Ad-aware Standard Edition

[Marianna]

It is with great pleasure that we make our popular anti-trackware utility available to the public. We know that you have waited a long time for this release and now it has finally arrived! We could have spent the last few months constantly replying to some of our more vocal critics, but instead chose to answer their challenge by providing our users with the best combination of privacy solutions available. The same effort and craftsmanship that we put into our registered versions has been put into our freeware offering.

Contrary to some reports and rumors that would have you believe we had abandoned Ad-aware or were releasing beta software, we have poured our hearts, souls and bodies into this project. We encourage you to try our software and compare it to what others are offering (sometimes at outrageous prices) for FREE! Then you will understand how far ahead of the rest of the industry our products are and why you can’t be without Ad-aware in your personal privacy arsenal.

We will be updating our site as soon as possible with our mirror’s links, but until they are ready you can get a copy from the following (this list will also be updated):

http://www.majorgeeks.com/article.php?sid=506&cat=31

http://files.lavasoft.us/aaw6.exe

more URL's here: http://www.lavasoftsupport.com/index.php?s=f064390c36b0dd9b9926858b6d84094b&act=ST&f=1&t=3222&st=0&#entry18622

[luv2bsecure]

The following response to the AdAware advertisement above is my opinion and my personal views only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of Wilders.org or the Wilders Forums in any way.

-{ Quote: "We could have spent the last few months constantly replying to some of our more vocal critics..." }-

No, Marianna, you could have spent the last few months supporting the current version the best you could. How come other software developers can seamlessly move from Version X.7 to Y.0 without spending months in R&D hibernation for their new version while ignoring the old?

If your local telephone or cable company were going to upgrade their infrastructure and just shut down for a few months leaving you without service - how excited would you be when they return claiming they are better than ever?

The above would never happen because most companies understand their obligation to current users of their product while they work on the upgrade in the trenches or in the lab.

Reading your above post there's not even a, "Thank you for your patience." Maybe because you knew that had run out months ago for most AdAware users. No doubt there will be many downloads. Many out of mere curiosity. And I'm sorry for being so rough, Marianna, but I take security seriously, and honestly -- what Lavasoft did was inexcusable.

There is software now that serves the purpose very well and do it without disappearing the way Lavasoft would just vanish. We all remember: website there on Monday - gone on Tuesday....and Wednesday....and Thursday.....Like the book, "Where's Waldo?".....it was where's Lavasoft? Can anyone find an AdAware download? The site would (maybe) return on Friday with no explanation. And that was BEFORE the months long abondonment of the product. Customer service was abysmal. Management was rude, petty, arrogant and paranoid. Forums were censored. All in all, it was a sorry performance by a business that was run without the most basic common business sense. Marianna, Attitude in a company is everything, but every time someone questioned Lavasoft (after being patient for soooo long), it was ---- attack the critics! Is there a new Attitude Version 6? Doesn't look like it:
-{ Quote: "We could have spent the last few months constantly replying to some of our more vocal critics......Contrary to some reports and rumors that would have you believe we had abandoned Ad-aware " }-

No apology. Just more of the same.

New product.
Same old Lavasoft.

Many of us will choose to entrust our security to people we can trust!

John
Luv2BSecure

[notageek]

Well said Luv2BSecure. In all fairness I tried AAW6 and found it not a good a Spybot S&D.

[sk]

Thank you for your post, Marianna. Everyone obviously has the right to his/her own opinion, but I find it almost unconscionable that some people have copped such a judgmental, critical attitude against AdAware after everything AdAware has contributed to the area of Internet security. It always seems that the people who contribute the least have the most negative things to say. I believe that AdAware's contributions - past and present - speak for themselves. I am glad to see AdAware alive and well, and wish you continued success far into the future. I relish this opportunity to state - for the record - my own personal debt of gratitude to all of the AdAware/Lavasoft dedicated pioneers who have given us more than we could ever give back in return. As for the ingrates who always have more negative things to say than they ever have positive to contribute, their own actions speak volumes about them as well.

Very sincerely,

sk

[Marianna]

Oops........ I was only the "messenger" ....... I have NOTHING to do with Lavasoft ....... and now you are "shooting" at ME ??? :'( :'(

[Nick]

First, I am pleasantly surprised that the free version is out already. I was expecting it to be "delayed". However, that's about the only truely positive thing I can say about the free version.

The free version seems to me to just be the same old AA that is has been, just with a new GUI. I know that the "inards" are new and it's supposed to be better, but I just don't see anything that makes this a significant improvement that justified the months of abandonment that happened in late 2002. Sure, the plus and pro versions have more options, but I go by the "fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me" kind of logic. After months of no work on 5.83, I would expect that AA6 would be near perfect. It's had numerous updates in just a few days. This tends to lend credibility to those that say AA isn't properly beta tested.

