Somebody tell Patrick that Spybot is WRONG!

[R2]

OK, I have told enough people now that Spybot INAPPROPRIATELY removes their access to the Internet Options and/or their Home Page settings through its Immunize tab.

Spybot has the very INAPPROPRIATE and MISGUIDED option to restrict the end-users access to their own HomePage and Internet Option settings.

This is LUDICROUS and MUST BE STOPPED. There is NO reason for this and it only leads to multiple questions on mutliple boards as to, "Why can't I access my Internet Options or Home Page".

There is NO security benefit to the end-user. This does NOT prevent the Home Page hijack nor modification of the Internet settings. This is simply an annoyance to the end-user.

The role of these Policy Restrictions are SOLELY for Corporate Administrators to prevent Employees from modification the Corporate settings. They have NO utility for the average home use. They do NOT belong on the Spybot Immunize tab.

[LowWaterMark]

Cross-link to any discussion that will also happen over at DSLR:

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7053242~root=security,1~mode=flat

[LowWaterMark]

Wilders has actually had numerous inquiries regarding this... In most cases, it was from people who mistakenly thought that Javacool's SpywareBlaster (http://www.wilderssecurity.net/spywareblaster.html) had caused the loss of access to the Internet Options menu item in IE.


Here's the screen shot of this feature in Spybot S&D:

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/attachments/spybot-IE-protection.gif

[zOK]

Agreed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


zOK

[spy1]

Here's a thought - try reading up on a feature before using it.

I certainly hope Patrick doesn't "dumb down" the program simply because people are too lazy or stupid to make the attempt to learn about its' features before trying to use them.

And I hope that all the whining and crying from people who don't read the "FAQ'S", the "Help" files and/or utilize the SpyBot forum before their fingers start clicking on options they don't have a clue about get all the attention they deserve - none.

Have a great night! ;D Pete

[zOK]

Wow people are lazy or Stupid? I hope you are not the programmer, and the programmer doesn't feel the way you do, if so this program is nothing but snake oil.


Must make you feel good Spy1, to give me a minus mark, Now I feel not only are you a bad person, but also a coward. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

[spy1]

In case anyone doesn't know, "zok" is VampireFo - the same, um, "individual" that made the really intelligent comments about the SpyBot program and programmer in the DSL thread referenced above.

He's been banned from this site several times, and he keeps sneaking back in using different nics/email addresses so he can cause trouble.

Kind of tells you what kind of guy he is and what he's about, doesn't it?

Not cowardly at all, Toney - that's exactly what "Smite/Applaud" is there for.

Cowardly would be sneaking around into forums where you're definitely not wanted simply to cause trouble.

It's a shame that someone who could have so much to offer like yourself simply goes around doing this kind of childish crap.

But that's you. Pete

[R2]

"I certainly hope Patrick doesn't "dumb down" the program simply because people are too lazy or stupid to make the attempt to learn about its' features before trying to use them.

And I hope that all the whining and crying from people who don't read the "FAQ'S", the "Help" files and/or utilize the SpyBot forum before their fingers start clicking on options they don't have a clue about get all the attention they deserve - none."

Certainly the most ludicrous response I have received. "Dumb down the program?" Is this supposed to be a program designed for the common man or for the intelligentsia?

Read the FAQ's?? Yeah, sure. Like I read all the "Owner's Manuals" on all the equiptment I buy. Get real.

One should NOT have to wade through FAQ's to figure out how a program should work.

MORE IMPORTANTLY: How about an argument that shows ANY utility WHATSOEVER to using these settings?

They are USELESS. Utterly USELESS. They provide NO security. They are an ANNOYANCE and that is it.

Give me ONE good argument that shows a BENEFIT to a single user computer?? There is NONE.

[SmackDown]

Short and sweet, the options should be removed.

[SmackDown]

Well, after reading the thread here and on others forums, about everyone agrees these options should be removed.

So Patrick, get rid of them. I agree with most of the posters the only one who really stuck out was Spy1, your comments, were of no help, I guess I get a minus mark now like zOK, who is correct by the way.

[Pieter_Arntz]

The answer to the problem is easily found in the FAQ at Net-Integration: http://www.net-integration.net/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboard.cgi?s=bc95824618bcc94e683560c9d32f1180;act=ST;f=28;t=2742
That would also be the right place to ask about the use of this function IMHO.

Regards,

Pieter

[spy1]

GM, Pieter!

Gee, the answer was "easily found" if you bothered to read something in the dedicated SBS&D forum?? (Who'd a thunk it! <g> )

I don't know - the thread title was only "ATTENTION ALL SPYBOT USERS!" (<g>)

AND it was only a "sticky" at the very top of the page??

