PC World testing antispyware !?

[plun]

"The biggest disappointment was Sunbelt Software's CounterSpy ($20),
our former Best Buy. CounterSpy removed only 66 percent of total
spyware components, down from 85 percent in our last review.
Microsoft's free Windows AntiSpyware beta also removed only 66 percent
of total spyware components. The similarity is not surprising, since
the two products share technology from Giant Company Software, an
anti-spyware firm that Microsoft acquired in December 2004."

http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,122496,pg,2,00.asp

- From top to medium ?

- Nothing about what they "injected" ? "Ignores" ?

- Some more faults about RTP when I read it.

This test result is nevertheless strange ? But from these newsgroups
we can see that several users has indeed problem with some infections.

 

[Bill Sanderson]

Rather than feeling that they are ignoring more stuff, I would suggest that
the spyware folks are getting ahead of the older antispyware
technology--i.e. they've probed the limits of the Giant scheme, and figured
out how to work around it.

Both Sunbelt and Microsoft have new beta products which will improve on this
record, I'm quite sure. I know some reading this forum have worked with the
Sunbelt beta, and we know Microsoft will release their beta2 later this
year. I'd hold off on judgements until we can see released versions of
those newer generation products compared.

 

[plun]

Hi Bill

This is an important test but the lack of information about what
"infections" they used for this test is really bad.

Some "medicine" can have severe other problems for a cure ..

So this will probably be discussed beacuse IDG-PC World is "big".

 

[Bill Sanderson]

That would be a good thing to find out--I believe that when antivirus's are
tested, good reviewer use a standardized set of viruses. This is tougher in
the antispyware area, because of the lack of industry cooperation and
standardization of definitions, but something must be possible.

--

 

[plun]

Hi

Yup, and therefore it´s important to know what PC World
tested.

I am sure that Mr Eckelberry, Sunbelt are going to find out that

I am in a defense position about MSAS within an other forum

--
plun



Bill Sanderson used his keyboard to write :

That would be a good thing to find out--I believe that when antivirus's are
tested, good reviewer use a standardized set of viruses. This is tougher in
the antispyware area, because of the lack of industry cooperation and
standardization of definitions, but something must be possible.

--

 

[Bill Sanderson]

I guess I should go back and read the review a bit more. One clear defense
for both products is that I don't believe this review looked at the
effectiveness of real-time protection. I think it looked primarily at
cleaning ability.

Both are important, but real-time protection in a free product is a strength
of Microsoft Antispyware.



--

 

[plun]

Bill Sanderson wrote on 2005-10-17 :

Both are important, but real-time protection in a free product is a strength
of Microsoft Antispyware.

Hi

Yes, that´s the key to this, some apps only detects keyfiles and
stops malware from installing.

TrendMicro for example detects Nail.exe and stops further infection.

MSAS is doing the same for a lot of severe infections but have some
trouble with cleanings afterwards if it already is installed.

But Mr Sunbelt will for sure check this

 

[Walterius]

real-time protection in a free product is a strength
of Microsoft Antispyware.

Quite so. IMHO it is beter at RTP than at detecting and removing malware.
Hopefully, the remover will improve so it is equal to the RTP.

Incidentally, it and Spywae Guard are so diligent about catching malware
install attempts that I feel safer now than ever before. Yay MSFT! Yay SG!

Walterius,
Old and safer and Fort Lauderdale.

 

[Bill Sanderson]

Incidentally, it and Spywae Guard are so diligent about catching malware
install attempts that I feel safer now than ever before. Yay MSFT! Yay SG!

That's what they want to hear--I'm not sure I can say that, but then, I felt
pretty safe before.

I got a paper phish in the mail on Saturday--pretty impressive--mailed from
Toronto with a very realistic check for 2,186.73 in it, and a letter asking
me to get in touch with the international lottery claims agents, etc....

I really can't see any obvious catch, but I think the chances of the check
actually being good are quite small--in any case, I sent it off to the
postal inspectors for their opinion.

 

[Dave M]

Well you never know Bill... Mom got a letter about winning a free trip to
anywhere in the world. I'm thinking scam, right? ...and guess what?... I got to
tag along to the Russian Far East with her on an Eco-Tour... So Good Luck...
Lets have a party, if it's real.

 

[Bill Sanderson]

If it's real, I'll post back here!

--

Well you never know Bill... Mom got a letter about winning a free trip to
anywhere in the world. I'm thinking scam, right? ...and guess what?... I
got to tag along to the Russian Far East with her on an Eco-Tour... So
Good Luck... Lets have a party, if it's real.