Spy Sweeper subscription; is it worth it ?

[Fly]

I've been using the Spy Sweeper (WITHOUT ANTIVIRUS) for over a year.

Before I bought it, I used the Spyware doctor, version 3 or 4. Excluding cookies, the Spy Sweeper at that time reduced my infections (active protection) by about 90 %.

Soon my subscription will expire, and I am faced with the question whether I should renew it.

I use elevated security settings. (Including, but not limited to, a customized sweep that also scans for rootkits, unlike the 'full sweep')

I know of basically two ways to see how well the Spy Sweeper works: first: no infections, second: number of impacts on it's shields.

However, at the moment I also use Counterspy, which is very good.
I'm using McAfee virusscan Plus too (but plan to ditch that).

I haven't found any spyware on my computer (except cookies) for a long time. But because of this combination, I really don't know how well the Spy Sweeper works. Spyware has changed, the version of the Spy Sweeper has changed. The number of impacts on the shields are extremely low.

If I check out users' (?) experiences on download.com, I see some very negative reviews. But that is the case for almost any program. I suspect that at least some reviews come from competitors.

Some people call it a resource hog, but it's not that at all on my computer (unlike McAfee!).

Regarding 'Webrot'; questionable attempts to install in a sneaky way the ask.com toolbar and a search assistent (but McAfee shares it's data with Doubleclick, which shares it with ... nearly anyone) also gives me pause.

What are your experiences ?

[WSFuser]

I have not used Spy Sweeper in years but I dont think realtime AS is really worth it. Use an alternate browser like Firefox or Opera and maybe run occasional ondemand spyware scans.

[Zom17]

Good question. I have used Webroot's Spysweeper for several years on two PCs -- that is until this past May.

I noticed that when I did upgrades to their versions offered in the Spring of 2007 I was experiencing lag time online, computer freezes, general slowness, and randomnly getting kicked out of internet browsing back to my desktop.

I thought it was my Sunbelt Firewall because the amount of BSODs due to this firewall (minidump confirmations galore) are too numerous to count (amazingly their free version hasn't caused an issue; sucky HIPS implementation).

Anyway, in May I purchased another 2 years and my issues were becoming worse. Soon after I read about a hidden toolbar and search assistant. I thought Webroot was in the business to prevent such spyware?!? And yet they added spyware without informing the consumer. That is spyware.

When I emailed Tech Support about this -- and I still have the emails -- they said they wanted to help me resolve the issue with the Toolbar. So there is/was a a hidden toolbar which in my book = spyware. Right then and there I said no thanks and uninstalled and I haven't had these issues since. For me it had become a system hog as well.

I now run a router + NOD32 2.7 + Superantispyware + Sunbelt Firewall free version (which I will be deleting soon and getting something else with HIPS) and all has been fine.

That is my experience and I will never go back to Webroot.

[jfd15]

bought SS for $20 at fry's and uninstalled after a week...was just a bloatware...

[Dieselman]

Why pay when free is just as good. SuperAntiSpyware and Spyware Terminator are just as or even better then Spy Sweeper. Spy Sweeper is a memory hog.

[LoneWolf]

Short answer = No
Long drawn out answer = No

There is much better paid or free AS apps.
Spysweeper 3.0-3.5 was very good, but now it has turned into a bloated, buggy app with little or no customer support.IMO. Not to mention that toolbar thing.

[Ngwana]

-{ Quote: "I've been using the Spy Sweeper (WITHOUT ANTIVIRUS) for over a year...Soon my subscription will expire, and I am faced with the question whether I should renew it...What are your experiences ?" }-

You are free to try other products. Your experiences will be far more important as you may not duplicate other peoples' experiences with Spy Sweeper. My 'little worry' is that Webroot seems to have lost 'presence' or even the zeal to beat the competition. Support is slightly poor compared to a few years back. Happy hunting ;D

[Zom17]

-{ Quote: "Spysweeper 3.0-3.5 was very good, but now it has turned into a bloated, buggy app with little or no customer support.IMO. Not to mention that toolbar thing." }-

Exactly. It really was a good product in its earlier versions, but as has been pointed out by several of us: bloat ware, hidden toolbar, etc., and for some poor tech support.

