SpywareBlaster 3.0 released!

Discussion in 'SpywareBlaster & Other Forum' started by javacool, Mar 29, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. snapdragin

    snapdragin Administrator

    Hi Pretender,

    Removing the protection in version 2.61 before uninstalling would be considered a 'clean uninstall'. Just like if you were going to uninstall an anti-virus, you wouldn't have any of it's components 'active' before you uninstalled it.

    But if you are having no problems with SpywareBlaster v3, and everything is working well, then you are fine with the way you did it. :)


  2. Pretender

    Pretender Registered Member

    Thanks for the reply! I had already took my computer back in time before the install and did as you suggested before uninstalling. I love GoBack! No problems so far and all looks good with 3.0.
  3. Libra

    Libra Registered Member

    Thank you LowWaterMark and The Quest. I still have Microsoft Internet Explorer in that setting (I didn't realize I had to type something in.)

    I think that when I uninstalled version 2.6.1 I forgot to remove the protection first. Everything seems to be fine (i.e. when I removed protection in the new version the status page showed IE was not protected and when I checked to protect, the summary page now shows 0 items have protection disabled.) Is this okay or is there something I should do?

    Rooted - if you look at the Protection page, Summary tab, the items you have protected/not protected are listed. If you are using the Restricted tool, when you go to a page with IE, a little round symbol will show up at the bottom of the screen - if you click on that it will show you what restricted cookies were not allowed.

    Sincerely, Libra
  4. TheQuest

    TheQuest Registered Member

    Hi, Libra

    No you are ok, that means you are fully protected.

    Sorry, This I do not know what you mean.

    TheQuest :cool:
  5. LowWaterMark

    LowWaterMark Administrator

    I think they mean this symbol that shows that IE6 blocked some cookies...

    Attached Files:

  6. LowWaterMark

    LowWaterMark Administrator

    Or possibly the normal restricted site indicator...

    Attached Files:

  7. Libra

    Libra Registered Member

    Thank you again. I was concerned that since I didn't remove the protection before I uninstalled, I may have caused a problem.

    SpywareBlaster is a great utility. Thank you javacool!

    Sincerely, Libra
  8. jmgrif

    jmgrif Registered Member

    I have had the same experience? The loop it has created is frustrating.

  9. Dirk

    Dirk Guest

    I am somewhat confused regarding the licensing costs for spyware blaster 3.0.

    First, I work for a private company and would like to use your product. I am wondering what are the costs for (a) running spywareblaster with the autoupdate feature enabled (per seat, per site, or per company costs) and (b) what are the costs for running spywarebalster without the autoupdate feature enabled (per seat, per site, or per company costs).

    Finally, a small suggestion. Why not follow a similar scheme as utilized by products such as Symantec Anti-Virus? Instead of all the clients pulling down updates from your server (eating up bandwidth), why not have each organization desginate one or a hanful of PCs (say a server) to pull down the updates as they are released and have the individual spywareblaster clients poll a designated company server to grab the updates from. This allows the update to be only pulled down once from your site.

    Finally, should there be no licensing costs incurred for not using the autoupdate feature, can we contribute otherwise to this outstanding project?


  10. Gianni

    Gianni Registered Member

    Reading this post on AUMHA Forums:

    i'd like to hear Javacool's opinion about this...intentional or un-intentional omissions...? something to worry about?

  11. Volans

    Volans Registered Member

    Re:problem with browser recog

    If you want an immediatly solution, in order to wait protected the 3.1 version with the bug fixed, read this:

    I have found this solution and for me work well...
  12. doubleu

    doubleu Guest

    Interesting that after I updated IESpyad today, Spywareblaster reported that I had 42 unprotected items
    in my restricted sites. Prior to the IESpyad update, there were none.

    I must confess that I don't know exactly how either program works but this experience suggests that after updating IE Spyad, one should also check Spywareblaster to invoke full protection for items IESpyad adds.

