Spywareblaster really necessary?

How useful is Spywareblaster if you have a decent a-v?

Does it really add to my protection - I use Avira suite, FF with WOT extension?

Ian

 

Its just a choice between proactive and reactive action.
SB can pro-actively ban sites, ActiveX, cookies from malicious sources. While Avira+WOT will only take action when the particular site,ActiveX,cookie is downloaded.

 

plus the snapshot of your system,incase you get a spyware infection you coud revert to your previous state

 

Having an original TEETH, or DENTURES ?...

Keep an Open Eye ...

Yours Respectfully PROROOTECT

 

IMHO Spyware Blaster isn't that useful if you have common sense, a decent AV and Firefox. Because I think half of the protection is for IE anyway.

 

I agree with Vijayind.

As SpywareBlaster has no active component, ie, nothing runs on the PC to provide protect, IMHO it is a no brainer to use it. It causes no slowdown, I can never recall an FP related to it and it is there as an extra layer IN CASE.

In these circumstances BETTER WITH THAN WITHOUT!

 

If you have kids/wife/friends/etc, using your computer, keep it. It's an extra layer that uses no resources at all.
I personally ditched it, since I'm the only one who uses this computer and found no need for it.

 

It's worth noting that Microsoft is finally pushing out "kill bit" downloads via Automatic Updates to do what SpywareBlaster has been doing for years.

 

Thanks for the replies.

I'll continue updating.

Ian

 

for me i always use it cause,the snapshot,flash kill bit and the bad black list of spyware sites and activex spywares like.

 

For a Firefox / WOT user probably not much. For an IE user I think yes, why not?

 

Being a compulsive downloader and manual updater, I would have to say, "Yes!" But it won't hurt to use it.

Dave