slimpickinz
join:2003-11-29
Conyers, GA
| reply to Viper007Bond
Re: Hmmmm.........
It did not catch Cydoor...hmmmm, have you updated definitions lately....
Look here, as an experiment, I installed exeem and here are the results...
--
Visit Us Here! |
|
BonezX
Basement Dweller
Premium
join:2004-04-13
Canada
| reply to Viper007Bond
said by Viper007Bond  :Same goes for me as well. I've been relying on Microsoft's lately actually. It caught the Cydoor that came with eXeem while Ad-Aware did not. same deal with cydoor, S&D caught it when i scanned, but ad-aware didn't and it usially picks up on data miners. |
|
B
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-28
| reply to King P
Well, they HAVE. They've at times removed malware remote control trojans that went "legitimate" with a commercial version, e.g. NetBus Pro.
I don't know if they still do this, but it has more to do with liability than with pay-offs.
-- B
--
In a realm outside causality and function |
|
King P
Don't blame me. I voted for Ron Paul
Premium
join:2004-11-17
Inman, SC
 ·Windstream
 ·Charter Pipeline
| reply to CampMaster
I've always used Ad-Aware and Spybot. This does make me scratch my head about Ad-Aware. If Anti-Spyware companies start doing this (removing known spyware from it's definitions) then what is to keep Norton or McAfee from doing the same thing with Virus definitions? I guess big money always talks loudest...
--
Forget 'em, Support the Indies.»www.ind-music.com |
|
Buddel
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Premium
join:2004-03-06
EU
| reply to Plldwnyrpnts
said by Plldwnyrpnts :I won't be chucking it. I'll just consider it less reliable. And as always, it will not be the only scanner I use. Yep!:) |
|
Viper007Bond
Premium
join:2002-09-26
Portland, OR
| reply to Plldwnyrpnts
Same goes for me as well.
I've been relying on Microsoft's lately actually. It caught the Cydoor that came with eXeem while Ad-Aware did not.
--
I have a signature. | I also have a website/blog. |
|
CampMaster
Rather Be Camp'n
Premium
join:2001-05-16
Trabuco Canyon, CA
·DSL EXTREME
 ·ViaTalk
·Cox HSI
| reply to Plldwnyrpnts
said by Plldwnyrpnts :I won't be chucking it. I'll just consider it less reliable. And as always, it will not be the only scanner I use. Same here. Pretty sad though and duly noted for future reference and recommendations to others.
--
There's no place like 127.0.0.1 |
|
Plldwnyrpnts
join:2003-04-19
Chicago, IL | reply to woody7
I won't be chucking it. I'll just consider it less reliable. And as always, it will not be the only scanner I use. |
|
