realtime component but does serve as a very good prophylactic against some of the more common spyware out there.  I still also run scans to check for spyware every once in a while as well.


Edited by britechguy, 24 July 2017 - 09:11 AM.
Added note on Spywareblaster

Brian  AKA  Bri the Tech Guy (website address in my profile) Windows 10 Home, 64-bit, Version 1703, Build 15063

       

    A man's worst difficulties begin when he is able to do as he likes.
              ~ Thomas H. Huxley (1876)

 


#3 Hakyme

Hakyme
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 25 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:04:30 PM

Posted 24 July 2017 - 12:11 PM

thanks but that doesn't answer any of my questions



#4 britechguy

britechguy

    Been there, done that, got the T-shirt


  • Moderator
  • 4,941 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Staunton, VA
  • Local time:10:30 AM

Posted 24 July 2017 - 12:51 PM

1.  Since spywareblaster can miss something that super anti-spyware might find I would continue to use both.

 

2.  I cannot answer whether the slight extra bit of security that comes from using two products that target the same thing is worth it to anyone else.  It is to me.

 

3.  Since adware scanners and spyware scanners, as previously explained, do not target the same things it should be obvious that greater security is obtained when one uses both, though if one practices safe surfing practices it's unlikely that either will ever find anything.

 

I can't spell it out any more clearly than that, and didn't think I needed to in the first place.


Brian  AKA  Bri the Tech Guy (website address in my profile) Windows 10 Home, 64-bit, Version 1703, Build 15063

       

    A man's worst difficulties begin when he is able to do as he likes.
              ~ Thomas H. Huxley (1876)

 


#5 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 49,728 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:10:30 AM

Posted 24 July 2017 - 05:27 PM

SpywareBlaster is a program that restricts the actions of potentially dangerous sites by adding a list of sites and domains associated with known spyware, advertisers and marketers to the browser's "Restricted Sites Zone". It prevents the installation of ActiveX-based malware, browser hijackers, dialers, and other potentially unwanted software and blocks tracking cookies. SpywareBlaster allows you to create a System Snapshot...an image of various system settings. This feature can be used to restore important browser and system settings to their previous state if your computer is ever infected with spyware or altered by unwanted programs. Under the Tools section Hosts Safe allows you to store encrypted backup copies of the HOSTS file which can be used to restore (roll-back to a previous state) if the HOSTS file becomes corrupted or altered by malware infection...see Javacoolsoftware Support: What is a Hosts file? Other settings allow you to disable and block Flash in Internet Explorer, add Custom Blocking and more.

How does SpywareBlaster actually work? It adds sites to the restricted zones by adding the domain as a subkey under the registry key: HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\ZoneMap\Domains. A dword is then added to that domain named * and given a hex value of 4 to specify that it is part of the Restricted Sites Zone. More specifically, Spywareblaster sets the "killbit" on the CLSID (Class ID) of known spyware. Every program has a CLSID that is unique to the type of program. Once Spywareblaster enables (writes) those killbits they are "locked in" and any identified spyware cannot be opened. Spywareblaster writes these killbits in and then stays off until you need to re-write them again with an update. Why is all this important? Some types of malware are known to alter Trusted Zones, Ranges and ProtocolDefaults set for a browser.

SpywareBlaster is not intrusive since the program does not run in the background and provide real-time protection like other security tools. Instead it focuses on prevention and passive protection without utilizing unnecessary running processes or consuming system (CPU, memory) resources. The program only requires installation and then enabling of all protection. After that you only have to check periodically for database updates using the built-in "Check for Updates" feature and then enable all protection again. Since SpywareBlaster does not use a real-time protection module, it supplements your existing security software without causing any conflicts. SpywareBlaster can be used with Internet Explorer and many other popular browsers such as Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome, Netscape, Seamonkey, Flock...see here.

I have used all the different versions of SpywareBlaster since it was first released. I stopped using SUPERAntiSypware some time ago. It is still ok if you want to use the free version as a stand-alone scanner....you can disable the scan for cookies...but other anti-malware scanners like Malwarebytes and Zemana are more effective.
.
.
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Windows Insider MVP 2017
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#6 Hakyme

Hakyme
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 25 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:04:30 PM

Posted 25 July 2017 - 11:12 AM

thanks for the response... is there any reason to get malwarebytes if im using adwcleaner?



#7 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 49,728 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:10:30 AM

Posted 25 July 2017 - 04:45 PM

While there is some overlsp with Potentially Unwanted Program (PUP) detections, Malwarebytes is more comprehensive and the premium version offers real-time protection to block infection, exploits and ransomware.
.
.
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Windows Insider MVP 2017
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#8 Hakyme

Hakyme
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 25 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:04:30 PM

Posted 26 July 2017 - 08:20 AM

im not much for the paid version because you have to subscribe monthly... i just read somewhere that adwcleaner is going to be build into malwarebytes but im not sure if that's true..