Most importantly, there's an issue with AA6 identifying empty folders named "gator" as spyware when it is not. I know because I made a new folder and named it "Gator" and it was flagged as spyware. There was nothing in it because I made the folder, but if it's this easy to fool AA6, then how easy is it to fool it into a false negative? More on this is posted here (http://www.spywareinfoforum.com/yabbse/showthread.php?t=3470) and here (http://www.lurkhere.com/forum/DCForumID6/272.html) .

I am not posting this to kick up dirt or to be nasty, but because I feel that there are "issues" and major public relations problems that need to be addressed by Lavasoft. Hopefully they will address these problems and better respond to users concerns and questions. Just releasing a new version is not enough. It will take months of consistant positive actions by Lavasoft to have any chance to repair the negative image that it has created.

Added after seeing new posts before mine:

I do not direct my post at you Marianna or anyone in particular except those who officially represent Lavasoft. It is true that AA was the only player at one time, but if they expect people to pay $39US for a program, they need to have a better track record in the present day instead of resting on their past achievements.

[sk]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Marianna link=board=20;threadid=7015;start=0#46810 date=1044425903]
Oops........ I was only the "messenger" ....... I have NOTHING to do with Lavasoft ....... and now you are "shooting" at ME ??? :'( :'(
" }-Well, anyone who shoots at you and makes you cry will ultimately come to learn - first-hand - of Dante's 'innermost circle'; of that I am sure. But in the meantime, Marianna, you might find this old time remedy a very handy personal defense against such mindless attacks: Just say this out loud and you are guaranteed to be safe from any negative fallout whatsoever: "I'm rubber...you're glue...bounces off me...and sticks to you"! (I have it on good authority that this is still the best all time favorite against all forms of mindless attacks!!)
:D
sk

[Marianna]

-{ Quote: "-{ Quote: "" }-"I'm rubber...you're glue...bounces off me...and sticks to you"! (I have it on good authority that this is still the best all time favorite against all forms of mindless attacks!!)
:D
sk
" }-


THANKS SK - I'm feeling much better now :-*

[rodzilla]

> Many of us will choose to entrust our security to people we can trust!

I got into spyware early ... I was involved in the Aureate exposure from the first day.

I used Ad-aware from the first freebie release, and I licensed it when it went commercial.

I was rather dismayed when it vanished off the face of the earth with no warning or apology.

After several months of zero support and an ignored email asking what was going on, I was even more dismayed to receive an email inviting me to upgrade to the new version for 50% off.

It's not the way I would have handled it! :(

[Pilli]

;D Maybe I'm an old softie ::) but I took what Lavasoft said at the time as OK by me- at least it was honest, though maybe a little misguided
AdAware is nice utility & I did not feel aggrieved by there abscence for a short while - We all were able to use other tools such as Spybot etc.
I like the new version very much & paid extra for the Pro version.
Gullible, I maybe, but I believe Lavasoft still have a lot to offer.
Giving any work away free is sacrifice for the owners of that work - so let's give them a chance. ;D

[sk]

A general response to Nicolas:

As I was reading your replies, three thoughts kept churning through my head:

1. Thanks for setting the record straight.
2. It's a shame you have to take time away from development of A.A. to answer such nonsense in the first place.
3. I'd love to see what wonderful contributions to the security/privacy software field these self-proclaimed experts have made.

Finally, after all the years of having enjoyed A.A. for free, I can hardly wait to go purchase the commercial version and, in a sense, put my money where my mouth is. I can't think of a single other product (with the possible exception of Proxomitron) about which I would say the same thing.

Once again, thanks, and much continued success.

sk

[Nicolas]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Nick link=board=20;threadid=7015;start=0#46811 date=1044426541]
First, I am pleasantly surprised that the free version is out already. I was expecting it to be "delayed". However,
that's about the only truely positive thing I can say about the free version.
The free version seems to me to just be the same old AA that is has been, just with a new GUI. I know that the
"inards" are new and it's supposed to be better, but I just don't see anything that makes this a significant
improvement that justified the months of abandonment that happened in late 2002. Sure, the plus and pro versions have
more options, but I go by the "fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me" kind of logic. After months of
no work on 5.83, I would expect that AA6 would be near perfect. It's had numerous updates in just a few days. This
tends to lend credibility to those that say AA isn't properly beta tested.
Most importantly, there's an issue with AA6 identifying empty folders named "gator" as spyware when it is not. I know
because I made a new folder and named it "Gator" and it was flagged as spyware. There was nothing in it because I made
the folder, but if it's this easy to fool AA6, then how easy is it to fool it into a false negative? More on this is
posted here (http://www.spywareinfoforum.com/yabbse/showthread.php?t=3470) and
here (http://www.lurkhere.com/forum/DCForumID6/272.html) .
I am not posting this to kick up dirt or to be nasty, but because I feel that there are "issues" and major public
relations problems that need to be addressed by Lavasoft. Hopefully they will address these problems and better
respond to users concerns and questions. Just releasing a new version is not enough. It will take months of consistant
positive actions by Lavasoft to have any chance to repair the negative image that it has created.
Added after seeing new posts before mine:
I do not direct my post at you Marianna or anyone in particular except those who officially represent Lavasoft. It is
true that AA was the only player at one time, but if they expect people to pay $39US for a program, they need to have
a better track record in the present day instead of resting on their past achievements.
" }-

Hello everybody,
We did not drop support of our customers and users during the developement of Ad-aware 6, I provided email support and assistance whith their problems whenever possible.So did the rest of the staff.
Updating the outdated 5x core engine over and over again as we did in the past seemed not the appriopriate solution.
Of course I'll updating the engine as well now frequently, but critical updates are now rarely required.

