I currently use these products (and a few others) on my computer:
Ad-Aware SE Personal
Spybot Search & Destroy
Spyware Blaster (not a scanner - a preventer) (I update manually as
needed)
Spyware Guard (not a scanner - a preventer)
I have used the MS beta version of Giant AntiSpyware but found it caused
unnecessary problems with my computer so I'm not prepared to use it
again until MS actually release the full version.
I also run a host file and have a large collections of nasty websites in
my 'restricted sites' zone in IE which limits what they can do if I was
to accidentally open those sites. I don't find spyware or adware on my
computer. I do a scan now and then but it is usually clean except for a
collection of cookies which are generally harmless.
I recommend the above programs to people because they are all free. A
lot of the programs listed below you actually have to pay for them and
based on the outcomes from testing, they would be a complete waste of
money. I am suffiently knowledgeable enough to remove any spyware/adware
that I find. I thought I would pass on the info as a public service.
Enjoy the read.
http://windowssecrets.com/050127/
Anti-adware misses most malware
By Brian Livingston
Now that 80% of home PCs in the U.S. are infected with adware and
spyware, according to one study, it turns out that nearly every
anti-adware application on the market catches less than half of the bad
stuff.
That's the conclusion of a remarkably comprehensive series of
anti-adware tests conducted recently by Eric Howes, an instructor at the
University of Illinois.
Howes, a well-known researcher among PC security professionals,
collected 20 different anti-adware applications. He then infected a
fresh install of Windows 2000 SP4 and Office 2000 SP3 with several dozen
adware programs in separate stages. Finally, he counted how many active
adware components were removed by each anti-adware product.
(Note: I use the single term "adware" in this article to refer to both
"adware" and "spyware." Since it's not necessary for a spyware program
to "call home" to be disruptive, the distinction between adware and
spyware is meaningless. All such programs display ads or generate
revenue for the adware maker in some other way. )
Howes's tests were conducted over a period of weeks in October 2004. His
results were mentioned at the time in several places, including Slashdot
and eWeek.
Unbelievably, however, none of these commentators bothered to print a
simple chart showing which anti-adware application did the best job at
removing the unwanted components. Even Howes himself hasn't posted such
a summary. In a telephone interview, Howes exhibited both modesty and
perfectionism, implying that his work wasn't yet done to his
satisfaction - despite the fact that his tests are some of the most
extensive I've ever seen.
Howes's test results sprawl over six long Web pages, with no overall
totals or summary of the figures. It's a daunting body of data, but its
bottom line is explosive. Adware seems to be evolving much faster than
anti-adware, and the battle is so far being won by the adware side.
For this issue of the Windows Secrets Newsletter, therefore, I've
complied Howes's figures into a straightforward chart, shown below. I
removed five products that didn't complete all of Howes's tests for a
variety of reasons. What's left is a revealing rating, from the top to
the bottom of the anti-adware heap.
Each anti-adware application, according to Howe, removed a certain
percentage of "critical" adware components. These are executable .exe
and .com files, dynamic link library (.dll) files, and Windows Registry
entries (autorun commands and the like).
Almost all the anti-adware programs that were tested removed fewer than
half of the hundreds of adware components Howes cataloged. The best at
removing adware was Giant AntiSpyware, but even that program removed
less than two-thirds of a PC's unwanted guests.
Giant AntiSpyware catches 63%, tests say
Howes's tests were conducted before the Microsoft Corp. announced in
December that it was purchasing Giant Company Software outright. For
that reason, the tests use the version of Giant AntiSpyware that was
available in October and not the newer Microsoft beta version that's
currently available.
Even so, with Giant's application removing 63% of a PC's adware
components, and its nearest competitor, Webroot Spy Sweeper, removing
less than 50%, it's clear that Microsoft has a potential winner on its
hands.
In the following table, which was reviewed by Howes himself before its
publication here, the Adware Fixed column represents the percentage of
critical components successfully removed, not just detected, by each
product (higher percentages are better). The False Positives column
shows the number of benign Windows files that were incorrectly reported
by a product as adware (lower numbers are better):
Product Adware Fixed False Pos.
Giant AntiSpyware 63% 0
Webroot Spy Sweeper 48% 0
Ad-Aware SE Personal 47% 0
Pest Patrol 41% 10
SpywareStormer 35% 0
Intermute SpySubtract Pro 34% 0
PC Tools Spyware Doctor 33% 0
Spybot Search & Destroy 33% 0
McAfee AntiSpyware 33% 9
Xblock X-Cleaner Deluxe 31% 1
XoftSpy 27% 3
NoAdware 24% 0
Aluria Spyware Eliminator 23% 3
OmniQuad AntiSpy 16% 1
Spyware COP 15% 0
SpyHunter 15% 1
SpyKiller 2005 15% 2
Howes didn't test the anti-adware programs in the above list against a
program called CoolWebSearch (CWS). This little bugger mutates every few
days, it seems. CWS actually requires a completely separate anti-adware
program, CWShredder, which is constantly evolving along with the
nuisance. This is explained in more detail later in this article.
The fact that anti-adware products fail to remove all or even most
adware components has been an open secret among security professionals
for some time. For this reason, tech writers often say, "You should
install two different programs and run both of them for maximum
protection."