[Perman]

Hi,
Back in 2004, 2005, SS was my favorite AS , along with Spyware Doctor and Giant AS. I did not renew it for some reasons I could no longer recall.

I re-enlist it again just a short while ago, when free offer at UK's PC mag leaks out to open. I managed to grasp a one-year lic.

Up to now (2-3 weeks already), I have no complain whatsoever. It runs (full duty) well along with Comodo FW 3, McAfee AV, PRSC, Comodo memory FW.
No system drag, no slowdown in Internet, and no significant resource hogging. My system is Intel Duo 2 Core with WinXp Sp3.

I will keep it for now, thanks to that surprising free offer, otherwise, I would never have thought about trying it again.

Take care.

[djohn]

Hi Fly I am new to spy sweeper and valid until 2009. I like the way Its shields have detected so far I put It through some real testing and had stopped and quarantined Safely. I believe Is does a very good job protecting the registry.I would suggest If you have been happy with it To stick with It.

[Fly]

I decided to renew, but after having payed for it with my credit card, they tried to pull the 'auto-renewal' stunt on me. I learned of this AFTER I had paid ! (And it seems they keep my credit card number, I really don't like that).

I've tried to cancel the 'auto-renewal', but they try to put obstacles in my way. However, if necessary I'll do a chargeback when the time comes.

That 'auto-renewal' thing was an unpleasant surprise, and I'm not sure if I regret 'renewing'.

The obstacle in this case is that they want me to make an international phone call ...

[Perman]

Hi, Fly:

I think you have made a wise choice, except that auto-renewal trick.

This auto-renewal option is not uncommon among general merchandising; even your newspaper will pull that trick too. You just have to read the FINE print well. Credit card issuer will help you to resolve the headache should it come next year.

Good luck and take care.

[Fly]

-{ Quote: "Hi, Fly:

I think you have made a wise choice, except that auto-renewal trick.

This auto-renewal option is not uncommon among general merchandising; even your newspaper will pull that trick too. You just have to read the FINE print well. Credit card issuer will help you to resolve the headache should it come next year.

Good luck and take care." }-

Well, there was no FINE PRINT ...

Just a renew option, I gave them some data, including my credit card, and after having paid, THEN they came up with this auto-renewal. It may have been in some user agreement, but I was not confronted with anything like that, and there was no auto-renewal issue in the past, so it was really unexpected.

[djohn]

-{ Quote: "I decided to renew, but after having payed for it with my credit card, they tried to pull the 'auto-renewal' stunt on me. I learned of this AFTER I had paid ! (And it seems they keep my credit card number, I really don't like that).

I've tried to cancel the 'auto-renewal', but they try to put obstacles in my way. However, if necessary I'll do a chargeback when the time comes.

That 'auto-renewal' thing was an unpleasant surprise, and I'm not sure if I regret 'renewing'.

The obstacle in this case is that they want me to make an international phone call ..." }-
Well I guess I got something to look forward to upon renewal

[Fly]

Well, it took a while, but opening a ticket (or whatever they call it these days), was successful: auto-renewal has been cancelled.

I agree with previous poster(s): their customer support, probably especially their technical support, is seriously understaffed. I suppose management is overly concerned with quarterly results.

[maddawgz]

i got it free till 2009 as well love it, that and avg pro free good start to 2008 :)

[SamSpade]

-{ Quote: "I have not used Spy Sweeper in years but I dont think realtime AS is really worth it. Use an alternate browser like Firefox or Opera and maybe run occasional ondemand spyware scans." }-

Just curious: I seen this comment from other posters -- "no need for real time antispy" -- but if a spy gets in and starts sending out passwords, etc., isn't *that* a little late to be sending in the sheriff?? Doing a scan *after* the damage is done seems woefully ineffective.

Or am I missing something?

