Microsoft Anti-Spyware Beta1

I went ahead and downloaded this today, mostly to try and get rid of my spyware. I've been fairly religious about running spybot and adaware weekly to keep it spyware to a minimum (on top of using firefox).

This found approximately 62 spyware threats. Including some Peper bugs that even the peper remover hadn't found. I'm bound and determined to beat this spyware stuff...
 
Installed it on two computers and it found 2 spyware registry entries and one browser hijack entry that Spysweeper, spybot and spyblaster missed or failed to block. Using with WinXP SP2. So far pretty happy with the beta
 
I am also fairly impressed. I hope it stays free. It found things that spybot, ad-aware, and CWShredder didn't clean.
 
Looks like it goes to a fee based program mid 2005. Will continue to test it out against SpySweeper to see which paid version I keep. So far like MS the best.
 
MaxGhz said:
Looks like it goes to a fee based program mid 2005. Will continue to test it out against SpySweeper to see which paid version I keep. So far like MS the best.
Click to expand...

I'm assuming you're referring to the expiration date of the beta. That's not because it's going to a fee-based system, it's because MS doesn't want everyone using beta1 when beta2 and the final come out. Expiring the product forces an upgrade.
 
wow, charging money to fix the mistakes THEY made when designing the operating system...


damn capitolism
 
Verge said:
wow, charging money to fix the mistakes THEY made when designing the operating system...


damn capitolism
Click to expand...

Just like there soon to be antivirus....
 
Verge said:
wow, charging money to fix the mistakes THEY made when designing the operating system...
Click to expand...
Yes, M$ sucks! long live open source!!


Get real, there is no way MS could predict every loop hole hackers are going to find in their software. There's no OS out there that fool proof to spyware, and there will always be a new flaw to be found...

I give that some flaws are pretty obvious (ie RPC) but i cant recall a case where MS didnt post a fix before the flaw was exploited (the was a fix for blaster before it appeared...)
 
while anything that can be coded can be cracked
and while every OS will have flaws
(though some very few like BSD, but largely because they are so specialized)

Microsoft specifically IE is far more insecure that it needs be
this stems from two basic reasons in my mind
one its shell integration
and two Microsoft's insistance on Active-X

Ive ammended my Security FAQ to reflect this
specifically instructing the reader to lockout access to IE in all accounts except the administrative account (with NTFS permissions),
and then then only to employ it to access Microsoft directly

Ive argued for an automatic update that cripples WSH and Active-X for over a year now
technologies that the average user has no business employing as they are obviously incapable of securing them or learning how

of course Im being somewhat disingenuous right now
as Im making $$ disinfecting this box for a client :p
 
Ice Czar said:
of course Im being somewhat disingenuous right now
as Im making $$ disinfecting this box for a client :p
Click to expand...
amen brother...


though i agree that MS does leaves it kinda easy for hackers... People make it seem as if MS meant for hackers to enter their OS...
 
Ice Czar said:
while anything that can be coded can be cracked
and while every OS will have flaws
(though some very few like BSD, but largely because they are so specialized)
Click to expand...
Let's not forget the RPC debacle originated from libraries originally located in BSD. ;)

Ice Czar said:
Microsoft specifically IE is far more insecure that it needs be
this stems from two basic reasons in my mind
one its shell integration
and two Microsoft's insistance on Active-X
Click to expand...
The thing is, if MS decided tomorrow to be done with ActiveX, a bunch of very large companies would be very angry with MS, as they employ ActiveX with impunity.

Ice Czar said:
Ive argued for an automatic update that cripples WSH and Active-X for over a year now
technologies that the average user has no business employing as they are obviously incapable of securing them or learning how
Click to expand...
I agree about ActiveX, but WSH is quite simple for an end user to make use of.

of course Im being somewhat disingenuous right now
as Im making $$ disinfecting this box for a client :p
Click to expand...
Heh... we all have to put in our time with that, man. Nothing disingenuous about dealing with that shit. :)
 
Phoenix86 said:
FYI this does not ID cookies, for what it's worth...
Click to expand...
Does anyone use default cookie handling?
Block the 3rd party cookies, and prompt for 1st party.
 
GreNME said:
The thing is, if MS decided tomorrow to be done with ActiveX, a bunch of very large companies would be very angry with MS, as they employ ActiveX with impunity.
Click to expand...

well then some sort of serious warning, whenever permission to install is requested
perferably with flashing lights a siren and big flashing type

DangerWillRobinson_275_275.jpg

DANGER
WILL ROBINSON
DANGER

:p
 
Ice Czar:

I agree completely. It would actually be kinda cool if it did. :D
 
It did find some minibug thing. Only thing I had installed was weatherfox. Thought that was adware free. Uninstalled weatherfox - reran - no minibug. Guess it came from there... can't confirm. I installed newest ForcastFox or whatever it's called and it didn't find anything.

It tagged DameWare as a high threat. It's basically like PC anywhere or Remote desktop. Thought that was really weird. Found several things S&D and Ad-aware did NOT find. However it still couldn't fix a newly released piece of spyware that one user had. I finally had to boot to safe mode and run spysweeper a few times before I was able to completely clean off the pc. BTW - Spysweeper found several things that S&D, Ad-aware, and MS did NOT find. I can't for the life of me remember the name of the spyware that was installed that kept starting and restarting but it was a biznich to remove.

MS finds potentially unwanted programs. Surprised firefox wasn’t listed. :) On a side note, McAfee finds the remote process starter included with a SysInternals program as a threat. Things like this could become a nuisance. We’ll see.
 
I also tried this program... and it seems to work good, found 18 things (some were just traces) that the other two Big spyware remover programs did'nt find.

But, and here's the funny thing (irony).

It told me it had to shut down IE, and so it did.

After it finished, i started IE up again, and what do you know!!!!!! my homepage has been changed to www.msn.com ... The bastards!

Other then that, it seems to work good.

I agree also, that its not so much a problem with the OS, but rather specific things... such as people who don't even know what an ActiveX or java applet is.....

Im very happy with Windows XP pro.

Update: I also tried it on my dads computer (he uses SP2)... and it did not have to shut down IE... after the scan was compelte and it did'nt find anything, I opened up IE and it did NOT change his home page. Strange.
 
towert7 said:
After it finished, i started IE up again, and what do you know!!!!!! my homepage has been changed to www.msn.com ... The bastards!

Other then that, it seems to work good.
Click to expand...

If you activate the anti-hijacking settings, the program will set your IE home page by default to whatever entry you list in the program. The default is msn.com, but you can set it to just about anything.
 
intercede007 said:
Yes it does.

Advanced Tools / Tracks Eraser / Internet Explorer Cookies.
Click to expand...
That erases them all, not ID good vs. bad. The reason I posted is I scanned a known infected machine with MS AntiSpy, it IDed a few spyware apps, and removed them. I then installed SpySweeper (newest version, 3.5?) and scanned to see what it would find that MS AntiSpy didn't. This is a reverse check from what people are doing here, scanning a known previsouly infected, but clean machine, to see what their current software missed.

The results were good for MS AnitSpy, it didn't miss anything except bad cookies (tracker cookies). Yes, it can delete all cookies, but it doesn't tell me which ones are bad so I can keep the ones I want.

Verge said:
wow, charging money to fix the mistakes THEY made when designing the operating system...
Click to expand...
Confirmation?

j0k3r said:
Does anyone use default cookie handling?
Block the 3rd party cookies, and prompt for 1st party.
Click to expand...
Your joking right? Sadly yes... :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top