The following is a response to Mr. Kalaher resp. the links posted above.

"..As you all know, I've been testing it.."

Mr. Kalaher (aka Nick,mViOkPe,Mikey and his other countless names):
Taken your continously slandering of our users and our software the past moths and even years, I question the
objectivity of your "testing", and I doubt your interest to provide the user an substantial overview.
If you would have the slightest spark of decency, you would at least respect other peoples hard work, especially since
you never provided a single piece of helpful software to the community.
I never harrassed other products neither on our board, nor in the public.You are using your namless accounts on
several boards(including ours) to do nothing else then slandering Ad-aware and its users.Don't think this remains unnoticed by the public.
Before posting the same false facts you should at least take a look into the Ad-aware 6 user manual.
There exists a "Reanalyze" function, which will filter the folders you've mentoined out of the scanning result.

Ad-aware 6 does NOT rely on "name recognition".
Ad-aware uses its own type of checksums, which are calculated fast and are 100 % accurate, and in most cases do not
even depend on a particular image of the executable.

"..Here you will notice that urizen claims that the new ref file will cure the prob. It doesn't. "

Read my response again, i've admitted that for the objects in question the hash signatures where not included in the
reffile at that time, however I've included them in the update followed one day later.
There are a few Gator, Conducent and Aureate distributions from 99/00 which are left-overs from the previous reference file, for which the binaries where no more available to update their signatures at that time.
(They make less than 0.1 % of all files Ad-aware 6 targets)
Btw, I just updated the referencefile again, and included most of the remaining.

However, at least Ad-aware is not using Wildcard-filename recognition, as Spybot does.

Now, "Spybot" using checksums..is far away from the truth.*)
Its an undeniable fact that Spybots "detection" is SOLEY based on information hard-coded in its database, which makes
it as weak as it is.(And slow, taken into account what it actually does respectively NOT does)
Especially its file-detection is SOLELY based on filename-recognition.

*) i just noticed you edited this false claim (Spybot using checksums) out.You certainly know why.

IF you set it up to scan some folders, it will produce more FPs then it detects valid targets, appearantly you never
tried it.

http://www.auracom.de/fps.gif

The red items in the scan result show only 100 % LEGIT files (One of them even is a copy of the Spybot core file ;-)
By recreating the registry keys spybot "detects", you can produce (forced) FPs on demand, so of course the same result is reproducable using registry keys or values.

I could show you 100 ways to produce FPs with the software you are promoting, but its pointless.
Instead of slandering other peoples work, I try to do it better.


Now, how about the converse scenario.

"I have tried changing names of known nasty files and AA missed every one of them."

This looks like yet another one of your false claims.
I can show you a file that will change its MD5\CRC value whenever executed.
Ad-aware will still recognize this file.(Yes, even if you rename it ;-) )
But if you know what you're doing, make a test with the recent lop distribution.

Lets see how Spybot handles the recent lop.com distributable, which uses random GUIDs-, key-, Value- and filenames.
Ad-aware still detects them, while spybot leaves all the vital core components behind, fully intact, it doesn't even recognize or terminate the process.
We've gotten several reports from users who relied on spybot, and now detected using Ad-aware 6 that they had a bunch of core files (not only lop) installed.

"Forgot to mention that AA also targets SSD backups even tho they are individually zipped and in the SSD 'backups'
folder. "

Those files are perfectly valid targets, claiming that these are FP's reveals only your lack of
If you can't stand the fact that Spybot's simply moving those files it detected (while they remain fully functional,
and theoretically executable), turn the in-archive scan feature off or don't scan your "Spybot" folders at all.
Instead of killing the "messenger", you should better inform your users about the potential security risk of Spybot's
unencrypted "recovery" archives.However, Ad-aware does what it is intended to do.Detecting targeted content.

Given all the above,
And given the fact that the tool you keep promoting has a considerably higher risk of generating FP's,
and a remarkable less effective engine, what are your real motives when you create threads like this one http://www.lurkhere.com/cgi-bin/forums/dcboard.cgi?az=read_count&om=272&forum=DCForumID6 as an example?
Or using countless accounts (at least 10 on the LS board over the last 6 months) to put the presence of a group of people, all confirming eachother ;-)
Well, as stated before, it is beeing noticed by more and more people.