    Does this make sense? Or, is IESpyad now redundant?
  13. amarok

    amarok Guest

    first i know just enough about computers to be VERY damgerous...but i need help. (i have windows ME) i hope someone can give me some direction in english..not computerese.
    i've had spywareblaster version 2.6.1 & was advised about the newest 3.0 version...so i tried to download the 3.0 but no matter where i attempted the download i kept getting the error about "Delete File:Code 5 access denied" i then check faq & found that apparently i'm not the only one with this problem because they gave some advice on how to overcome this problem..i tried everything...i uninstalled the older version, tried to do in safe mode...nothing works...but i'm not sure i uninstalled the program correctly...1st it wasn't in my list in my control panel add/remove programs...i found it in my program list & just deleted it by putting it in the recycle bin...still no success , so i went back to a previous restoral point in my computer & thought that i'd be back where i originally started but i don't think so... i still can't download the v3 & saw a post here about:

    "Remember to UN-check the protection in version 2.6.1 before uninstalling it, reboot, then delete the old folder. Then do a clean install of the new version 3."

    where do i go to UN-check the protectiono_O
    i need my spywareblaster ASAP!!!

  14. TheQuest

    TheQuest Registered Member

    Hi, amarok

    If you deleted the folder without uninstalling the program you will have all the reg entries still there in the Registry, you can either try to reinstall it then reboot check all protection [look a see there are no red one's] reboot then UN check all protection reboot, Then try and uninstall. Long but it on way.

    The other is you will have to use Reg Edit and search all Spywareblaster and javacool entries and delete each one then go to Internet Explorer_Internet Properties_Privacy_Edit_Remove All. reboot.

    Hope Either one works for you.
    TheQuest :cool:
  15. amarok

    amarok Guest

    to The Quest:
    thanks for the help...but as it stands now...i can't re-install it ...that delete file :code 5 error keeps coming up & there's NOTHING in my box (the box that normally shows all the items that had been protected)...that's why i thought that if i'd go back in time to a previous restoral point in my computer ..it would all go back to where i began but that's not the case.
    i'm AFRAID to mess with my registry especially if you say i should also delete the javacool entries...don't i need them for other programs aside from spyware blastero_O
    why can't i find the spywareblaster program in my list of add/remove programs in my control panelo_O
    how else can i completely un-install the program w/o going to my registryo_O

    should i just chuck it all and try to get a totally different program that works just like?

    why did they have to come up with an new version if i couldn't easily download ito_O
  16. eburger68

    eburger68 Privacy Expert


    Could you check this thread over at DSLR/BBR:


    It's about the problem with domains being removed during the installation of a new version of IE-SPYAD. I think the problem is fairly straightforward.


    Eric L. Howes
  17. Further to earlier frustrations - I have this afternoon managed to download and install version 3. WOOHOO :D

    Thanx guys

  18. doubleu

    doubleu Guest

    Thanks Eric...that explains it for me and resolves my questions above.
  19. Slater

    Slater Registered Member

    I agree. Those CLDISs were extremely useful and I relied on them for a number of reasons. I was pissed when the CLSIDs were changed from a text field (where you could copy into the clipboard) to a view-only field (where you could only read the CLSIDs on the screen). Now CLSIDs are gone altogether and that is ridiculous. Unless that feature is brought back, I won't be recommending we buy this for our 200+ employees.

    Also, most people leave their machines running all of the time, so the "update at startup" feature isn't as useful as, say, a scheduled time. It would be nice to be able to have the choice to automatically update every night at 2 am or whatever setting you choose for those machines that are only rebooted once a month.

    - Slater
  20. da cat

    da cat Registered Member

    wow javacool

    it looks great, the new GUI interface is just wonderful.

    Many thanks :D

    da cat
  21. Wabb

    Wabb Guest

    Thanks Volans for the link for Firefox. Since the only cookies I accept are Mom's, it isn't a critcal issue for me. I'll wait for a version fix, and hopefully more Firefox features, but Thanks again for the tip!!!

  22. Phant0m

    Phant0m Registered Member

    SpywareBlaster v3 you simply boot up the program and click “Internet Explorer” button which is located just before “Restricted Sites” button in “Protection” section. There contains main list with items names and its CLSIDs.

    Also SpywareBlaster v3 is still Freeware, new feature “AutoUpdate” system isn’t for very good reasons. You can still do manual updates, see http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/spywareblasterdonate.html

  23. Phant0m

    Phant0m Registered Member

    Those CLSIDs weren't in SpywareBlaster v2.6.1 main-list.

  24. javacool

    javacool BrightFort Moderator

    Thank you for the submissions - obviously I always try to keep improving the database (and adding new items as I come across them). :)

    Best regards,

  25. Phant0m

    Phant0m Registered Member

    Of course that is why i keep submitting custom block-lists to yea... :D

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.