Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

MS AntiSpyware vs Ad-Aware vs. SpyBot

timothy posted about 10 years ago | from the more-amazing-is-what-people-tolerate dept.

Security 535

An anonymous reader writes "Flexbeta.net compares Microsoft's new spyware fighting tool, Windows AntiSpyware, to Ad-Aware and SpyBot S&D; the two leading spyware tools on the market today. The review sets up an infected PC using VMWare Workstation and scans the machine using all three tools to see which tool detects the most spyware. Though still in beta, Microsoft AntiSpyware does an amazing job at detecting spyware by finding twice as many infected files as Ad-Aware and nearly three times as SpyBot."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

No more spying, please! (-1)

Lindsay Lohan (847467) | about 10 years ago | (#11298296)

Microsoft AntiSpyware does an amazing job at detecting spyware
Good. Ever since my embarassing nipple-slip it's been impossible to avoid, the cameras, the stalkerazzi. I just want to live a normal life people.

I like bubbles.

Re:No more spying, please! (2, Informative)

Lindsay Lohan (847467) | about 10 years ago | (#11298457)

Also, I neglected to mention in my previous post...

One factor behind MS AntiSpyware's successful may be the use of quadratic probing [nist.gov] in a secondary clustering to traverse file patterns, which are stored in an acylic graph.

Fleischer and Trippen [cs.ust.hk] elaborate further on this technique in a Java implementation [sourceforge.net] , which of course Microsoft did not employ. The rationale, however, is the same.

fristage postage (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298304)

zomg i got first

fp (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298306)


Wow, is this for real (5, Funny)

Cracell (788266) | about 10 years ago | (#11298310)

So wait a sec Microsoft's product is actual good?

Re:Wow, is this for real (3, Funny)

harrkev (623093) | about 10 years ago | (#11298354)

They have only owned it for a few weeks. Even Microsoft has limits on how fast they can screw stuff up.

Re:Wow, is this for real (1)

Cracell (788266) | about 10 years ago | (#11298383)

heh really I thought they were better then that, though the newest msn messenger 7 beta is sure crap compared to the first beta of it, so maybe as time goes on they can worsen their products

Re:Wow, is this for real (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298367)

Let's not get too crazy. MS obtained Giant Software and this product was (very recently) Giant Anti-Spyware. It was a good spyware detection product well before MS was involved.

Re:Wow, is this for real (1)

gameboyhippo (827141) | about 10 years ago | (#11298387)

Microsoft does from time to time make good software. For example I prefer MS Office to OpenOffice.org. MS Office has nice things such as grammar checking.

I do, however, use OpenOffice.org instead due to the fact that I prefer Free Software over proprietary software.

Of course it makes sense that MS would make an anti-spyware program. They obviously wish to compete against all the perks we Free Software users enjoy.

Not a Microsoft Designed Product (4, Informative)

nurb432 (527695) | about 10 years ago | (#11298402)

They just bought a company and rebranded..

Wait a few generations, then it will be a 'true' Microsoft Product..

Re:Not a Microsoft Designed Product (3, Interesting)

isecore (132059) | about 10 years ago | (#11298500)

Amen to that.

Also, they bought Giant Antispyware, and christ on a crutch does that thing do a hell of a lot of false-positives.

I rennamed a textfile something like claria.exe and that thing started screaming immediately that bad people were trying to take over my life.

So seriously, I couldn't care less.

Re:Wow, is this for real (2, Funny)

stfvon007 (632997) | about 10 years ago | (#11298413)

What there gonna do is make it good so it becomes what 95% of users use, Then start mostly ignoreing it cause they have a monopoly, just like what happened to Internet Exploder. It will also be bundled with Windows XP SP3 and Longhorn.

Re:Wow, is this for real (5, Funny)

wankledot (712148) | about 10 years ago | (#11298427)

Of course it's good, they know where to find spyware and viruses because they're the ones that created them!!@# [/tinfoilhat]

But MS Anti Spyware doesn't detect itself. (1, Funny)

hawks5999 (588198) | about 10 years ago | (#11298311)

The new spynet feature is pretty blatantly spyware itself.