Of course you are welcome to open a thread about this particular matter on the LS board www.lavasoftsupport.com (http://www.lavasoftsupport.com)

Best regards
Nicolas\Team Lavasoft

[Pieter_Arntz]

Hi Nicolas,

Is it OK to remove your previous attempts?
Quite a bit of reading to go through all of them. ;)

Regards,

Pieter

[Nicolas]

Hi Pieter,
Sorry about the multiple posts lol
I hope this is not considederd spamming.
(Preview button sucked)
However, the first three are incomplete and can be removed

Nicolas

[Nicolas]

-{ Quote: " quoting: sk link=board=20;threadid=7015;start=0#46875 date=1044452365]
A general response to Nicolas:

As I was reading your replies, three thoughts kept churning through my head:

1. Thanks for setting the record straight.
2. It's a shame you have to take time away from development of A.A. to answer such nonsense in the first place.
3. I'd love to see what wonderful contributions to the security/privacy software field these self-proclaimed experts have made.

Finally, after all the years of having enjoyed A.A. for free, I can hardly wait to go purchase the commercial version and, in a sense, put my money where my mouth is. I can't think of a single other product (with the possible exception of Proxomitron) about which I would say the same thing.

Once again, thanks, and much continued success.

sk
" }-

Hello sk,
Thank you very much for your positive feedback :)
It wasn't my intention to slander a competiting product.
In fact, this was my first response to the slandering that keeps coming from the same direction.
However, I can assure you there's now a lot more to come from LS in the near future :)
A new referencefile is coming today, and a new plug-in is currently beeing betatested.

Best regards
Nicolas

[Pilli]

Nicolas, I have added an updated review to my website wth a screenie showing proc mon - Nice job you & your team have done.

[notageek]

Marianna, just so you'll know I wasn't agreeing with L2BS talking to you like that, I was just agreeing with what he said about Lavasoft.

[notageek]

-{ Quote: " quoting: sk link=board=20;threadid=7015;start=0#46808 date=1044424819]
It always seems that the people who contribute the least have the most negative things to say. " }-


SK, lot of people would pay for products if they didn't just leave one product alone while they start a new one. The free version is there to try if you like and can afford it you buy it but is they don't take care of the free or payed for version while they make another version i see it as an that they wasn't going to give good support if I payed for the product. I'm not trying to start anything with you just making a point.

[JacK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Nicolas link=board=20;threadid=7015;start=0#46885 date=1044454548]

Hello sk,
Thank you very much for your positive feedback :)
It wasn't my intention to slander a competiting product.
In fact, this was my first response to the slandering that keeps coming from the same direction.
However, I can assure you there's now a lot more to come from LS in the near future :)
A new referencefile is coming today, and a new plug-in is currently beeing betatested.

Best regards
Nicolas


" }-

Hi Nicolas,

So sorry but here a little negative feedback ;)

AA6 counts 30 active processes on my system when there are in fact 34 running. No way to know which ones it's missing : there are not listed.

I am confident it will be solved soon ;)

Rgds,

[Pieter_Arntz]

JacK,

Can´t you tell from the scanlogs? The running processes should be listed.

Regards,

Pieter

[discogail]

Nicolas .....Good to see you out & about on the boards. ;D.......

[spy1]

Hey!

Can we lighten up on L2BS please?

All that happened was that he was under the mistaken assumption that Marianna was connected to LS!

When he realizes his error, I'm sure he'll make that right.

Deep breaths! OOOOOOMMMMMMM! Pete

[luv2bsecure]

Marianna,

I just read the last post and it was Pete's post saying I obviously thought you represented Lavasoft. That's exactly right and I am very, very sorry. I would never have addressed you, had I not thought you were connected with Lavasoft. My sincere apologies.

I have read the responses and I think it is perfectly fine for people to have divergent opinions.

I would like to take issue with one remark from SK that he should explain:
-{ Quote: "It always seems that the people who contribute the least have the most negative things to say. " }-
Considering I was the negative post to AdAware, one can only assume you were talking about me. Please go to my profile and just take a look at my posts. I defy you to find posts that are not, in some way, trying to help or trying to learn. A long time ago there was a "brush up" over what turned out to really be a misunderstanding of what constituted appropriate political posts. Since then, I have made hundreds and hundreds of posts and do not consider that your above post applies to me in any way. Coming right after my post about Lavasoft - it was rather obvious you were referring to me and I simply wanted to take issue with that as I spend hours on this forum trying to help and contribute and learn.

As for Lavasoft, I stand by my opinion. But, that should be okay. I really, truly believe every word I said.

Again, Marianna, my apologies for addressing my comments to you.

John
Luv2BSecure

[JacK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Pieter_Arntz link=board=20;threadid=7015;start=15#46930 date=1044471121]
JacK,

Can´t you tell from the scanlogs? The running processes should be listed.

