spysweeper Beta 4.0

[Mucker]

Spysweeper Beta 4.0 seems to scan faster, also scan cookies on the scan screen. please be careful regarding the startup list, you have to uninstall 3.5 in order to install 4.0 Beta and the beta cleaned all things that were blocked from startup --might have to restore--don't know any other way to find bloked items

[controler]

Where did you find this beta? and is the Lic for the paid version 3.5 work for this
new beta version?

Bruce

[Mucker]

Controler, I found it on the options page click update program- the 4.0 lic expires on same date as 3.5--Mucker

[polyglory]

G'day Mucker,

I only get I have the latest version 3.5 :)

[siliconman01]

Yesterday, following the uninstall/install instructions for SS Beta 4.0, I was unable to get Beta 4.0 to run on my Windows XP-SP2 HE box. It kept reporting that "Spy Sweeper is damaged, Please Re-Install". So I had to revert back to 3.5.

This morning it looks like the Beta download page is no longer available. ??? Perhaps Webroot has temporarily withdrawn Beta 4.0.

[iwod]

Has there been any improvement on resource usage?

[Don Pelotas]

-{ Quote: "Has there been any improvement on resource usage?" }-
Most definitely yes, it's currently using 2mb, the peak so far is 12mb.

[iwod]

I hope you are not joking...... 2mb?? Spysweeper? Are we even talking about the same product. The one from webroot which version 3.5 peak at around 40Mb and rest at 12 Mb!.

What about its interface? Still as ugly?

[Don Pelotas]

-{ Quote: "I hope you are not joking...... 2mb?? Spysweeper? Are we even talking about the same product. The one from webroot which version 3.5 peak at around 40Mb and rest at 12 Mb!.

What about its interface? Still as ugly?" }-
No joke, right now at 3.5mb and as you can see 12.5mb is the peak so far. The interface has minor changes, and couple new options, an auto-updater and an ADS-execution shield is added, i like it so far, it's fast btw.

[Mucker]

Don Pelotas,

Ihad to uninstall --an alert screen came up and appeared to block something and then very quickly changed to no alert. after that the alert icon greyed out and I could not get the alert log to function. The scan usually took 18 minutes with3.5 and was only 8 minutes for the Beta. I'm comp challenged so I don't understand everything that was happening. There also was something regarding the host file screen that made me nervous--reason for uninstall.

Mucker

[Don Pelotas]

-{ Quote: "Don Pelotas,

Ihad to uninstall --an alert screen came up and appeared to block something and then very quickly changed to no alert. after that the alert icon greyed out and I could not get the alert log to function. The scan usually took 18 minutes with3.5 and was only 8 minutes for the Beta. I'm comp challenged so I don't understand everything that was happening. There also was something regarding the host file screen that made me nervous--reason for uninstall.

Mucker" }-
I haven't seen anything like this so far, but siliconman01 did say in his post that the download was removed for while and i downloaded after this, so maybe there was a slight problem with the first exe.

I have the startupshield disabled, try this if you reinstall the beta. :)

[controler]

I still don't see the "Beta" listed on their site.

Bruce

[Don Pelotas]

-{ Quote: "I still don't see the "Beta" listed on their site.

Bruce" }-
You have to use "update program" in 3.5, there an invite on the update-page, you are directed to. I believe it's the only way.

[Mucker]

Controler,

I just checked the update program for the Beta and it seems to still be removed. I e-mailed webroot with problems and they responded and said thanks for info and passed it on to beta programmers. I would like to give another try myself. I also noticed lower resource usage like D Pelotas. Hopefully it will be available soon.

Mucker

[siliconman01]

Just out of curiosity, the very-early-on Beta 4.0 that I downloaded and which will not even run on my XP-SP2 system has stats of

5,441,293 Size
5,443,584 Size on Disk

Does this match the Beta 4.0 setup download for those who have Beta 4.0 in and running?

I too can no longer find any Beta download link even after reinstalling 3.5 and checking pgm update.

[Mucker]

Don Pelotas,

I was posting and just saw your reply, thanks for tip regarding startup shield. I am newbie and am very much impressed with what I read on Wilders.

Mucker

[Don Pelotas]

-{ Quote: "Don Pelotas,

I was posting and just saw your reply, thanks for tip regarding startup shield. I am newbie and am very much impressed with what I read on Wilders.

Mucker" }-
You're welcome, Mucker. :)

[Don Pelotas]

-{ Quote: "Just out of curiosity, the very-early-on Beta 4.0 that I downloaded and which will not even run on my XP-SP2 system has stats of

5,441,293 Size
5,443,584 Size on Disk

Does this match the Beta 4.0 setup download for those who have Beta 4.0 in and running?

I too can no longer find any Beta download link even after reinstalling 3.5 and checking pgm update." }-
This matches the size of the exe-file that i have. It's still using between 2-12.5mb memory, after 24 hours btw. :)

[siliconman01]

Thanks Don for the check.

-{ Quote: "This matches the size of the exe-file that i have. It's still using between 2-12.5mb memory, after 24 hours btw." }-

The memory size "fix" sounds most encouraging. I'm just wondering if I have some sort of pgm conflict for example with RegDefend, ProcessGuard, or NIS 2005...hmmm.