#9 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 49,728 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:10:30 AM

Posted 26 July 2017 - 08:39 AM

Malwarebytes Press Center: Malwarebytes Acquires AdwCleaner

For the near term, AdwCleaner will retain its current name, supplemented by Malwarebytes branding. Malwarebytes is committed to maintaining the mission of the AdwCleaner product and its features. Malwarebytes believes this will aid growing awareness for the Malwarebytes brand in areas of rapid growth within Europe, Asia and additional countries outside of the United States. Malwarebytes will also integrate many of the proprietary techniques and detections into their flagship products.

Malwarebytes Acquires AdwCleaner

Over a longer period, we hope to learn from and integrate the technology into our flagship product, Malwarebytes Anti-Malware. AdwCleaner will remain free as a standalone product.


.
.
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Windows Insider MVP 2017
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#10 MDD1963

MDD1963

  • Members
  • 655 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:11:30 PM

Posted 26 July 2017 - 07:30 PM

SuperAntiSpyware does indeed find cookies...but  then, do you expect it to find infections? (Hard to call it ineffective, unless we know for sure it is missing some things)

 

One would need to purposely infect a system to find it's cleaning/disinfection capabilities, but, 18-24 months when that was done, SAS had a very low detection rate indeed....; I dropped it, as clearing cookies can be handled by other products that do cleaning...(CCleaner)

 

Malwarebytes Antimalware is still one of the 'gold standards' most tools are compared to....


Asus Z270A Prime/7700K/32 GB DDR4-3200/GTX1060


#11 MDD1963

MDD1963

  • Members
  • 655 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:11:30 PM

Posted 26 July 2017 - 07:34 PM

one could always run periodic Adwcleaner, JRT, and Malwarebytes scans, or, run them if suspicious of anything occurring/running like a new process previously unnoticed, high CPU usage, etc....


Edited by MDD1963, 26 July 2017 - 07:34 PM.

Asus Z270A Prime/7700K/32 GB DDR4-3200/GTX1060


#12 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 49,728 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:10:30 AM

Posted 26 July 2017 - 07:45 PM

Malwarebytes Anti-Malware is now part of Malwarebytes 3.0 along with their Anti-Exploit and Anti-Ransomware programs.
.
.
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Windows Insider MVP 2017
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#13 Hakyme

Hakyme
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 25 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:04:30 PM

Posted 27 July 2017 - 09:00 AM

SuperAntiSpyware does indeed find cookies...but  then, do you expect it to find infections? (Hard to call it ineffective, unless we know for sure it is missing some things)

 

One would need to purposely infect a system to find it's cleaning/disinfection capabilities, but, 18-24 months when that was done, SAS had a very low detection rate indeed....; I dropped it, as clearing cookies can be handled by other products that do cleaning...(CCleaner)

 

Malwarebytes Antimalware is still one of the 'gold standards' most tools are compared to....

 

I just get the impression that they seem to find completely different things. SaS finds lots of tracking cookies and deletes them, where as adwcleaner finds lots of programs and files, etc. that it gets rid of. I also found that even with CCleaner, SaS still found some tracking cookies after running a complete clean up with CCleaner. Also, if you can get some addons for your browser or clean the tracking cookies yourself (im not sure if this is possible?) is SaS then really necessary? I found adwcleaner to be more effective than malwarebytes but adwcleaner also found some false positives like slimdrivers.



#14 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 49,728 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:10:30 AM

Posted 27 July 2017 - 09:15 AM

SUPERAntiSpyware will scan for cookies by default and show them as Adware.Tracking Cookies threat detections. There is no need to scan for them since cookies pose no significant threat (see my explanation here) and anti-malware scanners have more important things to look for. That is why I recommend users ignore scanning for cookies by changing the settings and disabling the option to "Search for cookies". Doing that will also decrease the amount of time it takes to perform a scan.

CCleaner will only scan for and remove cookies if you have that option enabled.

AdwCleaner and Malwarebytes intentionally do not search for and remove Cookies.
.
.
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Windows Insider MVP 2017
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#15 Hakyme

Hakyme
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 25 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:04:30 PM

Posted 27 July 2017 - 11:54 AM

SUPERAntiSpyware will scan for cookies by default and show them as Adware.Tracking Cookies threat detections. There is no need to scan for them since cookies pose no significant threat (see my explanation here) and anti-malware scanners have more important things to look for. That is why I recommend users ignore scanning for cookies by changing the settings and disabling the option to "Search for cookies". Doing that will also decrease the amount of time it takes to perform a scan.

CCleaner will only scan for and remove cookies if you have that option enabled.

AdwCleaner and Malwarebytes intentionally do not search for and remove Cookies.

 

I cannot use CCleaner because it conflics with VAC (anti-cheat program for steam games). But if you can provide me with some other option to get rid of them then I don't see the reason for using SaS. I don't want tracking cookies on my computer. The frist time I was scanning with SaS it found a ton of tracking cookies, but that's all it seems to have found since then, besides a few programs.


Edited by Hakyme, 27 July 2017 - 11:56 AM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users