AND it was only dated April 20th, 2003?? (Just a couple of months ago?? )

(I rest my case). Pete ;D

[Douglas]

-{ Quote: " quoting: zOK link=board=20;threadid=10001;start=0#msg65080 date=1054961280]
Must make you feel good Spy1, to give me a minus mark, Now I feel not only are you a bad person, but also a coward. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
" }-

Whether you're vampirefo or not, you show the same lack of ability to show any maturity in your disagreements.
You also don't show much of an ability to use logic.
It makes me feel good. Here, have another one.

Douglas

[R2]

The whole point is that users DO NOT bother to read the dedicated Spybot forum.

Let us not forget that some lady sued McDonalds because the coffee SHE spilled on herself was HOT and McDonalds did not explicitly warn her that it was hot. She WON the case...

Users are going to be lazy and are NOT going to bother to read FAQ's, owner's manuals, and dedicated forums.

What is the point of making options that only serve to confuse users and that require the user to go to the dedicated forum to figure out??

(Maybe that is it. Is it a technique to increase the number of members that post on the forum? ;-])

If you have to issue WARNINGS in your forum, if you have to place STICKY threads, and if you have to answer multiple questions on the same issue in your forum -- one would hope that you would LEARN something from this!! These options confuse users. They confuse the users SO MUCH that you had to make all that effort to UN-confuse them!

Why in the world would you want to have to issue warnings and answer the same questions over and over?? Why not simply clean up the interface in such a way so that the lazy, ignorrant, irresponsible end-user is LESS LIKELY to make a stupid mistake?

That is perhaps the point. If you all believe the options are useful, then have the GUI modified to help clarify the settings.

I would actually LOVE to see how many of the people who LIKE the options actually USE them on their computers. ANYONE?? Why?

I am sure that the number of users that actually find those settings useful is MINISCULE. If one compares the number of users that get confused by the settings to the number of users that actually think the settings are useful, the first group would be an overwhelming majority.

[spy1]

The simple fact of the matter is that it's the users' own fault if they shoot themselves in the foot with the program when all the information they need to make an intelligent decision on what options to use/enable is clearly at their fingertips.

IMO, Patrick has made the program incredibly easy-to-use for users that are too lazy or too time-pressed to RTFM - all they have to do is not use the "Advanced" interface.

If they do choose to use the Advanced interface...then re-read the first paragraph.

(Enjoying the discussion in the DSL thread, R2!). Pete

[Metallica]

Hi R2,

I agree that the function is of no use, but what´s the fuss. You strike me as a knowledgeable person, with better things to do, then complain all over the web except where it might have impact: on the dedicated site for the software.
Ask your money back. ;D
Or start an intelligent discussion with the developer.

[Pieter_Arntz]

Kind request to all participants in this thread:

Please refrain from personal remarks or I´ll close this thread.

Regards,

Pieter

[R2]

Thanks for having a good attitude. Well, at least it is fun. :)

[Krusty]

quote Metallica : -{ Quote: "Ask your money back. " }-

;D

[TonyKlein]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Metallica link=board=20;threadid=10001;start=15#msg65158 date=1054994512]
Hi R2,

I agree that the function is of no use, but what´s the fuss. You strike me as a knowledgeable person, with better things to do, then complain all over the web except where it might have impact: on the dedicated site for the software.
Ask your money back. ;D
Or start an intelligent discussion with the developer.
" }-

I happen to agree wholeheartedly with Pieter.

I don't think it's "fun" , like you maintain it is, and in addition to that I have a feeling you didn't mean it to be either.
Sounds more like some kind of crusade to me:

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7053242~root=security,1~mode=flat

http://www.spywareinfoforum.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=8&t=6589&hl=&s=140e8a9e02e6832694333fea9f72b32e


You'd almost think SpyBot is formatting people's computers... ::)

Any reason why you're not posting at the SpyBot board, where your remarks will be heard and taken seriously?

Or could it be that for reasons only known to yourself you're simply more interested in panic mongering?

[Straight Shooter]

For an otherwise GREAT product to have a couple of small sour spots is ridiculous. Every magazine out there has prasied Spybot S&D, even if it's free!!!!!!!! EVEN C/NET!!!!!

The only thing I gotta say is that Spybot works! It works and disinfects better than any other spyware program out there, for the most part, for me.... So it has an area that may not be agreeable. It's an extra feature.. CHILL OUT! Pay Patrick $30 bucks first then rant....

I really don't see the big deal. At least it gets the spyware out... Try saying that about other spyware proggies...

