Doesn't seem to detect spyware

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

I installed Microsoft Antispyware about two weeks ago. I made sure that the
definitions were current and that Real-Time Protection and the Scan-Scheduler
were on. After a few days, I noticed that MAS never notified my about any
spyware that got onto may machine. I ran thorouch scans, and MAS reported no
sypware . . . even when I used Explorer with "Accept All Cookies" and visited
sites that always deposited spyware. Finally, I put Ad Aware on my machine
and ran it. When AA found spyware, I did not quarantine or erase; I shut
down AA and ran MAS again. Again, the report was no spyware found. What's
happening?
 
Besson E-flat said:
I installed Microsoft Antispyware about two weeks ago. I made sure that
the
definitions were current and that Real-Time Protection and the
Scan-Scheduler
were on. After a few days, I noticed that MAS never notified my about any
spyware that got onto may machine. I ran thorouch scans, and MAS reported
no
sypware . . . even when I used Explorer with "Accept All Cookies" and
visited
sites that always deposited spyware. Finally, I put Ad Aware on my
machine
and ran it. When AA found spyware, I did not quarantine or erase; I shut
down AA and ran MAS again. Again, the report was no spyware found.
What's
happening?
Click to expand...


What's happening is that you are deliberately omitting WHAT you claim is the
spyware that is not getting detected. Okay, a show of hands. How many
would like to bet this user is complaining about .txt files (i.e., cookies)?
 
Thanks for your invaluable help Vanguard. I am sure there are several of us
out here with the same issue using AA. "Okay, a show of hands." How many
would like to hear the differences between WHAT spyware is and we are
complaining about, .txt files (i.e. Cookies)? I guess I am just a sorry self
made multi-millionaire, trust fund brat ($500M) with three business degrees,
semi-retired at age 25, currently 43 years old and obviously ignorant.
 
JMJ2 said:
Thanks for your invaluable help Vanguard. I am sure there are several of
us
out here with the same issue using AA. "Okay, a show of hands." How many
would like to hear the differences between WHAT spyware is and we are
complaining about, .txt files (i.e. Cookies)? I guess I am just a sorry
self
made multi-millionaire, trust fund brat ($500M) with three business
degrees,
semi-retired at age 25, currently 43 years old and obviously ignorant.
Click to expand...

Be careful when using Notepad then. Every .txt file you create with it
could be spyWARE, too.
 
Thank you for a prompt reply. I hope you weren't put off by my reply as I
obviously was at yours. As you are aware we come here for help. Sometimes
on what some may consider serious matters. This is my first time even
"lowering myself" to ask for assistance. I understand your reply but am
still confused as AA and SpyBot continue to pick up what appears to be stated
"CRITICAL OBJECTS" while the MS app. is totally ignoring them! Other users I
am associated with (with the highest of certifications, PhD's, industry
experts and even programmers) are asking the same question and have the same
concerns. We fully understand that this is just a Beta but have a feeling it
will be incorporated with the official release of "Vista." Please assist or
point US in the right direction.

Respectfully and humbly submitted.
 
My reply in this thread was a bit short and to the point. It wasn't
intended to be offensive. We often cannot judge the level of technical
knowledge of a poster from their initial questions. Opinions differ about
the best practice, but certainly being polite and professional is a minimum
requirement. Everybody here is a volunteer, and styles and content may
differ, depending on circumstances unrelated to your original posted
question--in my case, press of time was the reason for the short reply.

Check out Plun's references--he's laid out the underlying philosophical
question behind the findings that led to your question.

This question (Are Cookies spyware?) has been debated extensively in these
groups for over a year now--since this beta first appeared. It brings with
it strong emotions and opinions from both sides.

Personally, I don't worry about cookies (or data miners--another name for a
kind of cookie.) However, when they are identified by a product such as
Ad-aware or Spybot Search & Destroy, I do remove them, and I've yet to see
any negative to doing so.

I don't see cookies as a significant problem, unless they truly contain
PII - personally identiable information.

As Plun mentions--getting some of the terminology defined is an industry
process which has progressed substantially over the last year. There had
been some earlier efforts at information sharing which floundered when the
participants were unable to agree about who could be part of the discussion
and who could not. Spyware companies have substantial venture capital
behind them in some cases, and are attempting to remake themselves as
providers of a legitimate service. There are very tough issues involved in
creating clear definitions for an antispyware to work with.

--
 
JMJ2 said:
Thank you for a prompt reply. I hope you weren't put off by my reply as I
obviously was at yours.
Click to expand...