Regards,

Pieter

" }-
Hi Pieter,

Yes, I do but it's a bore to check for they are not listed in a logical order.
Not listed :
csrss.exe
system
Inactive system process (I understand : it's a "non process")

But to be clear it would match with the taskmanager
(Running WinXP Pro SP1)

Rgds,

[Pieter_Arntz]

@ John,

I don´t think sk´s post was directed at anyone and certainly not at you.

@ Jack,

I see what you mean. Maybe Nicolas will be back to enlighten us on those.

Regards,

Pieter

[Marianna]

-{ Quote: "again, Marianna, my apologies for addressing my comments to you.

John
Luv2BSecure" }-



Hi John,

o.k. apologies accepted and NO hard feelings!

[luv2bsecure]

It is clear I should have directed my remarks at Nicolas. Thank you Marianna for accepting my apology.

Pieter, I don't think there's any question that SK was directing the post at me. I believe he was responding to my post. But, that's neither here nor there I suppose.

Nicholas, I never attacked AdAware as a product. Only Lavasoft for the way "Team Lavasoft" handled things for months and months. For you to come here on this forum and attack a product (Spybot S&D) that had to step in and do the job for AdAware users, and who users turned to in droves after your abandonment is simply incredible. Complete with Lavasoft made screenshots! And you wonder why I have a problem with the tactics of your company? You wonder why it is discredited in the eyes of many?

By the way, fellow members of Wilders, that attitude from Nicholas? Who really is "Team Lavasoft" ---- that's exactly the attitude I was referring to in my post. He couldn't have proved my points any better. Why are they that way? WHY can they not just admit that they screwed up (badly) and move on from there? Instead, Nicholas is actually still trying to defend Lavasoft's actions - and blasting a competing product who SAVED MANY during the disappearance of AdAware. It shows their fears of users sticking with Patrick Kolla's product, Spybot S&D (of which there will be many).

Those of us who "contribute little" - as SK said in his post - and have harshly criticized Lavasoft's practices include Mike at Spyware Info (who has tirelessly poured himself into the spyware and privacy issues with so much else on his plate):
http://www.spywareinfoforum.com/newsletter/archives/december-2002/12252002.php

And, Fred Langa with The Langa List:
http://www.langa.com/newsletters/2003/2003-01-13.htm#3

I am not alone. It is a deeply held position felt by many and with all sincerity for the well-being of the end-user in security matters.

For those who disagree, I have no problem with that - at all. I live privacy issues day in and day out in my job, so I take it personally. All of you have every right to your opinion and I respect that. Only SK, who made the comment about the criticism coming from "those who contribute the least" immediately after my post, do I have a little problem with.

So, that's where I stand and I would appreciate it if people could try and understand my position from where I come from with my chosen field of work. I deserved the rebuke for addressing Marianna, but I honestly felt Marianna was with Lavasoft. I DO feel bad about that.

All The Best.

John
Luv2BSecure

[JacK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: luv2bsecure link=board=20;threadid=7015;start=15#46956 date=1044483541]
Nicholas, I never attacked AdAware as a product. Only Lavasoft for the way "Team Lavasoft" handled things for months and months. For you to come here on this forum and attack a product (Spybot S&D) that had to step in and do the job for AdAware users, and who users turned to in droves after your abandonment is simply incredible. Complete with Lavasoft made screenshots! And you wonder why I have a problem with the tactics of your company? You wonder why it is discredited in the eyes of many?

By the way, fellow members of Wilders, that attitude from Nicholas? Who really is "Team Lavasoft" ---- that's exactly the attitude I was referring to in my post. He couldn't have proved my points any better. Why are they that way? WHY can they not just admit that they screwed up (badly) and move on from there? Instead, Nicholas is actually still trying to defend Lavasoft's actions - and blasting a competing product who SAVED MANY during the disappearance of AdAware. It shows their fears of users sticking with Patrick Kolla's product, Spybot S&D (of which there will be many).

I am not alone. It is a deeply held position felt by many and with all sincerity for the well-being of the end-user in security matters.

Luv2BSecure
" }-

Hi Luv2BSecure,

I for one understand your position : what's the use to try and discredit a concurrent product which does fine its job throwing with screenshots from the beta as far as I can see ?
Nobody says AA is a bad product, but the politic of the team during the "gap" was at least strange and there is no mystery that Lavasoft 5.83 could cause great disfonctionnements when trying to delete some new or modified malwares with its out of date ref file.

I do think AA6 is already a very good product and will be an excellent product shortly.

Just a little fact as Nicolas spoke about SBSD :
sig in SBSD about 5000 / AA6 4000 8)
Patrick does NEVER critisize, at least publically another product but rather try and work with other developpers : see the link to SpywareBlaster in the GUI : that's a fair attitude

I cannot understand why having the same goal, protect users' privacy one spends time an energy to discredit other products....

