spyware

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

Guest

Installed beta software before December 05 and everytime i run a full system
scan says nothing has been detected. Can this be a mistake that it isn't
picking anything up or do I just not have any spyware? I am running
WindowsXP/SP2
Thank you
 
Good question! I have done the same with the same results and would like to
see what kind of response you get.
 
Hello,

Follow this thread:

Subject: Does MSAS detect anything?
From: "Steve"
Sent: 9/19/2005 11:23:59 AM
General forum

I hope this post is helpful, let us know how it works ºut.
Engel
 
I have looked everywhere and cannot find that post. Is General Forum
different from General Discussion? Thanks
 
Hi rags9,

No. is the same.

But here is, read Bill's test:
Subject: Does MSAS detect anything?
From: "Steve" <[email protected]> Sent: 9/19/2005
11:23:59 AM
General forum

I have had MSAS installed for about 4 months and it has not detected
anything at all since installation. My system stays pretty clean of spyware,
but I am a bit concerned that MSAS has detected nothing in 4 months.
Is there anyway to test MSAS with a "dummy" malware module?
..
Subject: RE: Does MSAS detect anything?
From: "Alan" <[email protected]> Sent: 9/19/2005 11:52:00 AM

It doesn't scan for cookies/dataminers.

Many other products do. However, cookies/dataminers are NOT spyware, they
are data files that CAN NOT harm your system.

WD has said they will re-evaluate cookie/dataminer scanning based upon the
feedback they recieve during the beta test.

Alan

..
Subject: Re: Does MSAS detect anything?
From: "Bill Sanderson" <[email protected]> Sent: 9/19/2005
1:56:06 PM

Here's a test for you. There's been some discussion of providing the
equivalent of an EICAR test for Windows Defender, and I have hopes that
something like that will be provided for the beta2 prºduct.

In the meantime--here's a harmless test which still works at this writing
and 5757 definition levels:

Go to a command prompt in the Windows or WINNT folder, depending on your
Windows versiºn.

md winlogon.exe <enter>

i.e. create a subdirectory called "winlogon.exe" (this is a real-life
example--an antivirus product uses this technique to "innoculate" against a
particular bug.)

Watch what happens. You can choose allow or remove, neither has any useful
effect. Don't choose always ignore unless you want to go looking for the UI
to reverse that which is an an oddball locatiºn.

Simply RD winlogon.exe to get rid of the ªlert(s.)

This doesn't really answer your question, except to show you what a genuine
alert about a known threat looks like.

Windows Defender continues to score at or near the top of the list in
comparative reviews against comparable products. There's been a lot of
change in this market of late, and it'll be interesting to see a good
comparative review in say January of next year, mªybe.

There are posts daily here which lament the fact that Windows Defender
hasn't found anything on a given system, while xyz antispyware finds
something new daily.
There's a problem with false positives in antispyware programs. Every
program has this problem, but some of them exploit it to make themselves look
better. Generally, these end up on Eric Howes list of rogue antispyware
apps, and we can discount their results. Since this is a hotly competitive
field, with no long-term industry information sharing (unlike the antivirus
field)--there are no accepted definitions for a given threat--vendors differ,
both in what they detect, and how a given threat is defined.

Yes--it does detect things--they collect the results via Spynet for about
(half??) the installations? It'd be nice to have somebody quote some of
those results for this beta--I think we'd all be impressed at what's been
accomplished in terms of cleaning systems.

Like you, I almost never see anything "real"--but I'm pretty much a nose to
the grindstone sort of guy--don't venture out of the beaten path much, and
the offices I work with seem to be similar. Lots of folks in these groups do
see useful cleaning and write in about it daily, thºugh.
 
Hi Engle,
Thank you for the information new at all this stuff, so I guess I'll just
keep it and hope it is doing what it's supposed to. Thanks again for
finding the info for me and posting it.
rags9
 
Hi rags9,

Your most welcome, enjoy the program.
(¯`·._.·Engęl·._.·´¯)
--
 
What is it that you expect to hear?

It is a little hard, across the ether, to say whether or not your system is
clean, except based on the evidence of a given scan of your machine by a
given piece of antispyware software.

Microsoft Antispyware beta1 does a pretty good job, but I have definitely
seen systems with nasty spyware in place that is missed by beta1. I expect
beta2 to do better.

If a system I look at has Microsoft Antispyware in place, up to date, and
has been full, deep scanned, and has not overt spyware symptoms, I don't
believe it has spyware in place.

If you run a different antispyware product you will get different results.
In many, but not all cases, these results will relate to cookies. In other
cases, they may relate to false positives, or detections of harmless
leftovers of previous infections which don't constitute a risk by
themselves--there are lots of reasons for differences in detections between
products.
--
 
Back
Top