Re:But MS Anti Spyware doesn't detect itself. (1)

beaverbrother (586749) | about 10 years ago | (#11298366)

The new spynet feature is pretty blatantly spyware itself.
How so?
SpyNet only submits unknown application information to determine potential threats, similar to methods used by many antivirus programs.
This anonymous information is not nearly as dangerous as software that keeps track of where you surf the net, etc.
Plus: It's optional

For fairness... (4, Insightful)

Raindance (680694) | about 10 years ago | (#11298314)

To be fair, "infected files" is a rather ambiguous notation (perhaps "malicious packages" would be a better way to count things).

I would also feel better if the submitter hadn't been anonymous. Though it's probably not astroturfing.


Re:For fairness... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298348)

Giant also has some issues with detecting false positives, as other people have mentioned. I do agree that 'packages' is a better term, suppose Ad-Aware & Spybot find one 'package' and mark the directory as an object to be removed/deleted and Microsoft's enumerates every file in the directory, or vice-versa.

Re:For fairness... (1)

clean_stoner (759658) | about 10 years ago | (#11298511)

In the submitter's defense, my sister's computer was pretty spywared up, and I could no clear it. So I broke down and used MS spyware. Even *after* scanning with both Spybot and Adaware, MS found 4000+ infected files. So at least in my experience it works fairly well.

first post (0)

jnapalm (749376) | about 10 years ago | (#11298316)

finally, i can clean up my machine and make it fast enough to outpost everyone else!

Wait a minute... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298317)

Wait.. aren't we supposed to hate Microsoft? I'm confused.

Re:Wait a minute... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298358)

I think the "logic" goes that the reason why we need an anti-spyware program is because of the popularity of Microsoft products, which is also the reason why we must hate Microsoft.

Funny... (5, Funny)

lga (172042) | about 10 years ago | (#11298320)

Does anyone else think it funny that the advert at the bottom of this review is for Smiley Central, a well known piece of computer-invading crap?

Re:Funny... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298355)

Advert? What advert?

If you're too cheap to buy a Slashdot subscription, you might like to switch to something like Firefox + Adblock. Never be amused by incongruous adverts again... because you won't have to look at them at all.

Advert blocking. Just one more technology that Microsoft almost certainly won't be including in a future version of Windows. ;)

Re:Funny... (1)

lga (172042) | about 10 years ago | (#11298443)

Well firstly, I am a Slashdot subscriber, and secondly I do use Firefox and Adblock. I just didn't have fastclick.net in my blocked list. (I do now.)

Re:Funny... (1)

daniil (775990) | about 10 years ago | (#11298392)

No, i don't find it funny at all.

fair and blanced (2)

OffTheLip (636691) | about 10 years ago | (#11298321)

that's all we ask. Microsoft is the most suitable candidate to find spyware infecting their product. Hopefully this is step one, followed by OS changes eliminating/reducing the possibility. Dream over...

M$ Expertise (1)

mordors9 (665662) | about 10 years ago | (#11298323)

Why wouldn't it surprise me that Microsoft would be able to find and remove everyone else's product on the box even if it is spyware.

Re:M$ Expertise (1)

Badflash (812406) | about 10 years ago | (#11298394)

pfff it's crapp... it detects c:\windows\system32\iexplore.exe as being a trojan horse... in fact I copied the servicepack files c:\windows\servicepackfiles\iexplore.exe in that location so I can click "programs/run/iexplore" instead of clicking... I guess it's only looking for that file name in that directory and randomly selects a trojan horse name ... :) Also, it detects my serv-u ftp server as a trojan... ohhh! And VNC ... I still think the number of detected infection is not really important as long as I DO NOT get false alarms and that the softwar in question is doing it's job and not forcing me to reinstall Windows.

