broadsword
join:2000-09-05
Louisville, KY
clubs:
| Best antispyware for Firefox and IE?
I'm not sure if this has been asked and answered before, but I use FireFox, and Adaware looks to me like it just scans IE specific locations. Can someone tell me which product scans and protects Firefox as well as IE? I'd prefer donationware, but will go commercial if the product is good and stable in an XP environment. |
|
fict0n
join:2005-03-28
Rampart, AK
| Firefox doesn't have any "specific" locations, only its cookies file, which Ad-Aware scans on a smart scan. Nothing else of Firefox is really infectable.
Ad-Aware and Spybot scan for Firefox tracking cookies, as well as any malware that is non-browser specific across your entire computer.
As for the question on the whole: what's the point of using Firefox if you're still worried about getting malware through your browser?  |
|
mozilla user
@rr.com | I don't use firefox for security reasons, I use it because it can do more things easier.. It has over 300 extensions, many are useful. The safety net does fit in but not that much.. |
|
haroldo
join:2004-01-16
united state
 ·Comcast
| reply to broadsword
Research has shown that you need many anti-spyware tools. There is no one product that can catch all the malware that is out there (the best gets approximately 65%). Use two, three or more!
Use Spybot, AdAware, Bazooka, CW Shredder, Microsoft AntiSpyware (watch out for Claria!) amongst the free tools.
In addition, use Spyware Guard, Spyware Blaster, IE-Spywad, hosts file, Spyware Blocklist file amongst the free PREVENTATIVES. |
|
John2g
Qui Tacet Consentit
Premium
join:2001-08-10
England
| said by haroldo  :Research has shown that you need many anti-spyware tools. I don't agree. With a well secured IE, you really don't need any of those mentioned.
I don't use Ad-aware,Bazooka, CWShredder, MSAS, nor do I use a Hosts File and I do NOT get any spyware or other malware. Occasionally I use SpyBot, but it has never found anything.
--
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt. |
|
jram
join:2003-08-06
Albany, NY
| reply to broadsword
With a well secured IE, you really don't need any of those mentioned.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
You mean a turned off IE, if not you better protect yourself with programs, that's your surfing habit keeping you safe.. I just can't be bothered surfing with a limited account , a turned off browser, it would get me mad having to surf like that.. I haven't ever had spyware neither.. If you look around this forum, the average user has everything under the sun protecting him/her, get real..hehe |
|
psychogenic
Ready Steady
Premium
join:2003-05-01
Staten Island, NY
clubs:
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| Technically you really don't need a limited account, but it will be a limited browser to a degree. Re-setting Internet sites to High security (which disables/prompts for action java and activex) will stop a majority of the junk from usage. If you're in a site which needs abovementioned controls then you can easily label it as a Trusted site which has much lax security. It is understandable for the average user though that this is slightly more maintenance required.
--
"He who hits head on wall, probably deserved it." |
|
broadsword
join:2000-09-05
Louisville, KY
clubs:
| I did not know Adaware scans the FireFox cookies file, thank for the information on that, fict0n. It just never found anything FF in an Adaware scan, so I assumed it did not look. I think I have Firefox nailed down pretty tightly. I use an extension called Permit Cookies, in which by default I do not accept cookies, and only accept on sites that I choose. However, I still have IE installed and occasionally--very rarely--use it. Usually just for testing. I also have Opera installed, but the same there, usually use it just for testing web pages I create. I am hopelessly hooked on FireFox, because of the extensions, like AdBlock. I guess you might say I want a good antispyware program for insurance, though. I currently use SpywareBlaster and the free version of AdAware. They are both up to date in terms of protection definitions. Upon an Adaware scan, it found one IE tracking cookie in the IE cache, which I removed.
For giggles, I decided to scan my computer using WebRoot's free Spy Audit, and it came up with the following "low to moderate risk" hit:
Adware
* Bonzi Buddy
Then, I downloaded the free trial of Sunbelt's CounterSpy. I installed it and ran a full scan and it found nothing. The odd thing is, when I run WebRoot's free Spy Audit again, it comes up with the same hit on "Bonzi Buddy" as before, and when I run the CounterSpy full scan again, it does not find one thing. Thinking that the Spy Audit hit might be a false positive, I scanned my registry manually for the word "Bonzi" and found nothing. There is also no BonziBUDDY directory in my Program Files directory.
So I guess the question is, do I really need CounterSpy or some other pay version of an antispyware program, or is my current configuration, mostly using FireFox, the free version of Adaware and SpywareBlaster, a good enough solution?