To test this assertion, I compiled Howes's raw data into a new table
showing the removal rate of the best app, Giant AntiSpyware, with every
other tested product. According to this analysis, combining Webroot Spy
Sweeper with Giant AntiSpyware did the most to remove unwanted
components. But the combination of the two apps increased Giant's 63%
success rate only 7 percentage points, to 70%:
Giant AntiSpyware plus... Total Adware Fixed
Webroot Spy Sweeper 70%
Ad-Aware SE Personal 69%
PC Tools Spyware Doctor 68%
Pest Patrol 67%
Spybot Search & Destroy 67%
Spyware Stormer 67%
Spyware COP 66%
Aluria Spyware Eliminator 65%
Intermute SpySubtract Pro 65%
NoAdware 65%
XsoftSpy 65%
McAfee AntiSpyware 64%
OmniQuad AntiSpy 64%
SpyHunter 64%
SpyKiller 2005 64%
Xblock X-Cleaner Deluxe 64%
Finally, the computer press often recommends that the two anti-adware
products that should be used together are Ad-Aware SE Personal and
Spybot Search & Destroy. That preference may have become the
conventional wisdom because both of these products have low-end,
freeware versions. PC World, PC Magazine, and other publications have
recommended this combination as recently as June and August,
respectively.
Ad-aware and Spybot may have been a great combo back then. But adware
apparently moves much faster than these two companies do. According to
Howes's data, the two programs together barely removed half the adware
components on an infected PC:
Ad-Aware SE Personal plus... Total Adware Fixed
Spybot Search & Destroy 54%
I found no combination of any two anti-adware programs that removed more
adware components than Giant AntiSpyware and Webroot Spy Sweeper, based
on Howes's data. Removing only 70% of adware, unfortunately, isn't good
enough. A much better strategy is to prevent adware from getting into
your systems in the first place. I'll cover that next.
How to defend yourself against adware
First, let me make my opinion clear: The installation of adware should
be illegal and harshly punished. Adware has exploded because it offers
big economic incentives for its sponsors. They'll never adequately
inform PC users about their software before it's installed. This
troubling aspect of adware will never be wished away.
Only software that a PC user specifically consents to should legally be
able to install - and "end-user license agreements" that stretch off the
screen should never be counted as consent. (This isn't a knock on
"ad-supported software," such as the Opera browser. Such legitimate
software is clearly integrated with its advertising and makes it easy to
shut off the ads by registering.)
In reality, today's tech-illiterate legislatures will never ban adware -
if they could even think of an effective legal approach to do so. We
need to engage the battle on a technical level instead.
To understand adware, you first need to know how PCs get it. The ways
that Howes obtained the adware he used in his tests provide us with some
perfect examples:
a.. Software downloads. For one group of tests, Howes downloaded and
installed Grokster, a popular peer-to-peer file-sharing program, from
CNET Download.com. Installing Grokster and clicking OK in its subsequent
dialog boxes loaded 15 separate adware programs, containing 134
"critical" executable components, by Howes's count. This source of
infection would compromise even Windows XP with its new Service Pack 2
(SP2).
b.. Drive-by downloads. To set up another group of tests, Howes used
Internet Explorer to visit the following Web locations: 007 Arcade Games
(a games site), LyricsDomain (a song lyrics site), and Innovators of
Wrestling (yup, a wrestling site). This resulted in 23 different adware
programs being installed, carrying 138 components, Howes says. Drive-by
downloads such as these are now less of a problem for users who've
installed XP SP2.
c.. You can't step into the same river twice. For yet another test,
Howes visited the wrestling site again, but on a different date. The
makers of adware must have signed a lot of distribution contracts with
the site in the interim. Howes says his PC picked up 25 adware programs
and 153 components on that one visit alone. (You'll notice that I didn't
link to the examples I cited above, and I strongly recommend that you
avoid trying any of them.)
It's not enough to say "PC users should be more careful." Computer
professionals, instead, have a duty and an obligation to prevent adware
from infecting their PCs or anyone else's. Here are some steps to take:
a.. Use Giant AntiSpyware (or install the MS beta), Webroot Spy
Sweeper, and CWShredder.
At the moment, this is the short list of programs that appear to
remove the largest number of adware components. I recommend that you buy
the registered versions of these applications and keep them constantly
updated. The few dollars involved are well worth it, compared to the
damage that can be done by a rogue program controlling your PC.
Microsoft hasn't yet announced whether its version of the Giant
application will cost money or be free after the beta period is over -
stay tuned. (Note: The MS beta is incompatible with the MS Media Center
Extender and has other 0.9-type issues.)
See Giant AntiSpyware download, Microsoft AntiSpyware beta, Webroot
Spy Sweeper, CWShredder.
b.. For prevention, install IE-SPYAD and Spyware Blaster. IE-SPYAD is
a list maintained by Eric Howes of approximately 8,900 Web sites that
are known to do things like install adware, hijack your browser home
page, etc. Merging the list into your Windows Registry puts these sites
into IE's Restricted Sites zone. They can't do much of anything to you
then. The list, as of this writing, requires manual updating, but Howes
hopes to automate the process soon.
Spyware Blaster is freeware by Javacool Software that Howes
recommendeds to guard against adware installs. A registration fee of
$9.95 USD enables the auto-update feature of the software, which Howes
encourages. Javacool also makes a related program, SpywareGuard.
c..
http://windowssecrets.com/050127/