Think about this, LinSux zealot (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298334)

When Microsoft finally motivates itself to attack a problem head on, it does a stellar job of crushing any and all opposition. Just think about what it will do when it finally decided to attack the shit scourge that is your shitty software called LinSux

Twice as much (1, Insightful)

ZeroExistenZ (721849) | about 10 years ago | (#11298336)

Not having read the article yet, I do wonder what the scanner reports as spyware in order to get "twice as much results as Adaware" and "three times as much as Spybot".

I'm just sceptical about MS + Anti-Spyware mix.

Re:Twice as much (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298403)

MS AntiSpyware reported WinPCap as a low risk "potential" spyware tool on my computer, which I use in combination with Ethereal Network Analyzer. It also reported K-Lite as moderate risk, not including any of its additional components.

Re:Twice as much (4, Informative)

Rob Carr (780861) | about 10 years ago | (#11298462)

After a vicious round with spyware, I switched to Firefox and regularly running AdAware and Spybot. Still, I ran the MS program to see what would happen.

Adaware and Spybot report a lot of cookies. MS's program didn't. On the other hand, the AntiSpyware program found stuff the other two didn't. Total "hits" weren't 2-3x, but I've decided to keep AntiSpyware in addition to the other two programs.

Re:Twice as much (2, Interesting)

Zocalo (252965) | about 10 years ago | (#11298482)

I'm guessing that the only thing that would account for this kind of discrepency is how registry keys are counted. Whether you count each individual registry key, registry branch, or just piece of spyware on a case-by-case basis will make a huge difference. Also, spyware typically installs copies of its registry settings in several places, and on a system with multiple logins there is even more room for abuse.

Based on my experiences there's not much to choose from between Spybot and Ad-Aware, and I haven't really worked out where the MS/Giant program fits yet. Some programs that are missed by Ad-Aware get picked up by Spybot and vica-versa, so I'd expect there to be a few new things to be found by the MS effort. What worries me most is that discrepency between Spybot and Ad-Aware; I've never seen that kind of gap between the two in either direction. I suspect that inadvertantly or intentionally the selection of spyware installed on the testbed virtual PC may have been slightly biased.

I never thought I'd be saying this... (1)

Mastadex (576985) | about 10 years ago | (#11298338)

way to go, Microsoft!!

It still leaves a bitter taste in my mouth after saying that....ich..

Unfair advantage? (1, Insightful)

meckardt (113120) | about 10 years ago | (#11298343)

Wouldn't the MS product have an unfair advantage... after all, isn't the Redmond crew responsible for a lot of that stuff anyway?

Why would this be a surprise? (3, Interesting)

eno2001 (527078) | about 10 years ago | (#11298347)

Microsoft knows what holes they have in the OS better than anyone else. They just don't bother to fix them in a timely fashion because it's not profitable The anti spyware isn't really a change in direction for them if you think about it. They are still applying a band-aid to the problems rather than a real fix.

Re:Why would this be a surprise? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298412)

Well I agree with what your saying, band-aids are nice sometimes. I'm very happy with the software.

Re:Why would this be a surprise? (0)

afidel (530433) | about 10 years ago | (#11298451)

First, MS bought this solution from a third party vendor. Second, you are correct that fixing the holes would be better than cleaning the resulting spyware, but a LOT of spyware is not MS's fault. Much of the spyware out there infects through flaws that were patched, in many cases years ago. Still others install not through holes but through user ignorance and subterfuge (like the ones that piggyback with many shareware/freeware packages). From my eyes the biggest blame lays with the antivirus vendors, most of the adware/spyware programs could be classified as trojans, and they tend to cause WAY more problems than the vast majority of virus's. It's a bloody crime that AV vendors haven't protected their clients against one of the biggest computer problems in decades. Sure some of the vendors are starting to add anti-spyware stuff to their AV suites, but so far from what I've seen is much too little way too late.

Re:Why would this be a surprise? (0)

eno2001 (527078) | about 10 years ago | (#11298465)

I should add that using Windows is like eating a diet of sweets. It might be really nice on the surface compared to eating, say, fresh fruits and raw vegetables, but it's ot good for your health. Same thing with Windows. It might seem easier to use and nicer overll compared to, say, any free *nix like OS, but it's bad for your computer's health.