No, I have fun, even when I argue (and sometimes even from the insults). If
you get upset with insults or arguments with strangers, you don't have to
social tools needed to deal with your friends (unless they are your clones
that never disagree with you).
I understand your reply but am
still confused as AA and SpyBot continue to pick up what appears to be
stated
"CRITICAL OBJECTS" while the MS app. is totally ignoring them!
Click to expand...

But you have YET to say what *are* those other critical objects. From your
description, it *appears* that cookies were what you were concerned about.
If cookies are your concern:

- Configure IE to allow 1st party cookies, block 3rd party cookies, and
allow per-session cookies. Per-session cookies are *supposed* to get
deleted when the last instance of IE gets unloaded (but IE is a bit flaky on
its cleanup on exit).
- You could use SpywareBlaster or Spybot to add a whole slew of "bad" sites
that will end up in the Block list for cookie domains. You can also add
domains to the Allow list to whitelist those domains. You are, however,
relegating the decision making to someone else as to what are "bad" sites.
- There are plenty of cookie managers available, some of which are free.
They can provide for whitelisting of those domains who you will allow to
deposit the .txt files on your host, and all non-whitelisted domains get
their cookie .txt files deleted on exit from IE (i.e., all non-whitelisted
cookies are forced to be per-session cookies).

I use PopUpCop (for other obvious reasons) which has cookie whitelisting but
there are other [free] cookie managers that probably have that feature.
PopUpCop only loads when IE is loaded since that is the only cookies are a
problem whereas many cookie managers remain resident all the time to consume
resources.

There are also other cookie-style files. Macromedia's Flash player leaves
behind .sol file but you can configure it to not cache any .sol cookie files
(other than the .sol file that retains your local settings).
 
Bill Sanderson said:
My reply in this thread was a bit short and to the point. It wasn't
intended to be offensive.
Click to expand...

Someone thought you were offensive? Lil pussycat you? Terseness does not
equate to rudeness. If that were true, and considering the usual verbosity
of my replies, I'm must be the most unoffensive poster here - and that's
definitely not true. <giggles>
 
Actually--I can only recall one poster who thought I was being
offensive--and I think that was in the OneCare beta groups---strange thread.

Nah--I just had the time to say more than I did the first time, and thought
it made sense to acknowledge the complaint.

--
 
Bill
It was not intended to be your reply referenced. I obviously replied to the
wrong post. This was meant for VANGARD. I did take offense to that response
but will no longer as I now realize that he has a sense of humor and wasn't
being rude. Thanks for your info and sorry my response was misdirected.

Respectfully submitted
 
Vangard - by now I am sure that you have found my original post was meant for
you, not Bill (see recent post). Thank you for your information. Thank all
of you!! As for your original post, I mistakenly thought that you were
slamming "Besson." I had no idea that it was your sense of humor style
which, LIKE MINE, can often be mistaken for acting like an ***##**. If we
met I'm sure we would enjoy throwing a few sparks, jabs and digs while
getting a good education. Ever in Scottsdale, AZ look me up. Love a good
discussion and hate clones!!
My philosophy, "Yes men" have no place in my life or organizations.
Mindless people are unable to assist in making good decisions. If it weren't
for people of your caliber people like me would have squat!! Sorry for the
rambling but I felt it necessary to make things right.
Great thread all. Thank you BESSON. I'll go to PLUN's link. I have
definately learned from all here. I'll learn more on what I'm attempting to
address here and re-visit if needed.
Respectfully submitted.

Vanguard said:
JMJ2 said:
Thank you for a prompt reply. I hope you weren't put off by my reply as I
obviously was at yours.
Click to expand...

No, I have fun, even when I argue (and sometimes even from the insults). If
you get upset with insults or arguments with strangers, you don't have to
social tools needed to deal with your friends (unless they are your clones
that never disagree with you).
I understand your reply but am
still confused as AA and SpyBot continue to pick up what appears to be
stated
"CRITICAL OBJECTS" while the MS app. is totally ignoring them!
Click to expand...

But you have YET to say what *are* those other critical objects. From your
description, it *appears* that cookies were what you were concerned about.
If cookies are your concern:

- Configure IE to allow 1st party cookies, block 3rd party cookies, and
allow per-session cookies. Per-session cookies are *supposed* to get
deleted when the last instance of IE gets unloaded (but IE is a bit flaky on
its cleanup on exit).
- You could use SpywareBlaster or Spybot to add a whole slew of "bad" sites
that will end up in the Block list for cookie domains. You can also add
domains to the Allow list to whitelist those domains. You are, however,
relegating the decision making to someone else as to what are "bad" sites.
- There are plenty of cookie managers available, some of which are free.
They can provide for whitelisting of those domains who you will allow to
deposit the .txt files on your host, and all non-whitelisted domains get
their cookie .txt files deleted on exit from IE (i.e., all non-whitelisted
cookies are forced to be per-session cookies).

