Spybot Search and Destroy 1.3 RC3 has been released

  • Thread starter Thread starter Steven Burn
  • Start date Start date
Spybot Search and Destroy 1.3 RC3 has been released.

http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail.php3?fid=1043809773
Click to expand...

Ah. This one runs in the Tray by default.

The process calls itself "TeaTimer", and has a 5,360KB footprint, which is
not trivial. Wonder why it's not called "SpybotTray" or something that
doesn't send you running to Google to find out what in the heck it is?

Apparently SpyBot is working toward being a full-blown, resident, active
Spyware prevention system. Immunizations have tripled in the last 3
releases, now the resident Tray app by default.

Bob

Remove "kins" from address to reply.
 
Bob said:
Ah. This one runs in the Tray by default.
The process calls itself "TeaTimer", and has a 5,360KB footprint, which is
not trivial. Wonder why it's not called "SpybotTray" or something that
doesn't send you running to Google to find out what in the heck it is?
Apparently SpyBot is working toward being a full-blown, resident, active
Spyware prevention system. Immunizations have tripled in the last 3
releases, now the resident Tray app by default.
Click to expand...

Well, in that case, so much for that program. I LOATH "services" that
run in the background, sucking up system resources. Of course, I'm
still using ME.
 
John Corliss said:
Well, in that case, so much for that program. I LOATH "services" that
run in the background, sucking up system resources. Of course, I'm
still using ME.
Click to expand...

I've got it running on 2 98SE boxes and my XP Pro machine, and it doesn't
seem to be taking up any resources?.

--
Regards

Steven Burn
Ur I.T. Mate Group
www.it-mate.co.uk

Keeping it FREE!

Disclaimer:
I know I'm probably wrong, I just like taking part ;o)
 
Well, in that case, so much for that program. I LOATH "services" that
run in the background, sucking up system resources. Of course, I'm
still using ME.
Click to expand...
You can switch the Tea Timer off if you wnt. I did.

Jari
 
Well, in that case
Click to expand...
as if *your opinion matters even in the slightest...

--
"John Corliss is a sick human being. We shouldn't hate him, we
shouldn't make fun of him, we shouldn't treat him as a pariah or a
net.idiot--above all, we shouldn't flame him. We should reach out to
him as a brother, with love and compassion, and operate on his brain."

- Gene Ward Smith
 
I've got it running on 2 98SE boxes and my XP Pro machine, and it doesn't
seem to be taking up any resources?.
Click to expand...
johnnie hasn't been the same since his mommy took away his crackpipe.

**
"John Corliss is a sick human being. We shouldn't hate him, we
shouldn't make fun of him, we shouldn't treat him as a pariah or a
net.idiot--above all, we shouldn't flame him. We should reach out to
him as a brother, with love and compassion, and operate on his brain."

- Gene Ward Smith
 
Spybot is not running in the background for me. Is that because I have
under Settings - System start - No automation marked? I do not want
Spybot to run in the background so I want to make sure I know where this
feature is so I do not accidentally turn it on. Also running Win 98SE.
 
venerdì 16/apr/2004 _Bill Bradshaw_ ha scritto:
Spybot is not running in the background for me. Is that because I have
under Settings - System start - No automation marked? I do not want
Spybot to run in the background so I want to make sure I know where this
feature is so I do not accidentally turn it on. Also running Win 98SE.
Click to expand...

Exactly: with "No automation" checked you are sure it doesn't start running
in background. You can also control which programs are loaded at startup:
see "System startup" under the Tools section.
 
Steven said:
I've got it running on 2 98SE boxes and my XP Pro machine, and it doesn't
seem to be taking up any resources?.
Click to expand...

Well, of course on XP system resource wouldn't (or at least
shouldn't") be an issue. But any consumption of system resources on
older versions of Windows in order to run in the background, however
small, is unacceptable to me.
On the other hand, Jari Lehtonen, Bill Bardshaw and MLC all say
that the program can be configured not to run in the background, so
crisis averted for now. 80)>
I'm wondering how long after the final release of the new version
they will support updating by the older version that I'm using now.
 
John Corliss said:
I'm wondering how long after the final release of the new version
they will support updating by the older version that I'm using now.
Click to expand...