Going back to sugar, the fact that it's very bad for your health doesn't make people stop using it. They'd rather deal with the problems (tooth decay, reflux, irritable bowel, ADD, etc...) and use medicines to hide them than actually fix the problems by cutting sugar out of their diet. Well... those same people apply the same logic to Windows. This spyware tool is just Microsoft's equivlent to Nexium for the Windows OS. On the other hand, I don't see any spyware utilities for *nix just yet. ;)

Re:Why would this be a surprise? (2, Insightful)

Flamesplash (469287) | about 10 years ago | (#11298541)

wow :)

On the counter point, *nix is like having 10 fingers but only knowing that 6 of them are there, and then only actually knowing how to use 3 of them.

I'm still waiting for the days of OSX but with windows.... cygwin will have to suffice for now.

Re:Why would this be a surprise? (2, Interesting)

sql*kitten (1359) | about 10 years ago | (#11298518)

They just don't bother to fix them in a timely fashion because it's not profitable

They don't fix them because they meant them to be there.

Take the notorious problem with Outlook, that it will execute embedded VBscript in emails and send virii (or trojans or whatever) to the people in your address book. Well Outlook was designed to do that. If you have scriptable email, then you can use Exchange/Outlook as a platform to develop workflow applications. Doing it that way has nowadays been superseded by the web, of course. Now, MS were naive to think that no-one would ever exploit that feature maliciously, no-one's denying that. But they can't simply remove VBscript from Outlook because that would break the platform for people who did use it for application building.

But why won't MS help linux? (-1, Troll)

Stonent1 (594886) | about 10 years ago | (#11298349)

Now they have this brand new antispyware program. How nice it would be for them to port it over to linux?

Re:But why won't MS help linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298407)

Note, that was sarcasm.

Re:But why won't MS help linux? (1)

codergeek42 (792304) | about 10 years ago | (#11298431)

Anti-spyware programs wouldn't be very useful on a GNU/Linux system, since spyware is pretty much non-existent on a an entirely or almost completely Free/Open-Source operating system. Ah the beauty that is peer-review. (nVidia's drivers and Macromedia's Flash Player are the only proprietary things I've installed.)

Re:But why won't MS help linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298532)

>Ah the beauty that is peer-review

Yeah, that's why the root shell exploit came out this week.

Great! (4, Insightful)

2MuchC0ffeeMan (201987) | about 10 years ago | (#11298359)

The Real-Time Protection agent is awesome. It automatically informs you of any changes being made to your current settings; such as if your IE homepage is trying to be changed. It also warns the user if any spyware is trying to be installed.
So it has to be running first. Just what i want my computer to do, run more stuff.

Also, I kinda know when our homepage is hijacked, and this is why i switched to firefox.

Re:Great! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298439)

I think it's worth the speed decrease compared to the speed impact spyware creates.

Not only that.... (1)

caino59 (313096) | about 10 years ago | (#11298444)

but when they compared this to spybot - did they use the included abilities - such as the teatimer or the ability to lock the homepage against hijacks (it doesnt just warn you from it being changed - it doesn't let it!) as well as locking the hosts file?

maybe they did - but that site is hosed.

browser hijacked (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298360)

I thought my browser had been hijacked to a fake slashdot site; a positive M$ article. No worries; there will be negative M$ comments from the slashdotters.

Missing Information (4, Insightful)

sangreal66 (740295) | about 10 years ago | (#11298365)

I only took a curory glance at the article before it was /.ed, but I did not see any attempt at analyzing how many of the additional items found by MSAS were false positives. This seems like pretty vital information.

Thats beacuse SpyBot stoped updating (0)

tjlsmith (583149) | about 10 years ago | (#11298369)

I think it has become abadonware. And after I donated to it, too.... :-)

Uh Oh... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298371)

Here comes the storm of "omfg wtf bbq MS cheated used secret api's haxors omfg wallhackerz!!11!11!one!11!"

Re:Uh Oh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298455)

MS never cheated: They DIDN'T wrote the software in the first place. Wait a few months before it's written from scratch by Bill's engineers!