[mata7]

i just install Spy Sweeper to check how it run on my comp, is really light i have turn on all shield

[SamSpade]

-{ Quote: "i just install Spy Sweeper to check how it run on my comp, is really light i have turn on all shield" }-


Does it stay light after running your web browser, email, etc?? Usually security apps build up some overhead after a while.


|||

[fax]

-{ Quote: " Spy Sweeper subscription; is it worth it ? " }-

IMO No!
Better to invest in a good virus/malware scanner.

Fax

[Mrkvonic]

-{ Quote: "Just curious: I seen this comment from other posters -- "no need for real time antispy" -- but if a spy gets in and starts sending out passwords, etc., isn't *that* a little late to be sending in the sheriff?? Doing a scan *after* the damage is done seems woefully ineffective.

Or am I missing something?" }-

Hello,

You're missing a lot - the whole concept of not getting infected at all. BTW, spyies don't get in by some random internet magic - 99% of the time, users install them because they are ... <choose favorite phrase>.

You don't need a Death Star to stay uninfected on the web. It's really simple.

Doing a scan after damage is done is ineffective indeed. But so is self-destructive determination.

Mrk

[mata7]

-{ Quote: "Does it stay light after running your web browser, email, etc?? Usually security apps build up some overhead after a while.


|||" }-

yeah it stay light after running my web browser, but at ready remove it, i just rollback my system, just want to try it and it was runing well

[Fly]

-{ Quote: "IMO No!
Better to invest in a good virus/malware scanner.

Fax" }-

Hi. Well, since I started this thread (and by now regretfully 'renewed', regretfully because of IAC and the credit card isue), I'll respond to your statement: I haven't encountered a virus in years ! Spyware, a very different story, although since I bought Counterspy, aside from a few cookies, I did get only 1 adware/spyware program over the past 6 months.

[Fly]

-{ Quote: "Hello,

You're missing a lot - the whole concept of not getting infected at all. BTW, spyies don't get in by some random internet magic - 99% of the time, users install them because they are ... <choose favorite phrase>.

You don't need a Death Star to stay uninfected on the web. It's really simple.

Doing a scan after damage is done is ineffective indeed. But so is self-destructive determination.

Mrk" }-

Well, I just have to comment here (again!): at one time the Spy Sweeper reduced spyware infections (excluding cookies) by 90 % !
Before I bought the Spy Sweeper, I was relying on an older version of the Spyware Doctor (3.x or 4.x) and quite frequently managed to get spyware infections ! How did I get infected ? Just by 'surfing' the internet. Not by knowingly installing ANY program. (Although internet explorer wasn't as safe at that time as it is now -yes, you can comment all you want about it being not safe ... ) In the past, accessing just mainstream sites was relatively safe, but you can no longer count on that.

There are so many ways to get infected: ActiveX, scripts (Java scripts, that Java module, others), exploits etc.

[SamSpade]

-{ Quote: "Hello,

You're missing a lot - the whole concept of not getting infected at all. BTW, spyies don't get in by some random internet magic - 99% of the time, users install them because they are ... <choose favorite phrase>.

You don't need a Death Star to stay uninfected on the web. It's really simple.

Doing a scan after damage is done is ineffective indeed. But so is self-destructive determination.

Mrk" }-


Yeah, I *KNOW* the idea is to "not get infected in the first place". (I didn't start computing yesterday, thanks.) That's why I'm asking about the value of on-demand scanning -- after the fact of infection -- vs having real-time protection/prevention. From what several people have said here, on-demand is enough; but I don't see it that way, so I'm wondering what real-time prevention is best, specifically, whether SSweeper is worth it.

I don't surf porn or <insert favorite phrase> yet I recently got something that SAS says was a trojan, yet now it seems was a legit program; i.e. a FP.