Seems becoming a new way of live for AV/AT/Security products young developers nowaday ;)

Long live and success to AA and SPSD.

Cheers,

[mitch shrader]

since april '02 i've been unable to use adaware, (blue screen) and i am scared to try the new one. spybot s&d makes the same type error.. spywareguard and spywareblaster do not. regedit does not. proxo does not. Guess which ones i think are worth having? as for the headbanging between Spybot S&D and AAW, tempest inna teaspoon. If i have to recommend ONE of em, its gonna be the nicer folks, (kudos for efficient(?) programming, but social skills count HEAPS with me).. and again, guess who I think is the nicer? 39$ for a proggie? that cleans up messes that are 99% preventable with freeware? puhLEEZE. thats a gf2 graphics card, or a router on the daily special someplace, something with a warranty, engineering specs, ratings, and that WORKS! ya'll can do flamethrowers at twenty paces if ya wanna. ima use prevention and regedit and dont think ill be sorry.

[Mike_Healan]

These statements in no way reflect the opinion of spywareinfoforum.com........ Wait a minute.. yes they do ;)

Hello again Nicolas.

Good to see you in public again, although I bet Coldmoon is muttering under his breath about it.

Version 6 may or may not put AAW back at the top of the anti-adware/anti-spyware totem pole in terms of performance. Scot Finnie seems to like it anyway: http://www.scotsnewsletter.com/39.htm#review1
I'll look at it and the plus version and see what they can do.

I don't particularly care which product does the best job. If AAW does a good job, I'll list it again on my site. It will never again be my top pick however. You abandoned all development for your 5.83 users for 4 months, so what's to stop you from doing it again when it's time to develop AAW 7?

You can't just drop updates for a security product. Whether it's free like AAW, or commercial like Aluria, you have to keep it up-to-date for your users. At the very least, you could have examined the new commonname LSP hijack and updated for that if nothing else. Every other developer I deal with updated within a week to deal with it because the old removal routine causes damage.

Despite all the criticism coming from me, I'm not just another Lavasoft basher. I was part of the team once and I regret that I had to leave. I just couldn't deal with Ann's antics at the boards anymore and that insane feud with Mike K.

I'm not loyal to any particular product. My only concern is for the people trying to get rid of spyware. When you wouldn't update for that commonname problem, I felt I had no choice but to speak out about it as loudly as I could.

I'm glad to see so many updates for the new version so soon. I'm a little disappointed that many of them are bug fixes. Perhaps you should rethink your view of public beta testing. That would avoid these problems.

Good luck with Lavasoft. I hope AAW can become what it once was.

Say hello to Melanie for me and tell her I hope she's doing ok.

Mike H

[Loki]

Hello,

Well i'm an AA+ user since version 5.6 and have always like it. But after going so long with no update I move to Spybot. I have the new version of AA+ and will keep it as a secondary to Spybot. Had NOD32 gone without updates that long while working on v2 I would have also changed AV's the same goes for TDS the last time I checked ( today ;D) they are still updating. That Lavasoft needed to upgrade there product was no reason to totally abandon the people using it. I also remember that AA went without updates when they upgraded to version 5.83. I hope that Lavasoft will make the right choices in the future. There are too many Lop.com's out there to be fighting with each other.

Loki :(

P.S. I had planned to have a friend use AA but instead went with Spybot due to the support that she could get. Support is the number one thing in any good product.

[Pretender]

The product was great. The support of the product was terrible. The product now is probably great. Hope the support will improve. I admit that I never purchased the program, but couldn't believe what happened to all of those users that had.

bob

[notageek]

I'm afraid to purchase AA6. :) But AA6 free is a good back up for Spybot S&D.

[sk]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Nicolas link=board=20;threadid=7015;start=0#46885 date=1044454548]
Hello sk,
Thank you very much for your positive feedback :)
It wasn't my intention to slander a competiting product.
In fact, this was my first response to the slandering that keeps coming from the same direction.
However, I can assure you there's now a lot more to come from LS in the near future :)
A new referencefile is coming today, and a new plug-in is currently beeing betatested.

Best regards
Nicolas


" }-If the future is anything like the past, I am sure A.A. and L.S. will be right there leading the way, Nicolas. All I can say with regard to the overall situation is this: I'm reminded of an old Irish saying: "Even god doesn't please everyone". I suppose there are always going to be ingrates and rabblerousers; it's inevitable. But what pleases me most is to see A.A. up and running strong again. All the best, Nicolas!

Sincerely,

sk

[luv2bsecure]

-{ Quote: "If the future is anything like the past, I am sure A.A. and L.S. will be right there leading the way, Nicolas. All I can say with regard to the overall situation is this: I'm reminded of an old Irish saying: "Even god doesn't please everyone". I suppose there are always going to be ingrates and rabblerousers; it's inevitable. But what pleases me most is to see A.A. up and running strong again. " }-

SK,

Do we live on the same planet?