MS = the Mob (3, Insightful)

HeyBob! (111243) | about 10 years ago | (#11298372)

It's kind of like the Mob offering protection services to merchants. They're the problem in the first place!

This kind of protection should already be in Windows, or least, make the OS completely separate from the apps and the data.

You should be able to click on any process running and see complete details as to what it is, why it is running and access it's startup options.

Re:MS = the Mob (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298449)

umm, yeah... like you can in linsux, right?

Re:MS = the Mob (1)

HeyBob! (111243) | about 10 years ago | (#11298521)

umm, yeah... like you can in linsux, right?

I've no idea - I only use Windoze

The REAL Ultimate Windows Anti-Spyware Program (3, Insightful)

BioCS.Nerd (847372) | about 10 years ago | (#11298376)

FireFox [mozilla.org]

An Ad-Aware/FireFox combination has served my parent's computer well for quite sometime. My father's business exclusively uses the above combination with great results.

Enough already. (5, Insightful)

XorNand (517466) | about 10 years ago | (#11298379)

Ok, enough of the "MS should do better, they make the holes" comments. If you remember correctly, MS bought [theregister.co.uk] this code only a short while ago from Giant Company. About the only thing Redmond has done is repackage and rebranded it.

Re:Enough already. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298493)

And your point is? Seems like MS is taking appropriate actions to help with the problem. They're both trying to fix their Windows code (not bugs, but holes--there is a difference) and also helping with detection/removal. The first is their problem, the second is due to malacious code exploiters. So, in essence, MS is paying huge sums of money for mistakes that the malicious code exploiters are committing--seems kind of benevolent to me. I DO NOT see any of the LINSUX crowd writing software that goes through a typical LINSUX distrubtion and identifies holes/spyware.

And if we a relucky (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 10 years ago | (#11298502)

thats all they'll do.
That said, at least they are doing something, even if it is only buying something.
Of course using it to have people prove they aren't guilty of copyright infringement is a little scummy. At least people can click no.

Just tried to install this MS AntiSpyware (5, Interesting)

benzapp (464105) | about 10 years ago | (#11298381)

and apparently their detection of license keys has greatly improved... my key is invalid.

Anyone else have this problem using their obscure key of choice? SP2 installed fine a few months ago.

Re:Just tried to install this MS AntiSpyware (5, Informative)

Chemical (49694) | about 10 years ago | (#11298478)

You can download without having to validate your license. Just select, the "No, leave me the hell alone" option when downloading.

isn't it odd (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298384)

isn't it odd that MS finds the most... perhaps they know all this issues with their software and know what should, and should not be there. :)

Re:isn't it odd (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298519)

I doubt MS has done many changes to the code other than cosmetic and feature removal (since the features were provided elsewhere in Windows). Giant's software was already well-known for identifying things that Adaware and Spybot missed.

Just desserts? (1)

fisheye1969 (842355) | about 10 years ago | (#11298385)

Considering MS's lax attitude to virus controls (at least until recently), it's about time MS did something to make up for the ridiculous amounts of spyware out there.

Note that I'm not saying they are entirely responsible - but they did set up a lovely fertile environment for it to flourish. And I wonder if it will be available for free to spyware infested Windows users?

Seriously though, congrats to MS though for producing what seems to be a good product - the world really needs something to rid us of spammers, and it's something I think we all need to work together on.


New Product: C|al|s Soft-Tabs! (1)

JawzX (3756) | about 10 years ago | (#11298547)


Are you giving your sexual partner what she wants?

Inside job? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298390)

"Though still in beta, Microsoft AntiSpyware does an amazing job at detecting spyware by finding twice as many infected files as Ad-Aware and nearly three times as SpyBot."

I find it hard to believe that an MS Beta program could do so much better than the competition, unless maybe there is some inside knowledge shared between the Ad/spyware people, MS, and their antispyware developers. MS surely has the money to orchestrate such a feat. Why else would it be so much better than everything else that's out?

