Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective
From: Ken Smith (kensmith_at_green.rahul.net)
Date: 01/28/05
- Next message: Ken Smith: "Re: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Previous message: john jardine: "Re: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- In reply to: Terry Pinnell: "OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Next in thread: John Woodgate: "Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Reply: John Woodgate: "Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Reply: Nico Coesel: "Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Reply: Rene Tschaggelar: "Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Reply: Don Taylor: "Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 15:04:32 +0000 (UTC)
In article <2j5kv05pqvarkhnvn2nfu64248nl2ih6er@4ax.com>,
Terry Pinnell <terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> wrote:
>I was surprised to learn today that all anti-adware and anti-spyware
>programs perform so badly. Here's an extract of the ranking, from
>'Anti-adware misses most malware' By Brian Livingston, in
>http://windowssecrets.com/050127/
>
>Product Adware Fixed
>---------------- ------------
>Giant AntiSpyware 63%
>Webroot Spy Sweeper 48%
>Ad-Aware SE Personal 47%
>Pest Patrol 41%
>SpywareStormer 35%
>Intermute SpySubtract Pro 34%
>PC Tools Spyware Doctor 33%
>Spybot Search & Destroy 33%
>McAfee AntiSpyware 33%
>Xblock X-Cleaner Deluxe 31%
>XoftSpy 27%
>NoAdware 24%
>Aluria Spyware Eliminator 23%
>OmniQuad AntiSpy 16%
>Spyware COP 15%
>SpyHunter 15%
>SpyKiller 2005 15%
>
>So, given that there must be great overlap, I reckon my
>frequently-used combination of Ad-Aware SE Personal and Spybot Search
>& Destroy is catching little more than half the malware reaching me.
>Unsettling.
It is an indication of how hard it is to remove the malware programs
without removing applications or Windows its self. There are several
things working against the writers of such software:
(1) You can't simply remove any software that appears to send data over
the network without removing portions of Windows.
(2) You can't simply remove any "strange" software since different users
have different applications installed and there is a wide variation in
what portions of Windows are installed.
(3) There is no direct way to tell the difference between a newer DLL
that has some bugs removed and one that has malware added.
I think what may be the best way to solve the problem is to place Windows
on a disk as the C drive, install all the applications from the shrink
wrapped boxes and then disconnect the write wire of the C drive. From
that point on, all the data goes on the D drive or it goes nowhere at all.
-- -- kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge
- Next message: Ken Smith: "Re: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Previous message: john jardine: "Re: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- In reply to: Terry Pinnell: "OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Next in thread: John Woodgate: "Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Reply: John Woodgate: "Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Reply: Nico Coesel: "Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Reply: Rene Tschaggelar: "Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Reply: Don Taylor: "Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