They shouldn't have ever been GONE to welcome them back!

Quoting Fred Langa tonight in one of the most widely respected technology newsletters:

"I'll take a look at the new version of Ad-Aware, but I don't plan to rely on it any time soon. LavaSoft left their customers exposed to malware for some 5 months before the new version came out--- an eternity when it comes to online security threats. There are plenty of other excellent anti-spyware tools out there, free and paid ( http://www.langa.com/newsletters/2003/2003-01-13.htm#3 ), that offer regular, frequent updates, and that have avoided the site outages and download problems that plagued Ad-Aware even when it was being updated regularly."

"I'll stick with those other tools for now. An out-of-date security tool is almost as bad as no tool. Even if the new version is perfect (and it cannot be--- no software ever is), it'll be a while before Ad-Aware regains my trust."

- Fred Langa....The Langa List....February 5th, 2004

John
Luv2BSecure

[Nick]

-{ Quote: " nicolas (guest)
Mr. Kalaher (aka Nick,mViOkPe,Mikey and his other countless names
" }-


It seems there is a case of mistaken identity. I am not Mike/Mikey/MIke K. Other than linking to posts by him, I am not related to him in any other way.

What prompted me to post is that I was able to create a false positive in AA6 by simply making a new folder and naming it "gator" and AA6 identified it as spyware. I found this amazing since it is such a simple error. Maybe it's not as big of a deal as I think it is, but it isn't a lone example of problems for AA. After updates to fix updates for AA 5.8x last year, followed by no suppoert for 4 months, I expected better results. If this fake gator folder was an isolated example, then it would not be the issue it is.

If Lavasoft wants people such as myself to pay for their products, then people need to trust Lavasoft. I lost that trust last year from the actions and lack of action by Lavasoft. There never was any significant action by Lavasoft to allay the fears of it's users that they were being abandoned. Only the promise of AA 6 sometime in the future. They never maintained an ongoing dialog with their users to "touch base". They also got the impression of being distant because many questions about what was happening were never answered. Overall, it was starting to look like they were going to be another one of the dotcoms that simply disappeared.

Now, AA6 is out, and it is not the great leap forward that was promised. Expectations were raised very high because of the 4 months of no support, because of the answer: AA6 will be out. Yes it is out, but I see nothing that tells me the problems are over, that it will be like it used to be when it was the premier software for adware/spyware removal. What I need is consistant positive behavior by Lavasoft over many months, if not years, to get that trust back.

My challenged to Lavasoft: Gain my trust back.

[Tassie_Devils]

Hi:

I was the first to post here after getting the email re downloading the new AdAware6.0+ version and I raved over it's fast scanning, liked the GUI, etc. etc.

This in no way altered the fact that Lavasoft abandoned its customers, particularly the ones who actually paid good money [as i did] for the product only to be left without updates.

Now, I am about to throw the cat amongst the pigeons and ask what gives with the following scenario with AdAware6.0+

I have been scanning with AdAware since installing and it's been finding spyware [tracking... errrr... mining data.... cookies ~ engage, quicksrv, doubleclick, etc.] and I have been faithfully "removing" them thinking all's well.

[b]However, this is the worrying part, they are NOT being DELETED from my TIF's at ALL ???

I had an occasion to look in the Temporary Internet Folders yesterday only to see these cookies still living there. I rescanned, thinking they must ave come back from surfing in the meantime but could not figure that out as had only been to this forum.

It found the files, I deleted them again, [still leaving them in the back-up]. Once again I looked back in the folders, still there.

I rescanned again, it found ZERO files this time, looked in folders again and they were still there.

So I opened up Internet Sweeper, looked under the "Cookies Found On Your System" and saw the ones that were supposed to have been deleted [apart from the ones I wanted kept].

I did a "Sweep", said it deleted XXXX files, then open up Windows Explorer again and looked in Temp Internet Folders. ALL cookies [except the ones I wanted] were deleted.

The only thing I can surmise is that I had Internet Sweeper installed prior and somehow it's "claimed" rights over the cookies. Is this possible?

Any thoughts?

Cheers, a mystified ??? TAS

[Mike_Healan]

-{ Quote: "However, this is the worrying part, they are NOT being DELETED from my TIF's at ALL ???

I had an occasion to look in the Temporary Internet Folders yesterday only to see these cookies still living there. I rescanned, thinking they must ave come back from surfing in the meantime but could not figure that out as had only been to this forum.

It found the files, I deleted them again, [still leaving them in the back-up]. Once again I looked back in the folders, still there.

I rescanned again, it found ZERO files this time, looked in folders again and they were still there.

So I opened up Internet Sweeper, looked under the "Cookies Found On Your System" and saw the ones that were supposed to have been deleted [apart from the ones I wanted kept].

I did a "Sweep", said it deleted XXXX files, then open up Windows Explorer again and looked in Temp Internet Folders. ALL cookies [except the ones I wanted] were deleted.