[Don Pelotas]

-{ Quote: "Thanks Don for the check.
The memory size "fix" sounds most encouraging. I'm just wondering if I have some sort of pgm conflict for example with RegDefend, ProcessGuard, or NIS 2005...hmmm." }-
You're welcome, i use Process Guard and have seen no conflicts, it asks for the same rights as 3.5 does, but thats it so far.

[iwod]

Now only if they would update the ugly interface.

What about CPU resources?

[Don Pelotas]

-{ Quote: "Now only if they would update the ugly interface." }-
I kind of like it. ;)
-{ Quote: "What about CPU resources?" }-
Believe or not, but this is the picture i'm seing:

[Don Pelotas]

Second screenshoot:

[Don Pelotas]

Just discovered that there are two processes in 4.0!!!! :-[ .......ATM these two combined are using almost 20mb, but there doesn't seem to be any of the CPU spikes that there is in 3.5. Kind of embarrassing only to notice after posting, but the good thing is the CPU-usage, much more important to me. ;D

[tuatara]

Welcome to Webroot's Software Update Page




Your Current Version: Version 3.5

Latest Release: Version 3.5

Congratulations! You've got the latest version of Spy Sweeper. Please visit us periodically to check for new product releases.

:-\

[polyglory]

-{ Quote: "Welcome to Webroot's Software Update Page




Your Current Version: Version 3.5

Latest Release: Version 3.5

Congratulations! You've got the latest version of Spy Sweeper. Please visit us periodically to check for new product releases.

:-\" }-

Exactly the same as I stated earlier, though I did not have your expertise to display the above :)

[iwod]

well 20 Mb is still an improvement from 36Mb.

But this is enough to keep me away.

[siliconman01]

I was able to get a slightly newer Beta 4.0 version by submitting a support request ticket to Webroot. It too failed to initially install. There is a major problem with the new second service WRSSSDK in Beta 4.0 and very large HOSTS file such as those from HPGURU's site. WRSSSDK goes 100% busy trying to handle this large HOST file and never drops down in CPU time...therefore locking out any other program from running. This large HOSTS file is handled without a problem in V3.5.

Plus the install failure is also a result of the large HOSTS file at C:\Windows\System32\Drivers\Etc. :(

This is going to be a killer for many of us SS users who also use the HPGURU HOST file.

[Triple Helix]

-{ Quote: "Welcome to Webroot's Software Update Page




Your Current Version: Version 3.5

Latest Release: Version 3.5

Congratulations! You've got the latest version of Spy Sweeper. Please visit us periodically to check for new product releases.

:-\" }-

I just went to there web site and Asked Customer Service for the Beta Version and they sent it to me!!

And I'm a Licenced User of SS;D

[siliconman01]

IMPORTANT:::::

Here's something you should immediately check if you are using Spy Sweeper Beta 4.0.

The HOSTS file Shield and the Common Ad file Shield completely overwrote my original HOSTS file wiping out the 127.0.0.1 Localhost entry at the beginning of the file. This feature should be appending to the HOSTS file entries, NOT overwriting the entire file.

This file is located in the C:\Windows\System32\Drivers\Etc folder. The very first entry should be 127.0.0.1 Localhost.

I'm not certain if this occurred on the initial installation of Beta 4.0 or when the definitions files was updated. So you may wish to recheck it the next few times SS updates the definitions.

I have submitted this problem to Webroot.

[tazdevl]

Things seem to be running smoother with 4.0. Scans are less invasive and as Don also indicated, I'm not seeing CPU spikes like I did with 3.5.

[beetlejuice69]

The Beta update is back up on their site.

[tazdevl]

I should also mention that I rarely even use AdAware, SpyBot or MAS these days. I have yet to be in a situtation where they other 3 apps find something SS misses.

[siliconman01]

Is this a refreshed Build of Beta 4.0 that has been issued? I've dropped back to V3.5 because of the HOSTS file overwriting problem. The Beta is not showing up for me on their website. :-\

[tazdevl]

Anyone else notice this log file showing up on their C: drive since installation? It's called "log". Contents attached.

[Infinity]

prolly they'll use it for troubleshooting, like giant does.

how is this spysweeper thing for you? do you like it Taz?

[tazdevl]

Been pretty happy with it... as I said in an earlier post. I have yet to find a situtation in the last 6 months where SS misses anything that MSAS, SpyBot and AdAware catches.

New version seems to be running pretty well other than the log file which pisses me off.

[siliconman01]

Taz,

Have you instituted the HOSTS and Common Ads Shield and if so, did it overwrite your primary HOSTS file instead of appending to it? Just curious. :o

[siliconman01]

Beta 4.0.0.303 of Spy Sweeper is now available. This new Beta did correct the problem of overwriting the HOSTS file when using the Ad Shields in the HOSTS option.

It does NOT, however, correct the problem that a LARGE HOSTS file cannot be utilized....HPGURU's 39000+ entries. The BETA will not even install properly if this HOSTS file is used.

This was not a problem in V3.5.

[siliconman01]

TazDevl,

The LOG.TXT file does not appear to be used by Beta 4.0.0.303.