Okay, I know it's an acquisition, so it's not really MS developing it, so there is an outside chance that those ppl are really just that much better than everyone else at what they do. But isn't it highly suspect in a field when someone else advances so much farther in front of everyone else? Maybe they've sold their souls to satan or are unlocking the secrets of alien technology recovered from the ruins of a crash site?

VERY much of an aquisition (1)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | about 10 years ago | (#11298471)

Under TaskManager, it still shows as "GIANTAntiSpywareMain.exe". No mention of Microsoft.

different from giant? (0)

mgkimsal2 (200677) | about 10 years ago | (#11298398)

Is this much different than what the results were/would have been comparing spybot vs the product giant had before MS bought them?

Has MS added that much value in a short time to make it head and shoulders above the rest? Or was Giant just that much better anyway (which is probably why MS would have bought them in the first place)?

Finding more isn't necessarily good (2, Interesting)

harlows_monkeys (106428) | about 10 years ago | (#11298399)

What we've seen where I work, with our antivirus/antispyware product is that if we miss something that AdAware of Spybot finds, then poeple say we are ineffective, and if we find something that they miss, people say we are generating false positives in order to frighten people into buying. (And then, when the thing we found that Spybot or AdAware missed actually causes problems, they say we put it there and start saying we pushing spyware).

A lot of people, especially on the popular antispyware forums, have simply decided that Spybot and AdAware are the best that there can possibly be, and anything that differs from them in bad.

Of course it finds more PUS (1)

killmenow (184444) | about 10 years ago | (#11298420)

Ad-Aware doesn't detect all those files from OpenOffice.org, Firefox, Mozilla, etc...

I'm going to bite and try this out (2, Interesting)

drgath159 (821707) | about 10 years ago | (#11298429)

I liked how it politely asked if I wanted to validate Windows
"Before obtaining the requested download, please take a moment to validate your genuine Microsoft Windows installation. Validation assures that you are running an authentic and fully-licensed copy of Windows. Validating now will enable faster access to genuine Windows downloads upon future visits to the Download Center. Please see the Why Validate? page to learn more about the Windows Genuine Advantage program and why validation is recommended."
Obviously clicked no.

False Findings (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298436)

I personally installed MS's new tool last night on my laptop and admittedly it did find more than Spybot, Ad-Aware or even a nifty one I sometimes use, SpySweeper. I can say that MS has come up with a winner.

Although, along with the real spyware, it found some "Adware Bundlers" such as KazaaLite, E-Mule and even TightVNC. This may mean that some of the claims of "twice or three times as many spyware files" should be taken with a grain of salt.

This begs the question... (0, Flamebait)

Zestius (526143) | about 10 years ago | (#11298440)

..did MS perhaps create some of these spywares themselves?

Ugh (1)

AdityaG (842691) | about 10 years ago | (#11298441)

Besides the usual blind skepticism and pathetic attempts at trying to be funny, there has been no real discussion here. Then again, that's not new. The article says that Microsoft's product does a better job. Why can't people accept this? I am sure if the product was my Company X or Apple, people would fall on their knees and worship it.

The whore on the corner is selling condoms (0, Flamebait)

HiyaPower (131263) | about 10 years ago | (#11298442)

Personally, I find it offensive that this company has designed software that is so poor that it may be exploited in this manner. I have just had a multi-hour session prying out some of the junk that my daughter naively stuck on her machine. And now the same company is offering me another closed system to fix their earlier closed system? No thanks. I think I will stick with OSX and SUSE where ever I can.

Cry me a river (1, Insightful)

js3 (319268) | about 10 years ago | (#11298550)

MS leaves fixes to 3rd party. WAAAA!! why doesn't ms fix their own shit

MS releases patches to fix their product. WAAA!!! this patch broke my already broken system.

MS release tools to detect and fix malicious apps that ruin their product. WAAAA!! a lot of spam companies will go out of business

damned if you do, damned if you don't

They created the problem!!! (1)

Spackler (223562) | about 10 years ago | (#11298448)

Dudes, they made the problem, they left in the weak code, and now they are saying they can fix it best???