The only thing I can surmise is that I had Internet Sweeper installed prior and somehow it's "claimed" rights over the cookies. Is this possible?

Any thoughts?

Cheers, a mystified ??? TAS
" }-

There are no cookies in the TIF folder. Those are internal pointers in the cache which point the browser at the cookies in the cookies folder. The start menu shortcut that launches Adaware is not the actual adaware program, it only points to it. Remove adaware and the pointer/shortcut does nothing. The same goes for those pointers in the TIF.

[Tassie_Devils]

Hi MIke:

Thanks for the reply. I am now even more confused, lol

Yes, I know the cookies are in the Cookies folder :), just that they also appear to be in TIF's. I did not realise they were "shortcuts".

In the TIF's the cookies are listed not as shortcuts, they are just there and both folders contain the same thing, size, name, etc.

No mention of "shortcut" at all. I presumed they were there as part of the TIF files.

The other thing is then, if that's the case, how come AdAware does not remove those as well, surely they were recognised as such. I mean Internet Sweeper deleted them no probs at all from BOTH folders.

No big deal then, if that's the case, just wondering now why, but as long as the main one is deleted then no probs.

Cheers Mike, TAS.

[mViOkPe]

Hey guys, just for the record, I haven't been here in this thread before. I haven't even been on this board in a month or so. Haven't been avoiding you guys, just been busy. Wouldn't be here now if Nick hadn't PMed me this morning. I think it is funny that Urizen thinks every time someone complains about something that it must be me. I'm kinda flattered. Just FYI, the only place I need to hide my ID is at LS where it is true that I can not openly post with my own identity. Anyone want to know why? Anyway, thx for the laugh. :) BTW Since 'Nick' reged to our board as well as here, I'm fairly sure that Paul could verify this. Besides, when I talk bad about LS, I always mention my questions that have yet to be answered. http://www.net-integration.net/cgi-bin/forums/ikonboard.cgi?s=3e41c1871314ffff;act=ST;f=34;t=1005 Urizen, care to comment? Also, just for the record, whenever discussing AA vs SSD, I always recommend using both since AA has finally been fixed so that it doesn't cripple sys anymore. Example; http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,5850780~root=security,1~mode=flat Later folks.

[javacool]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Tassie_Devils link=board=20;threadid=7015;start=30#47049 date=1044522145]
Hi MIke:

Thanks for the reply. I am now even more confused, lol

Yes, I know the cookies are in the Cookies folder :), just that they also appear to be in TIF's. I did not realise they were "shortcuts".

In the TIF's the cookies are listed not as shortcuts, they are just there and both folders contain the same thing, size, name, etc.

No mention of "shortcut" at all. I presumed they were there as part of the TIF files.

The other thing is then, if that's the case, how come AdAware does not remove those as well, surely they were recognised as such. I mean Internet Sweeper deleted them no probs at all from BOTH folders.

No big deal then, if that's the case, just wondering now why, but as long as the main one is deleted then no probs.

Cheers Mike, TAS.

" }-

If you clean the index.dat files (TIF and Cookie folders) with a program such as MRU-Blaster (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/mrublaster.html), these shortcuts that point to removed cookie files should disappear. :)

Best regards,

-Javacool

[Tassie_Devils]

thanks javacool, forgot about MRU with the cookies and tif's now, just ran it.

And Mike is right re shortcuts. I manually deleted one from the TIF's and it immediatley disappeared, did not ask "permission" yes/no, it just went, then I went to the Cookies folder itself and tried one there, and it asked me if I wanted to delete it or not as usually it does when deleting.

You learn something new everyday ;D

[wink]

Hi,

I have been reading this thread with interest as I used to use Ad-Aware a while ago (back when I assumed that installing the program protected me forever). I never knew that spyware evolved so quickly so I happily used the product assuming I was protected. On joining Wilders I found out to my dismay that Ad-Aware wasn't worth much as it hadn't been supported properly in quite a while and so I downloaded Spybot S&D (which is free and is updated regulary).

All I have to say is that I have little trust in a company that takes money and then leaves its product with only skeleton support if that.

All I can say I will vote with my mouse and people who feel desserted should do the same, the more forgiving give it a go, the screenies certainly look nice.

I'll climb down from my soapbox now.

I have said it before and I will say it again, the value of this forum for technical issue is fantastic, rarely do you find such a collection of knowledge under one URL ..... Good Work!!!!

Wink :)

[Basher]

Hmm

Looks like some big egos were hurt.

Am I right to say that many of the "big names" here are bashing , sorry critising adaware 6, on principle (because of "abandonment" issues) rather than any technical weaknesses?

Thanks

[Slezz]

Basher

The key word you used was PRINCIPLE, which the Lavasoft Team seems sorely lacking.
Technical weaknesses...would you consider screwing up a person's computer...which is what the previous version of adaware could do...a technical weakness ?