MSE Prerelease 4.3.205.0 question

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by m00nbl00d, May 30, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    So, yesterday I noticed there was an upgrade to the Prerelease platform. I went ahead and installed it, and then I see that it no longer has MAPS (related to Spynet reporting) present in GUI under Settings.

    I used to have that option disabled. I went ahead and checked the registry and notice that the key is still there under HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Microsoft Antimalware\SpyNet, with a value of 2, which means it's enabled.

    WTF? o_O They no longer provide options in the GUI and they reset the registry entries? :ouch:

    If I recall from memory, there are three values:

    0 - Disabled
    1 - Basic membership
    2 - Advanced membership

    Can anyone confirm this?

    P.S: Mods, I know there's an ongoing thread about version 4, but I think this is a specific concern, and one I think should have more exposure, which is why I decided to start this thread. Feel free to move it to the MSE 4 thread, should you find it more appropriate there.
     
  2. raven211

    raven211 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Posts:
    2,567
    That is correct. Those are the three values present in MSE/WD8.
     
  3. Macstorm

    Macstorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,531
    Location:
    Sneffels volcano
    Then, it would be interesting to read why MAPS was removed from the GUI ;)
     
  4. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    And, also why settings were changed to enable Spynet, when it had been previously disabled. :blink:

    Another situation is that in order to change the value back to 0 (disabled), one has to take ownership of the registry key in question, which is clearly something most people have no clue about. And, even for those of us who know their way, do we really have to resort to this kind of thing? o_O o_O

    I really wonder what's going with Microsoft these days. o_O
     
  5. Macstorm

    Macstorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,531
    Location:
    Sneffels volcano
    Who's to say what kind of information is really sent to MS.

    It seems that personal privacy is a thing of the past for every security software out there...
     
  6. Syobon

    Syobon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Posts:
    469
    not for eset, if you turn off their "Grid"

    i hate cloud.
     
  7. sm1

    sm1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2011
    Posts:
    520
    My system is virus free for a long time. But these days legitimate software are unnecessarily raising privacy concerns. I still don't know the type of files uploaded by security software for analysis. I don't want office documents to be sent to outsiders :doubt:
     
  8. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    Tell me about it. These days, I'm far more concerned about legit applications than malware itself. It's ironic to say the least. It seems they are the new malware. It's become a trend more and more. o_O
     
  9. sm1

    sm1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2011
    Posts:
    520
    For the same reason I am thinking of uninstalling security apps and just use anti executable or the built in SRP along with system images.
     
  10. sm1

    sm1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2011
    Posts:
    520
    Even if the security software uploads only executable files chances are that the executable may be a self extracting archive containing office documents or the files may belong to a software custom made for a particular organization.
     
  11. Cloud

    Cloud Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Posts:
    1,030
    Location:
    United States
    On the most part, I have to disagree. Especially if the security company in question went out of their way to explain how their cloud works and what gets sent. In my opinion, it is hard to claim that a common majority of these companies "steal" your personal information. I mean, it could perhaps happen due to weak implementations on their part but for some companies it is a misconception commonly shared amongst concerned users.
     
  12. Syobon

    Syobon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Posts:
    469
    nice try cloud but we still don't like you enough.
    AV companies are not dumb and innocent, they known very well how to code and what they download from our PC. Thats why i like the options eset gives.
     
  13. Cloud

    Cloud Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Posts:
    1,030
    Location:
    United States
    Shame, I thought I had a pretty decent fan base. :cool: I didn't say they were dumb though, but I did state that I would like to review cloud function to avoid misconceptions.
     
  14. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    The fact a security company mentions how their cloud works and what gets sent, doesn't mean things happen that way. The only way to know what happens behind the scenes is to monitor what happens with tools like Wireshark, etc.

    Anyway, as anyone seen any info about this prerelease version mentioning why the MAPS setting disapperead from the GUI and why it reset registry entries to their default values, meaning allowing Spynet? I do like the word Spynet. :argh:
     
  15. Cloud

    Cloud Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Posts:
    1,030
    Location:
    United States
    I am so glad they changed the name to MAPS over the old Spynet. Just didn't sound right for a security product.
     
  16. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    Well, they only changed it in the GUI, and even now it's gone from the latest prerelease. But, the registry entry I mentioned in the first post reveals they're still very found of the word spynet. :D
     
  17. raven211

    raven211 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Posts:
    2,567
    Most companies have gathered information about your PC for the last 5 years and probably longer - that's just something concerned people will have to deal with, whether you like it or not.

    Moreover, if you're really concerned about privacy, you'd have to quit using Facebook altogether - and how many of you FB users are gonna do that?
     
  18. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    Then I would need to join FB first I guess, or else it would be rather hard to quit :D
     
  19. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    OK. First of all, this is not about Facebook/other social network. This isn't about information being shared either. This is about a specific application - Microsoft Security Essentials Prerelease - which currently has no option in the GUI to handle MAPS/Spynet, and has reset MAPS/Spynet settings to their default values, allowing information to be shared. The setting previously set was to disallow the sharing of information to MAPS/Spynet.

    I hope you don't think I'm being rude or anything like that, but if we turn this into something else, then for sure this thread will be closed.

    Unfortunately, I still haven't found why Microsoft decided to remove the MAPS/Spynet setting and why it reset its value. :blink:
     
  20. mnosteele

    mnosteele Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Posts:
    181
    Location:
    Chesapeake, VA USA
    It's common sense why Microsoft enables this by default and removed the option to disable, they want to improve the products detection and they do so by analyzing questionable files. If the option is disabled they don't receive files that could be malicious. If you are worried about the information they gather then you shouldn't be using a Windows based OS to begin with.
     
  21. JimboW

    JimboW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Posts:
    209
    @m00nbl00d, I found an explanation on the Prerelease forum. You need a Microsoft account of some sorts to read it. The post reads:
    -http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/mseprerelease/thread/c869bdfd-7758-4565-8381-da9db8dff1a8-

    Also found a changelog for those interested:
    -http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/mseprerelease/thread/782e76cb-f569-4b9c-b992-8d6648789f03-
     
  22. raven211

    raven211 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Posts:
    2,567
    Of course I'm not offended. This is a forum and every opinion should be expressed with no hesitation. (Except when it goes to a personal level.) :)

    EDIT: "Additionally, you have the option to automatically send us entire files that we suspect are malware"

    Um... M$, that's not what it looks like. :blink:
     
  23. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    100% nonsense.

    What's at discussion is that they reenabled an option that has been previously disabled. An option that still exists, but only in the registry. It's also required to take ownership of it, so one can modify it back to disabled. Lame. They shouldn't have reset it, period. They want new comers to the beta test to have it enabled by default, and give them a hard time disabling it, fine by me, but respect the settings of those who had already been testing it and disabled MAPS/Spynet. Is it really that hard to respect users?

    If this becomes a trend, soon they will start to reenable the experience program (Windows, Internet Explorer, etc) crap in every system where it's disabled.

    I get really concerned when I see people like you not caring about nothing of this. :blink:
     
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2013
  24. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    So, all of a sudden they decided they should remove MAPS/Spynet setting from beta versions... just because? :ouch:

    Well, for sure I won't be testing it anymore. I don't like things to be forced, and especially not reenabled, when they had been previously disabled.

    It's still to be seen if this will stick with the stable versions. Time will tell. :doubt:
     
  25. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    I agree, it's always bad when it goes to a personal level. :)

    That's an additional setting, that's now part of the latest prerelease version... and it comes disabled by default. Which is fine, it's opt-in. :)
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.