Ad-Aware AE (Anniversary Edition)

[YoKenny]

ardvark, if you are interested in my opinion it found nothing but my cookies I want to keep with the Quick scan.

I have hpHosts and MVPS HOSTS file installed and after two hours of its Full scan that was interrogating the HOSTS file at about 1 every 2 seconds I canceled it. 

I have un-installed it.

It is a shame as Ad-Aware was my introduction into the whole field of malware fighting back in 2000 although then it was known as spyware or adware.

It has not kept up with the times.

I like Windows Defender and WinPatrol. 

[ardvark]

ardvark, if you are interested in my opinion

Hi YoKenny...

Yes, I am. Thank you for sharing this with me.

It is a shame as Ad-Aware was my introduction into the whole field of malware fighting back in 2000 although then it was known as spyware or adware.

It has not kept up with the times.

Mine too, believe it or not, and in the same time frame as well, 2000-2001, with version 4.6. I didn't realize the problems with it today were this extensive.

I like Windows Defender 

Me too. It is my program of choice with my clientel as well. In part because it's...

1. Free
2. Offers realtime scanning
3. Easily configured and complexity is kept to a minimum.

Thanks, YoKenny!

May God Bless you!

[Bellzemos]

Another question...

Do you recommend SpywareBlaster with Avast, SAS and MBAM? Is it worth having SpywareBlaster installed? Cons/pros? Has anyone had any issues with it? Thank you! 

[YoKenny]

SpywareBlaster is good to have and it is passive but you need to check at least once every two weeks (fortnight for the UK blokes) for an update.

I don't use SAS but it is good.

I use MBAM Fee version but I do not let it automatically update nor run a Quick scan because I prefer to do it manually when I choose.

[ardvark]

Another question...

Do you recommend SpywareBlaster with Avast, SAS and MBAM? Is it worth having SpywareBlaster installed? Cons/pros? Has anyone had any issues with it? Thank you! 

Hi....

Yes, absolutely! I've not experienced any major problems with it in the years I have worked with it and it one of the programs I use on a regular basis with my clientel. The only issue I have come across with it a couple times was that it had a difficult time loading the definitions on Firefox and I had to repeatedly click "enable all protection" two or three times before they would "stick." However, there may have been other issues that were causing this rather that SpywareBlaster. Also, if you using Windows 98 and do not have the file MSVBVM60.DLL installed on your system, SpywareBlaster will come up with an error message stating that this file is needed to run the program. If you are running this particular OS and don't have this file, you can download a copy here...

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=7B9BA261-7A9C-43E7-9117-F673077FFB3C&displaylang=en

SpywareBlaster is indeed worth having and is a good supplement to the security software you are currently using.

May God Bless you!

[normishmael]

Yes,if the free edition of SuperAntiSpyware is set to NOT start with Windows,
the right click context scan does not work.
(However,you can hit the program shortcut,and start the process,do your right click scan,and the close the program through the little beetle icon in your tray.)
 Also,on the SuperAntiSpyware forum, they recommend the program be allowed to start with Windows,not only for the context scan functionality,but also because some malware can prevent security apps from starting.
The running process helps avoid this.

[Bellzemos]

I have 2 more questions...

1. I use Firefox for internet browsing. How SpywareBlaster handles Firefox updates? If Firefox updates itself, will SpywareBlaster still work right with the new FF version? I heard about some problems with FF/SB combination... Do you use Firefox with SpywareBlaster? Any problems?

2. Has SpywareBlaster many "false positives" - meaning it won't allow me to go to web sites that are clean, but "accidentaly" flagged as malicious by Spywareblaster? Is that a common/rare occurance?

Thank you!

[normishmael]

I have 2 more questions...

1. I use Firefox for internet browsing. How SpywareBlaster handles Firefox updates? If Firefox updates itself, will SpywareBlaster still work right with the new FF version? I heard about some problems with FF/SB combination... Do you use Firefox with SpywareBlaster? Any problems?

2. Has SpywareBlaster many "false positives" - meaning it won't allow me to go to web sites that are clean, but "accidentaly" flagged as malicious by Spywareblaster? Is that a common/rare occurance?


Hi Bellzemos.
 I have had the same SpyWareBlaster installation through at least two Firefox updates,with no problems related to updating.
I have had the problems with losing restricted site protection for some entries for
Firefox in SpywareBlaster.
Link to unresolved thread on this issue in their forum below:
http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=229360

I thank the site blocking list is pretty well maintained.
so false blocking has never been a problem for me.

[Bellzemos]

I have had the problems with losing restricted site protection for some entries for Firefox in SpywareBlaster.

What do you mean with this? I don't understand... Thanx! 

[normishmael]

Bellzemos,I am sorry,I was not more clear.
SpywareBlaster offers restricted site protection,in a manner similar to a extended host file.
In a normal case,when SpywareBlaster updates,a few new sites are added to the block list,and after downloading the update,you simply "enable all protection" to add the new sites to your list.
For some reason,some sites,30-40 in the Antivirus 2008-2009 family, were reverting to a unprotected state.
As thousands of people no doubt use the same combination of on demand scanners as I did,without problems,i feel it must be something unique to my system.
As it was not time proximate to a Firefox update,I do not thank that had any effect
on my problem.
I was somewhat disappointed that my help thread was simply abandoned by Java-cool.
In any event,I now use only A-Squared free as a on-demand scanner,and have had no more problems with restricted site protection loss in SpywareBlaster.
To be honest SpywareBlaster is more important for users of IE,than Firefox,but I did not mean to discourage you from using it.

[Bellzemos]

Thank you. I have installed it. 

[prettychinita]

In any event,I now use only A-Squared free as a on-demand scanner,and have had no more problems with restricted site protection loss in SpywareBlaster.
To be honest SpywareBlaster is more important for users of IE,than Firefox,but I did not mean to discourage you from using it.

Hi normishmael! I just read ur response from the topic I posted with regards to A-Squared Free.. Just a question though, u said u now use A-Squared Free instead of SpywareBlaster.. Does that mean using both AS and SB would conflict each other? Or its ok to have both apps installed since SB (SpwareBlaster) is a passive program anyway?

[normishmael]

Hello prettychinita!

No,There is no conflict with A-Squared Free and SpyWareblaster.
They work fine together.
I still have them both on my computer.
It was Malwarebytes and SuperAntiSpyWare that I removed,but not
because of any proven conflict,just trimming where I can.

As far as Avast,its really pretty hard to find something it does not run well with.

[coppertrail]

I have 5 Antispyware apps on my machine, all of which have resident scanning disabled (including AdAware 2009 AE). The only resident scanner I run is Avast!

[DavidR]

Well you can certainly get too much of a good thing and 5 anti-spyware (AS) applications would certainly come under that heading. Though you don't say what the other four are I would say AdAware doesn't bring anything special to the party.

Apart from the you also become a salve to them in having to keep them all up to date multiple resident applications of the same category like AS or AV could conflict with one and other as even when resident functionality is disabled they may have drivers loaded.