Is an antispyware really useful ?

Hi,

Most of them do not block anything (on the fly) nor seem to notice any of the actions (e.g. Spycar test... which is caught on access by Avira Antivir ) and moreover their heuristic capabilities are often poor... or nonexistent (e.g. AVG AntiSpyware).

In other words : are antispyware apps still useful ?

Thanks for your comments.

 

I don't see how that indicates that antispyware programs are useless against real threats, or that Avira is useful against real threats.

The thing I've noticed is that some AV software perform weaker against this category of malware, and others (like Avira free edition) do not detect them on purpose. AS isn't absolutely necessary if you've got a good security setup, but for people still relying on blacklist scanners, I'd suggest they add one.

 

The better AS programs are generally more effective on cleaning spyware/adware etc compared to most AVs.

IMO, it is worthwhile using one of the free ASs as an occasional on-demand scanner.

 

I certainly don't need them, but my setup isn't yours.
1. Spyware can't hurt me anymore, even when they are installed.
2. I remove spyware completely during each reboot, no AS can do that.

 

Nah, mine just does it before the reboot.

 

How do you do that, with failing security softwares, not with a real-time shield, I hope ?

 

For instance, Avira's scope is very comprehensive (Premium edition) : besides viruses and trojans, it can detect most of other malwares (adwares, spywares, rootkits, etc.)

In that case, what would be the usefulness of an AS ?

 

that and a Sandbox.

 

Never hurts to have one for on demand scans.

 

Which one ?

 

SAS or AVG-AS

 

Are they more effective in prevention?

 

thats a loaded question. I mean if you use a AV that is really bad in detection, then yes. If you use one that is rated standard or above, I think not. But that is just the way I feel about it.

 

and what about CA Antispyware ? (formerly Pest Patrol which was a very reputable antimalware)

 

Comodo BO Clean is pretty good and has heuristics and is free and is low on system resources.

 

I confess I'm a bit surprised to see many people on the forum run CA Antispyware down...
Why ?

 

The first product I owned was ETrust Security suite by CA. That led me to this place. Hmmm, wonder why? Its detection is not that great, it will clean what it finds, but finding it is the key. Their firewall is the old Tiny one I think and they screwed it up. The AS is dismal by todays standards. I mean why settle on a Yugo, when there are endless possibilities talked about here that will help you so much more.

 

Thanks for the info.
I thought CA Antispyware (and Ad-Aware as well) were still effective products...

 

Last I tried PestPatrol it had many false positives.

Anyways for the original question: AS are good for cleaning adware/spyware on infected computers. If youre on a clean computer however, using an alternate browser (Firefox or Opera) and sandbox is effective at keeping you safe from spyware.

 

AVG AntiMalware would be a good example of how having one along with your AV could help in improving On Demand scanning, but unfortunately in the case of AVG even with the Antispyware its Real Time effectiveness isn't the best.

 

More details about why that is true would be appreciated.

 

I may be wrong but an AS without any heuristic capabilities and solid real-time features is absolutely useless.
On-demand scans are not enough since the battle is lost.

 

Referring specifically to Woodward's post, AVG Anti-Malware comes with realtime protection as well. So I'm just curious as to the basis behind his claims.

 

I must ask for clarification on this one. Did I misunderstood or did you say that they don't protect in real-time? I wonder what the resident shield in my AVG A-S Plus is for then, or the Ad-Aware Pro-Plus/SAS Pro/etc. corresponding features?