Is SpywareBlaster still *better* than Spybot Search and Destroy's Immunization?

Discussion in 'SpywareBlaster & Other Forum' started by SpywareBlasterUser, Mar 17, 2018.

  1. SpywareBlasterUser

    SpywareBlasterUser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2018
    Posts:
    7
    Location:
    Australia
    Actually the original question would have been is SpywareBlaster the same as Spybot Search and Destroy's immunization and if so, how is it different? In which a searched topic answered this but dates back 15 yrs which answers a sounding "yes and is better too" summary, and was wondering in this year and age, this is still the case? Of course I would reply to that thread if it wasn't locked to see if anyone on there would reply back....

    So far, I've read that both do the something, except Spybot does one step further and edits the hosts file for more protection which SpywareBlaster doesn't do? Or at least the version I've been using doesn't.... but SpywareBlaster is still better despite the extra step Spybot has taken....or maybe things ave changed since the release of v2.0 of Spybot....hmmm? Or maybe v1.6.2 is still superior to v2.0? hahahaha....
     
  2. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    6,101
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    SpywareBlaster does not run in real-time where I think Spybot S & D does. It's been a long, long time since I installed Spybot.
     
  3. SpywareBlasterUser

    SpywareBlasterUser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2018
    Posts:
    7
    Location:
    Australia
    Yes, you are right, SpywareBlaster doesn't run in realtime as all its protection is passive, where as Spybot S & D is active, BUT only teatimer and that SDHelper processes run in the background which I don't believe have anything to do with immunization....

    Why has it been a long time since you installed Spybot? It got devalued after the version 2.0 update upgrade they did? Or some other software you've decided to use have *better* protection settings than Spybot even the paid version? Or just simply decided to no longer use any malware/virus active protections and rely on passive ones only and of course your common sense so you don't fall to social engineering attacks......hahahahaha...?
     
  4. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    6,101
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    It just has no appeal for me anymore. I'm using much better programs these days.

    I don't get infected anyway and if I do I'll simply restore a recent backup.
     
  5. SpywareBlasterUser

    SpywareBlasterUser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2018
    Posts:
    7
    Location:
    Australia
    ...so it's lost its touch after all these years of updates?

    ...like what?

    You must do hourly backups then if you don't intend to pursue removing the threat and backing up those important documents......that you just finished a few seconds ago and then suddenly a rampant virus gets passed your antivirus deleting everything....oh yeah right, that kind of attack would kinda need a backup of some sort to recover said documents and ues having an hourly backup of one would be nice so you don't have to re-do weeks of work on something that you just finished because a virus got passed your defenses....

    But I guess I was more on about the lesser destructive kind .....like maybe a trojan..........ok a backdoor trojan could be just as bad I suppose...but what about a keylogger/screen-grabber type trojan? ...only harmful if you let the data get out of your system......
     
  6. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    6,101
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    Nope, I don't do that kind of stuff on my machines. I have Macrium Reflect scheduled to do weekly backups and I manually do a backup when I feel the need.
    I'm just not interested in it.
    Other stuff.

    This forum section is about SpywareBlaster, not about other programs.

    Cheers.
     
  7. JoWazzoo

    JoWazzoo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    241
    Location:
    Ether
    Spywareblasteruser - there are 10s of thousands of posts here. Likely any ? you might raise is already answered here.
     
  8. SpywareBlasterUser

    SpywareBlasterUser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2018
    Posts:
    7
    Location:
    Australia
    Yes, but I was quite curious as to what sort of security protections you had in place since you've given up on Spybot....paid or free, I don't care which... But seem very defensive on your layered security.....so it must be solid and don't wanna tell others so that they could break it or something idk.....hahahaha....
    Yes, but they date 15 years back......or at least a few years back(unless you can find one that was started this year 2018 - I'll take that answer if it exists?), I want a March 2018 answer, not one that's old and most likely no longer relevant thanks to an update or whatever....
     
  9. JoWazzoo

    JoWazzoo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    241
    Location:
    Ether
    Maybe you should start a new thread then :)
     
  10. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    6,101
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
  11. SpywareBlasterUser

    SpywareBlasterUser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2018
    Posts:
    7
    Location:
    Australia
    ...well that's what this thread was for, wasn't it...? Well so far I still haven't quite gotten an answer to my question.... If a well guarded hosts file helps, then Spybot would be better because it does that on top of the usual stuff SpywareBlaster already does, but on the other hand not having to have a background service running helps reduce overhead but as mentioned earlier, I don't believe those two have anything to do with immunization, but of course correct me if I'm wrong... OR you could have both if you are unsure which is better! :doubt:
    ...ahhh, thanks...
     