Thank you!!!



|||

[fax]

-{ Quote: "Hi. Well, since I started this thread (and by now regretfully 'renewed', regretfully because of IAC and the credit card isue), I'll respond to your statement: I haven't encountered a virus in years ! Spyware, a very different story, although since I bought Counterspy, aside from a few cookies, I did get only 1 adware/spyware program over the past 6 months." }-

When I said virus/malware I was referring of course not only to virus. I have just said with a good investment in your primary security you can avoid cluttering your system with add-on security tools and equally enjoying a safe surfing.

I would not consider mcaffee a good base to start with. I mean solid detection and prevention with security tools like Kaspersky or AVIRA. And if you really want more just add on top some alternative non signature based tools or sandbox (many are free).

Cheers,
Fax

[Fly]

-{ Quote: "Yeah, I *KNOW* the idea is to "not get infected in the first place". (I didn't start computing yesterday, thanks.) That's why I'm asking about the value of on-demand scanning -- after the fact of infection -- vs having real-time protection/prevention. From what several people have said here, on-demand is enough; but I don't see it that way, so I'm wondering what real-time prevention is best, specifically, whether SSweeper is worth it.

I don't surf porn or <insert favorite phrase> yet I recently got something that SAS says was a trojan, yet now it seems was a legit program; i.e. a FP.

Thank you!!!



|||" }-
About online surfing: I don't visit porn sites, file sharing sites, warez sites and such either !

I wouldn't go without at least one active protection antispyware program.
Spy Sweeper ? Considering the issue of IAC and the ask.com toolbar, the auo-renewal policy they sneaked in (I found out AFTER renewing, taking advantage (?) of their 19.95 USD offer instead of 29.95 USD, I was not notified about their auto-renwal practice until after paying), and that they seemed to keep my credit card data, I'd question buying the Spy Sweeper.
But a company like McAfee has an alliance with Doubleclick, Omniture, others and they share a lot of data, and more companies insert the ask.com toolbar or google toolbar.

Pro Spy Sweeper without antivirus: the shields used to be good, I can't comment on how good they are now considering my current security setup, their signature database may be good, and their site shield/guard (internet communications) has protected me from more than one spyware program. On my computer it's really a light application. I use a customized scan because the 'full sweep' doesn't include scanning for rootkits and can use some other adjustment, and I have some other tweaks like 'verify executable program in a protected memoryspace before starting' to maximize security. As for on-demand scanning: it's fast but not very good. It's more for prevention.

If you and your system can handle it: Counterspy gives excellent protection. I'd prefer it above the Spy Sweeper, but I have them both !

[SamSpade]

-{ Quote: "About online surfing: I don't visit porn sites, file sharing sites, warez sites and such either !

I wouldn't go without at least one active protection antispyware program.
Spy Sweeper ? Considering the issue of IAC and the ask.com toolbar, the auo-renewal policy they sneaked in (I found out AFTER renewing, taking advantage (?) of their 19.95 USD offer instead of 29.95 USD, I was not notified about their auto-renwal practice until after paying), and that they seemed to keep my credit card data, I'd question buying the Spy Sweeper.
But a company like McAfee has an alliance with Doubleclick, Omniture, others and they share a lot of data, and more companies insert the ask.com toolbar or google toolbar.

Pro Spy Sweeper without antivirus: the shields used to be good, I can't comment on how good they are now considering my current security setup, their signature database may be good, and their site shield/guard (internet communications) has protected me from more than one spyware program. On my computer it's really a light application. I use a customized scan because the 'full sweep' doesn't include scanning for rootkits and can use some other adjustment, and I have some other tweaks like 'verify executable program in a protected memoryspace before starting' to maximize security. As for on-demand scanning: it's fast but not very good. It's more for prevention.

If you and your system can handle it: Counterspy gives excellent protection. I'd prefer it above the Spy Sweeper, but I have them both !" }-



I already have SSweeper subscription for one year paid, as I got a very good offer two years ago. I uninstalled it in late 2006 because it had become bloated and hooked into too many places, so it slowed down my computing. That was an early version 5, IIRC. It has nice features, but the cost in overhead was just too much. But that was then; I'm wondering about now.


|||

My question is whether anybody knew if it has become LESS of a drag than it was 18 months ago.