I've worried quite a lot about Spybots lack of updates (compared with
for e.g. AdAware and A squared). It seems to have been a 'feature' for
quite some time, and also was in their earlier versions.

KeithS
 
KeithS said:
I've worried quite a lot about Spybots lack of updates (compared with
for e.g. AdAware and A squared). It seems to have been a 'feature' for
quite some time, and also was in their earlier versions.
Click to expand...

Maybe with all the public sentiment against spyware and adware, new
types are not being developed as fast as with viruses and Trojans.
This would mean that updates wouldn't need to be as frequent. Just
speculation on my part though.
 
Maybe with all the public sentiment against spyware and adware, new
types are not being developed as fast as with viruses and Trojans.
This would mean that updates wouldn't need to be as frequent. Just
speculation on my part though.
Click to expand...

Based on regular reading of spywareinfo forums, I would say your
speculation is way off here.

In fact, compared to say a year ago, I would say the number of spyware
that cannot be removed by the combo of Ad-aware+spybot is much higher
now. CWshredder covers some of the rest of the cases, but it's getting
disturbing to see the number of cases that cannot be automatically
removed by spyware scanners due to the speed of the releases and the fact
that like viruses, and trojans, spyware are now designed to fight
specificly against the tools normally used to remove/detect them.





Aaron (my email is not munged!)
 
Aaron said:
@corp.supernews.com:




Based on regular reading of spywareinfo forums, I would say your
speculation is way off here.

In fact, compared to say a year ago, I would say the number of spyware
that cannot be removed by the combo of Ad-aware+spybot is much higher
now. CWshredder covers some of the rest of the cases, but it's getting
disturbing to see the number of cases that cannot be automatically
removed by spyware scanners due to the speed of the releases and the fact
that like viruses, and trojans, spyware are now designed to fight
specificly against the tools normally used to remove/detect them.
Click to expand...

Hmm. Interesting. I guess I didn't notice this because of the common
sense steps I take to not give spyware or adware a chance to get
insinuated onto my machine in the first place. And I'm not being a
smart ass here. I believe you.
 
Hmm. Interesting. I guess I didn't notice this because of the common
sense steps I take to not give spyware or adware a chance to get
insinuated onto my machine in the first place.
Click to expand...

1) Not using IE as your primary browser

2) Using secure browser settings if using IE with regards to Activex. If
you surf like a monk with even active scripting and java off, even
better.

3) Using proggies like spywareblaster, IEspyad which allow you to
immediately block kwown malware right off the bat.

4) Staying update with IE patches. - Important since many crapware these
days use the latest exploits to install themselves automatically.

5) Not visiting dubious sites or downloading and running dubious stuff.


If you intend to break 5, better make sure you are also doing 1 or 2+3+4
(at least).

Using 1, would make you pretty safe*, though you still need to be careful
when using apps that require on IE, or when others use IE on your
computer.



And I'm not being a
smart ass here. I believe you.
Click to expand...

Sure.


* XPI installed spyware seems to becoming popular these days though.

Aaron (my email is not munged!)
 
1) Not using IE as your primary browser
Click to expand...

I refuse to let the bastards win by forcing me to change my browser. I will
use the browser *I prefer, play it safe, and the purveyors of spybots can
go to the devil.

How about "Cool Web Search"? They actually coded some of their 'bots to go
after Adaware and CW Shredder! That's leaving the domain of "spyware" and
entering the domain of "Trojan", which is not only unethical, but illegal. I
would love to see them prosecuted!

Bob

Remove "kins" from address to reply.
 
Bob said:
I refuse to let the bastards win by forcing me to change my browser. I will
use the browser *I prefer, play it safe, and the purveyors of spybots can
go to the devil.
Click to expand...

Well, to each their own. In my case, I actually prefer Mozilla over IE.
How about "Cool Web Search"? They actually coded some of their 'bots to go
after Adaware and CW Shredder! That's leaving the domain of "spyware" and
entering the domain of "Trojan", which is not only unethical, but illegal. I
would love to see them prosecuted!
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
Aaron said:
1) Not using IE as your primary browser
Click to expand...