  12. PEllis

    PEllis Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2016
    Posts:
    251
    Location:
    Australia
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2018
  13. SpywareBlasterUser

    SpywareBlasterUser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2018
    Posts:
    7
    Location:
    Australia
    Yes, I've also used both at the sametime as well at a few points in my life too...

    Assuming the information in those threads are still valid in today's version of SpywareBlaster (SB) and Spybot Search and Destroy (SS&D):
    • SB doesn't quite support Firefox (and this is my main browser I use) or other browsers as much as Internet Explorer (IE), so if you're using them, have fun! hahahaaha However, SS&D has some support for Firefox with its own immunization feature * ...oh, there's a conflicting post: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/fo...aster-and-spybot-together/page-2#entry1306050 says it DOES work with firefox whereas that other guy said it probably doesn't.... oh here's another post that says is DOES support Firefox: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/fo...wareblaster-and-spybot-together/#entry1300094
    • Extending the above point, if using Firefox as the web browser will have minimal effectiveness as SB is intended for IE only or IE based application... *
    • SS&D's Teatimer realtime process allows you to proactively block any registry changes you didn't intend to make and thus is useful when combating malware BUT you kinda have to know some background information on what those changes are and whether or not they are good changes or bad changes from a rootkit for example and you allow it through thinking it's probably a good change and the fact that you're already annoyed with the constant popups and just wanna get it out the way... * ** ***
    • SS&D gets another point for hosts file protection * **
    • There IS some overlap protection if running both SB and SS&D *
    • SB blocks spyware tracking cookies, restricts the actions of potentially dangerous sites by adding a list of sites and domains associated with known spyware, advertisers and marketers to the browser's "Restricted Sites Zone", and prevents the installation of ActiveX-based spyware, adware, browser hijackers, dialers, and other potentially unwanted software. SB also adds sites to the restricted zones by adding the domain as a subkey under the registry key: HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\ZoneMap\Domains a feature called killbits * **
    • SS&D also has an equivalent restricted zones, ie killbits feature that SB has, a "restricted zone sites" as well, a cookie filter as well that blocks malicious cookies from even saving onto the disk and apparently SB's block list is more current than SS&D's *
    • SS&D has another realtime proactive module called SDHelper which filters traffic from the good and bad and blocks the bad, effectiveness is supposedly minimal and SB doesn't have an equivalent *
    • SS&D supposedly hasn't been keeping up with the times..... *
    • Both seem to piggyback on tools that are already present on a windows operating system...they just made it more convenient and easier to use...just like some third party firewalls and even their paid counterpart versions! Oh this brings back memories of Online Armor, I don't think this program piggybacks off window's firewall and re-branding it as their own, does it...? .....my favourite firewall until tall emu got bought out and the series got axed..... :( There were no better or equivalent alternative.....zonelarm and comodo don't really stack up to it as alternative equivalents after using them for sometime to see which of the three were better...

    ...:confused:o_O:doubt:
     
  14. javacool

    javacool BrightFort Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2002
    Posts:
    4,017
    This thread has gone a bit awry, and some posts that are off-topic have been moved.

    To answer the original question:

    Most of the same answers that applied back then apply today. SpywareBlaster's protection is no-nonsense, no-overhead, and differs from Spybot's.
    Of course, you are welcome to use both - they should not conflict with each other.

    SpywareBlaster's protection is focused on co-existing with other layers and protection programs, as part of a multi-layered solution.
    Spybot has real-time and other components that may not follow that goal, but approaches will obviously differ.

    SpywareBlaster supports IE, Firefox, Chrome, etc. Some of those are changes from past answers (when not as many browsers were supported, and not in the same ways).

    Basically, you can use SpywareBlaster alongside anything else, and you'll be better off than without. It's about as no-nonsense as it gets.
     
  15. SpywareBlasterUser

    SpywareBlasterUser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2018
    Posts:
    7
    Location:
    Australia
    oh awesome, thanks! :)
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.