[Krusty]

Quote Straight Shooter:-{ Quote: "The only thing I gotta say is that Spybot works!*" }-

PRECISELY my friend ;)

[Reverend Ike]

(I posted the following in the related DSLR forum thread. I think the problem is real, but it is relatively minor and can be minimized with some simple changes IMHO. There's no need to use a shotgun on a mosquito.)

- - - - - - - - - -

I agree that all users should read the documentation. However, it is a well-known fact of human nature that everyone doesn't. Telling users repeatedly to read the manual probably won't solve the problem, unfortunately.

The most significant problem I see is that some users enable the "locking" options unnecessarily, and later don't understand why they are unable to change their home page, etc. Then they come to this (DSLR) forum, and ask what's wrong. It's a real problem and we've all seen the repeated posts. I doubt that massive numbers of users have this problem, but it has been one of the most noticeable areas of confusion since the latest Spybot S&D version was released.

I don't think Spybot S&D misleads the users. If their instructions said "Check the boxes below to prevent hijacking!!!" - now that would be misleading. However, some users might assume - perhaps because of the "Immunize" feature title - that certain options offer more complete protection than they actually do. So I think it's important for Spybot S&D to take one extra step, and point out the limitations of the "locking" options. And the best place to do that is immediately adjacent to where the enabling checkboxes are located.

(Referring to a screenshot of the "Immunize" window), I would suggest the following:

(1) Near the top, following "... your personal preferences", I would add: Note: the "Lock IE start page" and "Lock IE control panel" options below do not protect against most hijackings. These two options were generally designed to prevent unwanted changes made by others on a multi-user system.

(2) Near the bottom, I would change "Recommended miscellaneous protections" to "Optional miscellaneous protections". I think the consensus is that it is not a good idea to recommend enabling the three options to all (or even most) users. Too many people tend to blindly check any box labeled "recommended".

That's it, a few additional words of text - no axing of features or reworking of the program needed. And I bet the number of posts regarding accidental or forgotten locking of the IE home page or IE control panel would drop dramatically ...

[controler]

Are you saying Patrick should offer a corporate version of Spybot ?
Most companies do that now. I don't think there is any posters on this thread that will not aggree Patrick is one of the best programmers
today. His program HAS helped many as is in constant development
I have to ask how many of them little old ladies sitting at home on the internet actualy use IE's options anyway. Most don't even know how to change their start page. Spybot does have an advanced button.
I have been testing software for many years and will say Spybot
is one of the greats. Not Many programmers give such dedication and offer it free?

[illukka]

hi
one has to seriously think of what is the motivation behind this attack on spybot...do you own a spyware company or what's your problem,r2? dont have anything better to do?
do you understand that this is a freeware app we're talking about? an app that is born of sheer good will of patrick... something that he voluntarily does in his free time without pay or profit, to help us..

[telo]

There is no question that Spybot is a good program. BUT - almost every day at probably every computer board, someone asks why their IE Options are suddenly restricted.

How about a Spybot prompt/alert before whatever triggers the Microsoft message?
- It will at least educate the non-readers
- It will reinforce why Spybot can protect them

An alert with a "Do you want to allow..." type confirmation might be ideal.

[the Tester]

I think the main point about Spybot is that it has two modes available.
Anyone running Spybot has a choice in what mode they will use.
When exposed to a program that has advanced mode/ options and a "use at your own risk"message at the top of the console, I consider that a friendly reminder that the help files should be studied!
Besides that,there are links to the support forum and Patrick's email in the Spybot console.
It seems to me anyway,that Patrick has gone to great lengths to make very good support available for any questions that a new user could have.

[controler]

I aggree, there would be nothing wrong with an alert message.
I was thinking the same thing myself ;)
What do the rest of you think?

con

[Straight Shooter]

I don't mind but I still think this whole thread is ridiculous! ;D

[Krusty]

LMAO and we keep on getting those karma cookies teeheeeeee, SPYBOT RULES !!!!!!

[Metallica]

-{ Quote: " quoting: K®u$tÿ link=board=20;threadid=10001;start=15#msg65269 date=1055038283]
LMAO and we keep on getting those karma cookies teeheeeeee, SPYBOT RULES !!!!!!
" }-

Yup, looks like someone found a new toy. >:(

Hey look, all my minuses are gone. ;D

[SmackDown]

Probably Spy1, looks like he gave me 4, such a baby, he is OH well.

[Paul Wilders]

Ladies and Gents,

IMO this issue should have been taken to the software developper in the first place - over on his dedicated forum or in private. I fail to see the benefit from some sort of a crusade expanding over all sorts of security/privacy forums, but that's my personal view on this.

Anyway: since there are no new arguments to add either, I'm closing this thread.

regards.

paul