Is SpywareGuard still worth using?

Discussion in 'SpywareBlaster & Other Forum' started by wolfpack, Jun 9, 2005.

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

    wolfpack Guest

    Hi,

    I was wondering how good you all feel SpywareGuard still is at stopping the latest spyware, and how good its browser hijack protection is in comparison to other programs available that stop bh's.

    I know how popular Javacool is around here, and it is well deserved, imo as well, but I'm looking for the most honest opinions you can give about the programs current ability to stop the LATEST forms of spyware. Thanks very much.


    *Any comments from JC would be most appreciated also, but I understand your probably busy so if not thanks anyway Javacool. :)
     
  2. snowboard

    snowboard Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2005
    Posts:
    160
    SpywareGuard
    • Prevents Hijack on homepage
    • Prevents you from downloading bad files from the internet
    • Catches and blocks spyware before it is executed

    SpywareGuard doesnt update much, but it provides good protection and it also as a decent hueristics engine too, ive heard.

    The stopping of browser hijack actually works. Like if you are switching homepages it will alert you if you want to keep the change or not.

    SpywareGuard just really stops the ones it has in its database. Compared to other hijack stoppers this a good free one that works well. But for more additional protection use SpywareBlaster

    It does the following.

    SpywareBlaster
    • Prevents ActiveX-based spyware, adware, browser hijackers, dialers, and other potentially unwanted software from installing on your computer
    • Prevents Hijack on homepage
    • Protection againest bad sites on IE/FireFox/Mozilla

    SpywareBlaster is updated usually one time a week or so. Great product that runs it the backround and take up very little resources.

    This really adds additional protection to this 2 products.

    Regards,

    snowboard
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.