Pest Patrol

I bet it wasn't anything too flattering.

Yes,the dots say that given the products you post above it is obvious Pest patrol is better than nothing, since none of what you posted above are known to be good for detecting trojans . That's always assuming you did not accidently detect something legimate

 

<g> Ruffian - In my scenario, PP isn't the primary or the secondary - I wouldn't have it here.

Any company that shuts down their support website to avoid public complaints about their product doesn't cut it, AFAIC. Pete

 

Well then what the heck are you doing in this thread?

Ah yes, yet another member of the "majority" that loves Pest Patrol. *Snicker*

 

Here you are assuming that in most cases you trust both secondary and primary scanners (at least to avoid false positives) and then some circumstance comes along that destroys your faith in the primary scanner.

But if you have any doubt at all in your secondary scanner in avoiding false positives as we are talking about in this case with Pest patrol, than it's effectiveness is destroyed .
...
Ruffian, I can only hope you do not have to learn the hard way. I certainly don't think you understand computer security or security programs. By attacking a program that is actively reducing the number of trojans in the wild you are so far off base that one wonders if you are not really the auther of Pest Patrol and are simply using your outlandish posts to introduce the virtues of your program to more potential users.

If you insist that you know better than anyone who would use Pest Patrol please examine the following True/False statements and see how you would answer them. But be sure to think before answering! Hidden among these seemingly obvious questions is one that was carefully crafted to reveal a serious flaw commonly present in the minds of those who think that everything with regards to computer administration will have an easy way out. If you don't want to be put on the spot, then maybe I will turn the key question into a poll. Then when you see which answer the majority of those polled think and you will know to do the opposite. Good luck!

-HandsOff

*****

1. I am livid everytime I get a false positive from a security program. There is no excuse for this kind of sloppy programming.

2. I appreciate programs that report suspicious files because this allows me the best opportunity to limit damages.

3. When I find out my computer has been compromised by malware I am afraid, because I feel I can never trust my computer again.

4. When I allow a security program to remove an infected file, and then later I find that the file was legitimate I am devestated! I have no idea how to return my computer to its previous state.

5. I don't "panic" when a program detects malware because often it is a "false positive". It is always a good idea to verify the files malevolence with an independent file checking means.

6. If I do not like a products support page then I simply refuse to use their program. I don't care how well the program works.

7. The sign of a great program is when the makers devote more resources to support pages then they do to maintaining the program.

8. If a security program is excellent at detecting a certain class of threat, but is mediocre in detecting a different class of threat then the program should be trashed. Its authors clearly do not have enough pride in their work.

9. My computer was compromised by malware. I burn with shame. I vow it will never happen again.

10. Mr. Smith has the best security programs that money can buy. Mr. Jones has mainly free programs. Mr. Smith learned everything he needed to know about computers years ago. Mr. Jones is still learning. Mr. Smith's computer is certain to hold up better were his and Mr. Jone's computers subjected to identicle threats in the coming months.

 

Well based on your posts on this forum , I 'm pretty sure I do understand more than you in general, but this has nothing to do with this thread.

Paranonia. Given the way you support pest patrol one might think *you* are the author! But you are very off base here. You don't really need to look far for people to speak out against Pest Patrol really. Even in the very first post of this thread...

Wow, scary... Let's see you give loaded question and try to force feed true/false answers.... Let's see if they are possible.

*****

I'm not Livid for every false positive. Even the best do get false positives. But that does not mean that you don't care about the frequency of false positives. I'm Livid if it occurs over and over again though.

Again impossible to answer. Would you appreciate a program that 90% results in false positves? 80%? 5%? Can you see why a true/false answer is silly here?

No. It's a rare person who started on his own without any guidance to be totally malware free. And by that I mean even the most mild case of adware or just a simple hijack. Though of course. many many people have never being infected by viruses.

I certainly won't be devasted, just annoyed. But other people/newbies will be devasted. And it certainly is annoying!

I don't panick, but getting a blizzard of false positives will reduce security because of the tendency of the person to assume that it is one such false positive again. Remeber the story of the boy who cried wolf?

Not sure about the relevance of this question. But i suppose this is directed to Pest patrol closing down their support page?

Logically I would say no. But in general, the 2 go hand in hand.

No. If you signed up for a anti-trojan program, it will then catch trojans only, pretty simple.

Do you mean Mr smith has stopped learning? Otherwise , if someone trumps another in both knowledge and use of software, it is logical that he will be more protected than the other.

 

Hi Ruffian -

Okay, really your are entitled to your oppinions, and my question(s) and answers are by no means definitive. It is good that you are willing to take positions on the questions, however, try to remember that the answer to a True/False question is

True

or

False

One can attempt to justify ones answers and try to establish that theirs is correct despite not agreeing with the author of the test. Often they are right. In the computing world one is often confronted with the need to reduce an idealogical answer to one that translates to following a certain course of action, e.g. suspicious file, i should remove it (true or false). Whatever the basis for the decision when it comes right down to it, with computers it is always True/False ... 1/0 ...

I will give you the number of my "trick" question...it is number 5. What say you?

True or False?

-HandsOff

 

whats the answer to number 5 ?

 

5. I don't "panic" when a program detects malware because often it is a "false positive". It is always a good idea to verify the files malevolence with an independent file checking means.


The answer to question 5 is FALSE. The answer I expected to see was TRUE.


Hopefully it was understood that "panic" in this context can be substituted with "act swiftly to neutralize the suspicious program." One may like to have definitive proof before going through the process of sanitization. One may like to take the time to assess the risk of the potentially dangerous code. However while you are studying it, it may be more than just studying you. Cut out the infection in time and you may live to compute another day.

As for being annoyed by false positives? Actually, they are easily handled, and the code is normally easily replaced. I've installed about 300 programs on my personal computer this year, not counting the usual patches, driver upgrades. (i've subsequently uninstalled about 250 - this is an exclusive club!) adding one or two more to either list is not going to rock my world.

As for the boy who cried wolf? Well, all those people who came running before probably would not have helped him anyways. At best they might provide a vague description to the propper authorities if it is safe to do so. If it is your job to tend the herd, then hopefully you can deal with the occasional wolf. Besides, I have a saying of my own to quote.

"Never send a boy to do a man's job."

-HandsOff

 

Sounds to me your "test" is worthless if you have to hope that something is "understood" along certain lines.

 

Handsoff for someone who doesn't know a lot about computer security, your tone seems far too arrogant for me. Moreover For a poll about attitudes, there is by definition no correct answer depending on your comfort for risk versus stability for example.

For a ultra paranoid risk mode (which isn't inherently more secure) which you seem to be in, of course you would insist remove all FP files first.

 

Right guys, let's be sure our debate/s are kept to the pros and cons of the software being discussed and not each other.

 

Sorry about that, Detox, and the late post too. Spring time does not see me in front of my computer as much. You are right of course. I did not mean to let it get out of hand.

Pro's:
-Detected many trojans that other software missed.
-Has lots of information and decent logs. The background information they give you sometimes seems misleading, yet it still provides enough information to know what you are dealing with, so I am more than satisfied with it.
-Has free version
-Highly Customizable (straightforward and easy to set options)
-Keylogger is a nice bonus
-Has significant anti-spyware (example, Kontiki...) capability
-I like the fact that you can customize the scan to specific folders and drives because as a practical matter, certain folders can be excluded and thus shorten the scanning time required.

Con's:
-False positives. I have not been troubled by this. I have never removed anything as a result of a false positive.



-HandsOff