I use Mozilla.
2) Using secure browser settings if using IE with regards to Activex. If
you surf like a monk with even active scripting and java off, even
better.
Yup.

3) Using proggies like spywareblaster, IEspyad which allow you to
immediately block kwown malware right off the bat.
Click to expand...

Maybe others. But it'd be a real sneaky S.O.B. that could install any
malware on my system. So far I'm batting 1.000.
4) Staying update with IE patches. - Important since many crapware these
days use the latest exploits to install themselves automatically.
Click to expand...

Well, here we differ. Because MS has a history of making changes that
are unrelated to what a certain patch is supposed to do, I no longer
trust them or use them. But I'm using ME and it's not as critical.
Also, (on a related note) I've castrated RPC on my system.
5) Not visiting dubious sites or downloading and running dubious stuff.
Yup.

If you intend to break 5, better make sure you are also doing 1 or 2+3+4
(at least).
Using 1, would make you pretty safe*, though you still need to be careful
when using apps that require on IE, or when others use IE on your
computer.
Click to expand...

I always run such apps the first time with my router turned off. That
way, if it always opens IE instead of the default browser like *it's
supposed to do*, I'm forwarned. Also, nobody touches this computer but
me. Everybody I allow in my house knows that it's "a real bad idea" to
mess with my system.

I'd add to your list that it's important to run a firewall with
logging capabilities.
Sure.
Click to expand...

Well, I hope that wasn't sarcasm. 80)> I was serious.
* XPI installed spyware seems to becoming popular these days though.
Click to expand...

This can be avoided by turning off automatic "software installation"
or at least configuring the browser to ask first.

As I've said in the past, I've only had one virus (a LONG time ago in
computer years.) I've also never had my browser hijacked and I've
always been too sceptical to install *any* search toolbar addon (and
never saw any need to anyway.) Malware (except for that Happy99 virus)
has never found it's way onto my computer, except when I installed
Windows (heh heh).
 
I refuse to let the bastards win by forcing me to change my browser. I
will use the browser *I prefer, play it safe, and the purveyors of
spybots can go to the devil.
Click to expand...

So as a result you prefer to do the Ms patch scramble, and antispyware
update scramble , your choice.
How about "Cool Web Search"? They actually coded some of their 'bots
to go after Adaware and CW Shredder! That's leaving the domain of
"spyware" and entering the domain of "Trojan", which is not only
unethical, but illegal. I would love to see them prosecuted!
Click to expand...

Huh? The defintion of trojan has nothing to do with "going after" other
software.


Bob

Remove "kins" from address to reply.
Click to expand...



Aaron (my email is not munged!)
 
Maybe others. But it'd be a real sneaky S.O.B. that could install any
malware on my system. So far I'm batting 1.000.
Click to expand...

Sneaky bastards exist. So sneaky you still don't know you have them.
Well, here we differ. Because MS has a history of making changes that
are unrelated to what a certain patch is supposed to do, I no longer
trust them or use them. But I'm using ME and it's not as critical.
Also, (on a related note) I've castrated RPC on my system.
Click to expand...

Exploits that autoexecute themselves on IE generally don't exploit RPC
bugs I think.

I always run such apps the first time with my router turned off. That
way, if it always opens IE instead of the default browser like *it's
supposed to do*, I'm forwarned.


Also, nobody touches this computer but
me. Everybody I allow in my house knows that it's "a real bad idea" to
mess with my system.

I'd add to your list that it's important to run a firewall with
logging capabilities.
Click to expand...

Firewalls are nice, but they don't do anything to *prevent* you from
getting infected when browsing, which is the main intent of my prior
post. Similar for cleaning tools like Ad-aware free,Cwshredder etc.

And poorly setup rules in firewalls (loopback rules), plus the fact that
many spyware are installed as BHOs and appear as your browser, will allow
such spyware out anyway without the firewall protesting.


Well, I hope that wasn't sarcasm. 80)> I was serious.
Click to expand...

No that wasn't sarcasm. Neither is this in case you are wondering,
This can be avoided by turning off automatic "software installation"
or at least configuring the browser to ask first.
Click to expand...

True.

<Rest of boasting sniped>

Aaron (my email is not munged!)
 
Back
Top