Any and all advice welcomed and appreciated. |
|
howcanubsure
@ad.jp
| reply to John2g
If you don't really use any (or very few) anti-spyware programs how can u b sure you don't have any spyware? Some spyware/malware can hide itself very very good. Spybot cannot be relied on to find all the spyware that is out there, it's a good addition, but only as part of a layered security set up.
Having a least a few different spyware scanners, along with at least a couple anti-trojans, and a couple anti-keyloggers, with a good solid AV, is essential if you want even a chance of coming close to finding all the crap that could be infecting your computer right now. |
|
haroldo
join:2004-01-16
united state
·Comcast
| reply to John2g
said by John2g :said by haroldo :Research has shown that you need many anti-spyware tools. I don't agree. With a well secured IE, you really don't need any of those mentioned. I don't use Ad-aware,Bazooka, CWShredder, MSAS, nor do I use a Hosts File and I do NOT get any spyware or other malware. Occasionally I use SpyBot, but it has never found anything. I don't want to get into a long discussion on the topic, but if you don't use the scanners, how do you know that you don't have spyware?
Eric Howes' study said the best scanner found 65% of spyware. Sinc Spybot (the only one you use) wasn't the best, your analysis of your own system couldn't possible vouch for the rest of the threats.
My advice is simple, get as much protection as you can.
See »windowssecrets.com/comp/050127/
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. |
|
Mowergun
join:2004-02-15
Charleston, IL | reply to broadsword
Assuming I already have an antivirus program, if I could only afford to buy one security program it would be BOClean. |
|
John2g
Qui Tacet Consentit
Premium
join:2001-08-10
England
| reply to haroldo
said by haroldo : but if you don't use the scanners, how do you know that you don't have spyware? Because I have a program that monitors everything that is added to my computer. In addition, I use imaging and frequently "wind back the clock" so that my computer is hardly any different from the day that XP was installed.
CWShredder is not very effective: it only detects ~50 out of ~300 variants of CWS!
"A much better strategy is to prevent adware from getting into your systems in the first place."
I agree, which is the reason for having a well secured browser and the best AT program (one that does cover the 300 odd variants of CWS)
--
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt. |
|
John2g
Qui Tacet Consentit
Premium
join:2001-08-10
England
1 edit | reply to howcanubsure
said by howcanubsure:
If you don't really use any (or very few) anti-spyware programs how can u b sure you don't have any spyware? Some spyware/malware can hide itself very very good. Spybot cannot be relied on to find all the spyware that is out there, it's a good addition, but only as part of a layered security set up. I didn't write that I don't use other anti-malware programs: I do. I use SAV and BOClean.
I wrote: I don't agree. With a well secured IE, you really don't need any of those mentioned. |
|
John2g
Qui Tacet Consentit
Premium
join:2001-08-10
England
1 edit | reply to haroldo
"Eric Howes' study said the best scanner found 65% of spyware"
What Eric should have written, is that the best found 65% of the spyware samples he tested against. That is not the same as writing that they found a maximum of 65%.
What he tested for was a drop in the ocean.
"In the first group of tests, twenty anti-spyware scanners were pitted against a collection of 15 adware and spyware programs"
"In the second group of tests, the anti-spyware scanners were matched against a mish-mash of 25 different adware and spyware programs picked up via "drive-by-download""
"In the third group of tests, the anti-spyware scanners were pitted against yet another hodge podge collection of adware and spyware programs. These 23 different programs were...." |
|
redxii
too big to fail
Premium,Mod
join:2001-02-26
Texas
Host:
/dev/null
Broadband Tweaks
Suddenlink
ISDN
Fiber Optic
| reply to broadsword
If you want a little more comfort surfing with any browser, use DropMyRights in addition to your favorite e-mail client or internet browser.
Click here for the best anti-spyware tool under the sun [MSDN]
--
"If you like linux then use it otherwise stop preaching about linux we all already know about it and if we like it we'll use it. If you keep pestering people you look like those annoying Jehovah's witnesses... [..] with nothing better to do." |
|
jabarnut
Light Years Away
Premium,MVM
join:2005-01-22
Galaxy M31
| reply to broadsword
If I may, a little something to keep your eye on related to this subject.
This and other Polls are running in the Software Forum.
And many more to come! 
Your participation is both welcome and needed to update the Software FAQ's.
»[POLL] Spyware Removal & Prevention Programs
And....other Polls including a tentative schedule on new Polls in the near future.
»FAQ Update Status
--
I had a life once.....now I have a Computer and a Modem. |
|
D-Train
@34.81.x.x | reply to fict0n
I would think that if this person works in the IT industry they are just looking to ensure the network's security |
|
