Spyware cleanup?

[Art]

kaspersky is still a company with a legal license to it. Unless they gave it
away to a company that is out of business. And you still have to agree to
their legally binding license to install it.

I would rather be legal. I'm cheap but would rather stay legal.

And you said you run a related business, so your attitude is both
understandable and admirable. I look at it from a realistic POV. It's
a shame that the best GUI version scanner Kaspersky ever produced
is no longer available except via a source such as sac. I'd like to
see people using it instead of the free av scanners available, since
it's far more effective and powerful.

OTOH, there may be cases where Kaspersky actually loses sales
of its new versions because of my actions. I doubt it, but it's a
possibility and a concern I do have. It's a sort of catch-22 whereby
too much success of my promotional efforts of version 3.5 backfires.

Because of that, I'll probably withdraw the special updater for
version 3.5 download in the next day or two. It's certainly not
my intent to steer users to 3.5 _instead of_ purchasing some av
that uses the Kaspersky scan engine.

Art

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

 

[Brook Humphrey]

And you said you run a related business, so your attitude is both
understandable and admirable. I look at it from a realistic POV. It's
a shame that the best GUI version scanner Kaspersky ever produced
is no longer available except via a source such as sac. I'd like to
see people using it instead of the free av scanners available, since
it's far more effective and powerful.

suer my main concern is that if I use a tool for celaning systems I want it
to be legal. I dont resell kaspersky. I resell nod32 and have also been
asking questions of these companies if it ok to use it as I do but so far
neither eset nor kaspersky has given an answer. Untill them I'm using tools
like the drweb cleaner. It is completely free for use with no restrictions.
It works well enough for my needs although I would rather run nod or
kaspersky, With drweb there is still more work to do by hand that nod or
kasperky would catch more of.

OTOH, there may be cases where Kaspersky actually loses sales
of its new versions because of my actions. I doubt it, but it's a
possibility and a concern I do have. It's a sort of catch-22 whereby
too much success of my promotional efforts of version 3.5 backfires.

Because of that, I'll probably withdraw the special updater for
version 3.5 download in the next day or two. It's certainly not
my intent to steer users to 3.5 _instead of_ purchasing some av
that uses the Kaspersky scan engine.

Art

I do agree that kasperky is a good engine which is why I looking at
reselling it also. I'm currently beta testing the 2006 version and seeing
how it performs. So far I'm really happy with it. Well not including beta
bugs but performance and features are nice.

Indeed it would be nice if they would just make the 3.5 a free version with
limited functionality. This does not seem to be kaspersky's way or doing
business though. So I'm doubtfull.

 

[Art]

suer my main concern is that if I use a tool for celaning systems I want it
to be legal. I dont resell kaspersky. I resell nod32 and have also been
asking questions of these companies if it ok to use it as I do but so far
neither eset nor kaspersky has given an answer. Untill them I'm using tools
like the drweb cleaner. It is completely free for use with no restrictions.
It works well enough for my needs although I would rather run nod or
kaspersky, With drweb there is still more work to do by hand that nod or
kasperky would catch more of.

Many use the command line version of McAfee, which is another very
good scan engine. Dave Lipman has put together his Multi-AV which
includes this, plus Trend's Sysclean, KAVDOS32 and a Sophos offering:

http://www.ik-cs.com/programs/virtools/Multi_AV.exe

I do agree that kasperky is a good engine which is why I looking at
reselling it also. I'm currently beta testing the 2006 version and seeing
how it performs. So far I'm really happy with it. Well not including beta
bugs but performance and features are nice.

Indeed it would be nice if they would just make the 3.5 a free version with
limited functionality. This does not seem to be kaspersky's way or doing
business though. So I'm doubtfull.

That would be best for everyone. They could remove the realtime
monitor and offer it as a "free for personal use" on-demand scanner
like Bit Defender has done. However, such scanners aren't legal for
those using them as a tool for profit I wouldn't think. Seems someone
like you needs tools that can be licensed for use in their businesses.
I'm not aware of any such arrangements. Actually, technicians can
easily find cracks and use whatever antivirus products they choose
illegally. I suppose that practice is widespread.