For some reason, I don't think I'll be trusting them to much.

Amazing video (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298450)

Check out the spyware video (https://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/spyware /video1.mspx)
and they'll explain you why M$ products are a piece of crap, it's quite funny how they manage security bugs to launch a new product.

spy vs spy (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 10 years ago | (#11298458)

Let's see the real deathmatch: shop for spyware as a sleazy spammer, paying for the best spyware installer malware available, then run that against MSAntiSpyWare, Ad-Aware and SpyBot. I bet the malware mafia comes out on top.

A new king of the hill, but... (1)

spywarearcata.com (841806) | about 10 years ago | (#11298459)

Webroot's product used to be the best, but now Microsoft's free product is better. For now.

But until a bright line separates unlawful adware and spyware from lawful, no product is going to beat Spyware.

Contrast to viruses and worms, which with very very few exceptions, are entirely unlawful and do not financially profit anyone. It is hard enough for the market leader Symantec to stay only epsilon behind the virus makers; with Spyware, which is both legally ambiguous and highly profitable, even the behemoth Microsoft will succumb to the Army ants.

Moral, we cannot rely upon a single company to protect us. We need a combination of laws, profit and non-profit organizations and financial disincentives to control the parasites.

Insecure Microsoft (1)

Tajas (785666) | about 10 years ago | (#11298470)

I tried clicking on the link from Firefox for the MS AntiSpyware crap and Firefox wouldn't allow without me allowing temporary access with a possibly invalid security certificate.

Anyone else having this happen to them?

How can we even begin to trust a company that can't trust itself?

Fix your certs MSFT!!!

Re:Insecure Microsoft (1)

Arondylos (141298) | about 10 years ago | (#11298553)

Looking at the certificate, it seems it is a valid certificate, but signed by MSFT. Most non-Microsoft browsers do not by default trust MS' root certificate.

MS would have to have their cert signed by Verisign or something like that; or it could ignore the few percent of non-MSIE users that do not click through the cert warnings anyway.

yeah... (1)

mr_tommy (619972) | about 10 years ago | (#11298486)

It's a pretty poor article offering at best a cursorary look at MS's offering. To sum it up in a few words : Yeah, Microsoft's new anti-spyware solution works; but you knew that without reading th earticle.

Parent is a Troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298497)

This was posted just to piss people off and give more publicity for M$. The application is from Giant, not M$, ok???

Re:and Linsux is really Unix, so? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298551)

Your point being? MS never hid the fact they purchased Giant's software. Many applaud this as another proactive step MS has taken in order to help the common user avert infection by malicious developers. Oooh, all the spyware and viruses are probably a Linsux community conspiracy to degrade MS software and thus promote OSS crap.

This isn't really MS antispyware (5, Informative)

mutilated_cattle (846847) | about 10 years ago | (#11298499)

MS just bought giant AS and rebranded their product as Microsoft. As far as I can tell there's very little change to the program itself beyond the branding.

Giant has always been among the top antispyware products, as evidenced by Failing Grades for most anti-spyware tools [slashdot.org] so this "MS should know their own security holes better than anyone" stuff isn't strictly relevant. I think MS should foucus more on fixing the secuity problems in IE that are responsible for 90%+ of spyware infections rather than sticking plaster over the holes by buying up anti-spyware solutions. Is this even going to be free when it's released?

Personally I prefer webroot spysweeper anyway, Giant has always generated too many false positives for me.

yep it really works (1)

js3 (319268) | about 10 years ago | (#11298504)

I always thought my pc was well protected, mcafee antivirus, router, no porn sites (I'm a developer so it takes a lot to fool me) and yet ms antispyware found a file that contained a trojan on one of my drives. Last night when I was about to shut own my computer it gave a warning about the asus probe utility using "fishy" methods to ensure it run on startup

Unfair (1)

Turn-X Alphonse (789240) | about 10 years ago | (#11298510)

Who here only uses 1 or the other of spybot and adaware? Most people know adaware and spybot pick up different things. Hence putting them together VS Microsoft would be a better judge.

but what about aol? (1)

macsox (236590) | about 10 years ago | (#11298513)

i know this sounds like heresy, and i'm embarrassed to ask -- but does anyone know how effective these tools are in relation to the one that comes with the new version of AOL?
the reason i ask is that, like many of you, i am the CIO of my family, and my family is at the lower end of the spectrum that defines excellent computer using. a few family members have AOL, so i'm curious as to whether it saves me time and headaches to use the AOL tool as opposed to another. because if i have to spend half my christmas fixing dad's xp home that my sister installed kazaa on, i'd like to get back to the egg nog as soon as possible.

I had different results (1)

jd142 (129673) | about 10 years ago | (#11298515)

I tested a test lab computer at work. No special attempt to infect it, just running a lot of test freeware and average junk.

The MS product found 3 problems: tightvnc, iMesh infecting every file in my Oracle client directory !!!, and a third one I can't remember. Spybot on the same computer found about 10 things, all different.

So in my little test, MS did pretty poorly. I'm sure that every file in the c:\orahome directory was not infected with adware. And it missed quite a bit that spybot found.

The best that can be said for the Giant/MS product is that it tells you if it finds vnc installed. If it tells you when it finds servU or other ftp products, it will be a useful tool, but I'll stick with Spybot too.

flexbeta spyware reviews suck (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#11298517)

flexbeta.net has the most un-scientific, half-assed reviews ive ever seen, why is slashdot pandering to anonymous submissions from the website's own operator?

Thier last spyware review compared the number of files or components reported by each spyware removal application as the benchmark. The problem is each tool reports files and components in different ways. The end result is just comparing the number of spyware components each product "reports", not the actual number of spyware suites removed......complete rubish of a review.

I, for one... (2, Interesting)

Big Nothing (229456) | about 10 years ago | (#11298524)

I, for one, welcome our new anti-spyware overlords.


Yes, it would be better if all the security holes in M$ SW were fixed but guess what: they're not gonna be fixed tomorrow. A good anti-spyware tool is sorely needed. I've cleaned a large number of home and office computers using a number of anti-spyware tools and frankly none of the cut it. At best, some of them suck a little bit less than the rest. I find that at least 3 separate tools are needed to find, clean and keep clean a normal luser's puter. If M$ can come up with a tool that is efficient, free and automagically upgradeable I'd sure as hell cheer.

Specific Firefox / Mozilla protection (1)

bstadil (7110) | about 10 years ago | (#11298526)

Spyware blaster has a seperate section for Explorer and Mozilla/FF protection. Anyone know if this is the is the same for the MS products.

I wouldn't be surprised if somehow the MS spyware removal tool fails to fix anything Moz related.

Too many hits (2, Funny)

tehshen (794722) | about 10 years ago | (#11298536)

There is a problem with the database that is preventing the site from working.
An email has been sent to the administrator notifying them of the problem. Please try again later.

They're letting us slashdot their mail server too?

Apparently RealVNC is spyware (1)

drgath159 (821707) | about 10 years ago | (#11298542)

Glad MS Anti-spyware advised me of that. How come the other remote utility on my computer, Remote Desktop, wasn't detected too? Oh wait... that's right.

VNC, etc (1)

unix_geek_512 (810627) | about 10 years ago | (#11298544)

MS "anti-spyware" listed VNC as spyware with a horrible explanation of what it was.

It looks like MS is already labeling software they do not like / approve of as "spyware" which is unethical at the very least and illegal if you consider the anti-trust implications.

It is good! (2, Funny)

Further82 (720625) | about 10 years ago | (#11298546)

It even detected and removed Firefox and my Linux partition. Ad-aware missed those.

Of course MS finds spyware... (1)

Krunaldo (779385) | about 10 years ago | (#11298549)

Did they finnaly decide that IE and activeX was spy ware or what?

How long? (1)

ArbitraryConstant (763964) | about 10 years ago | (#11298552)

Until companies pay off Microsoft to allow their spyware to be installed?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?