I use PopUpCop (for other obvious reasons) which has cookie whitelisting but
there are other [free] cookie managers that probably have that feature.
PopUpCop only loads when IE is loaded since that is the only cookies are a
problem whereas many cookie managers remain resident all the time to consume
resources.

There are also other cookie-style files. Macromedia's Flash player leaves
behind .sol file but you can configure it to not cache any .sol cookie files
(other than the .sol file that retains your local settings).
Click to expand...
 
JMJ2 used his keyboard to write :
Great thread all. Thank you BESSON. I'll go to PLUN's link. I have
definately learned from all here. I'll learn more on what I'm attempting to
address here and re-visit if needed.
Click to expand...

Hi

I believe also the Industry and opponents has a "cookie war" within
antispywarecoalition.org.

Ewido uses a good description and defined them as a "Spywarecookie".

Really nice way to track a Botnet army where they are and what they are
doing. Botnet salesman Mr X can easy pick up a bunch an sell
5,10 or 1000 Zombies to a spammer or pedofil.

So for me cookies are dead, stone dead !

regards
plun
 
plun said:
JMJ2 used his keyboard to write :
Click to expand...
So for me cookies are dead, stone dead !
Click to expand...


Some sites won't work without them as they provide temporary storage needed
to provide secure navigation within a site (since Referrer may be blocked)
or to retain information between browser sessions. For example, when
shopping online, do you really want to start all over putting items in your
out-basket because you got interrupted, had to end the browser session, and
then come back to do more shopping? Do you really want to have to open and
register an account before you can start selecting items so they can record
your out-basket items in your account to permit multi-session shopping?
When you revisit your favorite forum, do you want to have to login in each
time, or not have it remember which posts that you have read before (by
removing bolding from them)? There are good uses for cookies. There are
good uses for rifles but responsible hunters lock them down. Learn to
lockdown your cookies.

I allow only 1st party cookies (i.e., only those from the site that I'm
visiting). 3rd party cookies are blocked (I don't know them, don't trust
them, that is not where *I* browsed, and if the "3rd party" is another
entity of the first then don't mask that fact). Only trusted domains get to
leave a cookie on my host, hence the need for a whitelist (because I don't
even want all sites in the Trusted Sites security zone to leave cookies
hanging around). You can use IE's Allow and Block list for cookies to
define which ones to keep or block, but I don't care for all the manual
upkeep, especially in having to maintain a huge list of Blocked domains.

IE does not have the feature where you can whitelist the good domains in the
Allow cookie list and force cookies from all non-Allowed sites to be
per-session cookies. By having a cookie domain whitelist (which is separate
of the Trusted Sites security zone), the user can specify just the few sites
where they really do want to keep their cookies between browser sessions
with those sites. This way you allow retained information from good sites
(and only those good sites that you want to whitelist), allow the use of a
temporary info store to ensure a site functions properly, but all
non-whitelisted cookies are forcibly purged after the browser session.

#1 - Allow only 1st party cookies.
#2 - Block 3rd party cookies.
#3 - Allow per-session cookies (which get deleted when exiting the browser).
#4 - Provide whitelisting of user-selected domains (so their cookies survive
across browser sessions).
#5 - Delete all non-whitelisted cookies on exit from the browser (i.e., they
are forced to be per-session cookies).

Firefox stores cookies, too. From
http://websearch.about.com/od/firefox/ss/firefoxoptions_5.htm and
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/pki/psm/help_21/using_priv_help.html,
it looks like Firefox might provide a decent level of cookie management.
With IE, you need 3rd party tools, but decent cookie management is just as
easily doable.

Rather than flee from cookies to only degrade your browsing experience, just
learn to manage them.
 
It happens that Vanguard formulated :
Rather than flee from cookies to only degrade your browsing experience, just
learn to manage them.
Click to expand...

Hi

I know how to handle them, block and remove. Cookies stinks.

I must accept them under some circumstanses.

Mostly all users do NOT know it and they are used
to track för example Zombies within a Botnet.

The Botnet salesman can see that he has a really nice
bunch of broadband PCn in a certain area in the world.
This bad guy can also follow these PCs, when they are awake
and what they are going.

Then it´s for him to sell these botnet army to a spammer or Ddos
attacker or a pedofil gang which distribute child porn.

So Spyware cookies and then cookies are "stone dead".

Unwanted technology !

regards
plun
 
Back
Top