Art

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

 

[Brook Humphrey]

That would be best for everyone. They could remove the realtime
monitor and offer it as a "free for personal use" on-demand scanner
like Bit Defender has done. However, such scanners aren't legal for
those using them as a tool for profit I wouldn't think. Seems someone
like you needs tools that can be licensed for use in their businesses.
I'm not aware of any such arrangements. Actually, technicians can
easily find cracks and use whatever antivirus products they choose
illegally. I suppose that practice is widespread.

Art

yes it is unfortunately. I'm also against such practices. It also means
those of us wanting to be legit are put in a very curious position. I have
been in touch as stated before though to see about getting some kind of
roving license or such that would allow for use in cleaning systems.

Really all this is in the companies best interests as when the customer sees
how bad off the system was and how good a job some of the other scanners do
then they are interested in purchase at least sometimes. It is a sale at
any rate that would have never been made.

 

[Art]

yes it is unfortunately. I'm also against such practices. It also means
those of us wanting to be legit are put in a very curious position. I have
been in touch as stated before though to see about getting some kind of
roving license or such that would allow for use in cleaning systems.

Really all this is in the companies best interests as when the customer sees
how bad off the system was and how good a job some of the other scanners do
then they are interested in purchase at least sometimes. It is a sale at
any rate that would have never been made.

I contacted Eugene Kaspersky, asking him if there were any plans to
offer a "free for personal use" on-demand scanner. Apparently, his
answer was "no". He simply pointed to the fact that version 6 personal
is modularized and one can use only the on-demand module and updater
if he so chooses. He also pointed out that they have their free
on-line scanning service.

I've just taken another look at version 6 personal Beta, and while it
takes some adjustments and re-learning on the part of the user, I
have to say the flexibility of options is there. Probably at some
point in the near future I'll wean myself off version 3.5 and start
using version 6.

Art

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

 

[Brook Humphrey]

I've just taken another look at version 6 personal Beta, and while it
takes some adjustments and re-learning on the part of the user, I
have to say the flexibility of options is there. Probably at some
point in the near future I'll wean myself off version 3.5 and start
using version 6.

Art

After being a nod reseller and liking nod32 very much for it's low resource
usage I was not really interested in kaspersky 4 or 5 from all the horror
stories I had heard. I have to say though through my 2006 beta testing I
have been quite happy with it and the resource usage seeems to be very
reasonable considering I am using kis and not kav. Besides they still have
a few months left to get rid of all the bugs before release.

 

[Art]

After being a nod reseller and liking nod32 very much for it's low resource
usage I was not really interested in kaspersky 4 or 5 from all the horror
stories I had heard. I have to say though through my 2006 beta testing I
have been quite happy with it and the resource usage seeems to be very
reasonable considering I am using kis and not kav. Besides they still have
a few months left to get rid of all the bugs before release.

Version 6 ignores files already scanned in order to gain speed
performance. I don't particularly care for that approach, but I'll
probably wind up learning to live with it. I have no interest in
NOD32, though it has been improving. I prefer using a scanner
which has a broad range of detection capabilities. For example, KAV's
ability to scan within install/setup files and archives is unmatched.
So is its ability to detect a wide variety of malware. I use KAV
on-demand only. Never have needed realtime monitoring
of any kind.

Anyway, I did make a sales pitch to Eugene this morning on the
beneifits I see of him doing a free on-demand scanner. Remains
to be seen whether or not he'll even respond I tried to point
out the free advertising aspect since many of us would be highly
recommending KAV on the newsgroups. Also, I doubt most users
would be satisfied using a scanner without a realtime monitor. So
I see it as a likely net gain in business if he decides to do it. They
don't have to support it since that would be done be knowledgable
people on forums and newsgroups.

Art

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg