SUPERAntiSpyware 5.x

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

Hi:

Superantispy can you tell us if the shield or proactive protection is improved or not? In all the test I saw on youtube and other online tests superantispyware active protection failed to detect almost all threats. It did very poorly. I admit the scanning ability of superantispyware is great but the protection the pro version offers is a big failure. So will this be improved and when please?

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

Yes, in one test you saw on youtube we may not have done well, but in millions of other real-world tests we do great and protect our users.

The new real-time is on par with our scanning system, FYI.

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

The patched driver or infected MBR is still there after a reboot.

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

As you know, anti-spyware doesn't typically "unpatch" software, nor handle MBR components as anti-virus software typically has "first hold/watch" on those components.

We clean and catch many of the droppers and we continue to improve our technology to handle new variants and types of infections.

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

Hi:

Actually it was not one test I saw. If you search for any and all tests in youtubes from different testers (in all of them) that tests the pro version of the proactive detection (online protection) of superantispyware you will see what I mean. Also in PC-MAGAZINE reviews, Anyway can you please show me some links where I can go to check to see the effectiveness of the proactive protection (online protection)? I know its on-demand detection is excellent but am looking for its online protection.

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

Fire up a VM or test system and try it yourself, you will see we block many installers, droppers, etc. The PC-Magazine review is nearly 2 years old, FYI and many of the youtube posts are done by competitors in an attempt to discredit our product - just part of the "game".

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

Thanks for the reply. Regarding "quick scan" malware cleanup usually has to be done in stages - I find if I can quickly remove a layer of crud the system becomes more responsive so the second (and sometimes third) more thorough scan doesn't take as long. That's why I want the first scan to be as fast as possible. I'm glad to hear that v5 will be faster and improved in other ways as well. Definitely looking forward to test driving it!

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

The product may not be able to "unpatch" drivers, but it could incorporate a routine to look for clean file replacements within the hard drive. That would enable the above statement of "TDSS Rootkit removal enhancements" to be more accurate. Currently, the statement represents more of a marketing strategy than fact. (And I don't work for the competition, I work for myself. )

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

It's actually not a "marketing strategy" - we have done significant internal work to the product to be able to block and detect the droppers, components, etc - so the statement is in fact accurate.

No product can remove 100% of everything - it'll never happen.

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

I realize this infection is very complex, but I clean PCs for a living. I have tried SAS on every TDL version that has come out, but the software doesn't even see it. By now, I'm wondering what those 'removal enhancements' are. Maybe it's something I'm doing wrong.

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

Since you seem to be questioning our technology - we have done updates to our definions system (smart definitions) and our Direct Disk Access (which many products still don't have) to directly parse the NTFS volumes without using the Windows API.

If these are patched files, we may not detect them as we typically don't prioritize definitions for things we can't fix directly - such as unpatching a file.

If you have an infection that's NOT based upon a patched file and we don't detect it, please contact me and I can have you run a diagnostic so we can see what's going on!

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

My only suggestion at this point is that you do more testing with live current TDL files before you advertise 'TDSS Rootkit removal enhancements' to the public.

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

We remove many variants of TDSS/TDL, droppers, traces, etc. or we wouldn't be advertising as such.

As you can see here:
http://www.superantispyware.com/definitionupdatehistory.html

You will see we have done numerous definition updates for TDSS, and you can see many more if you do the "view year" option on definitions.

Your signature above is interesting!

You are trying to steer the thread away from it's intention - so let's keep it on track. Thanks!

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

Thank you! PM me if you'd like to learn more about PC security through proper configuration.

And thank you for your product update link. It definitely gives me clear insight of exactly how SAS removes TDSS. Keep up the good work!

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

ParadigmShift, If anything you are a very interesting character!
May I ask you whom you work for?

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

I currently have lifetime subscription I have only one request..Is it possible to enhance the cleanup..What I mean is after SAS removing the infection following a restart often encountered rundll errors ..means the entry in startup for that specific item have not been disabled/deleted.. thanks

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

Hello hayc59,

Thank you for your complement. I work for me.

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

I agree with you. With a proper system configuration, only stupidity would allow an infection to occur. But, do not forget one simple thing: Not everyone is as knowledgeable as yourself, nor do they know people like yourself, and therefore they depend on others who develop security solutions, free or paid, to help protect them.

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

End-users typically get infected because they are "tricked" into clicking things (i.e. phishing scams), are infected by drive-by downloads with unpatched systems, etc. - that does't mean a person is "stupid" for that happening.

Is someone "stupid" because they don't know how to operate on their own heart and have to have a qualified heart specialist operate on them? No.

Is someone "stupid" because they don't know how to change their timing belt in their car and have to have a mechanic do it? No.

Is someone "stupid" for getting pneumonia because the infection is "floating" around the air? No.

People aren't, and should not have to be, experts in computers to use them - things happen and that's why companies such as ours exist - it's just like any other industry/paradigm.

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

Did I call anyone stupid All I mentioned was that not everyone has the expertise to deploy security mechanisms that would prevent 99% of infections. And, were they capable of doing it, only stupidity would cause an infection to happen, like installing stuff without caring for source, etc.

Obviously, there are tricks that lead people to believe they need something, like say when entering XYZ website saying that it is needed to install Adobe Flash Player or Adobe Reader (just two examples); but people need to smarten up and start to care about their own security. I find it amazing that some people, who do home banking, don't even try to know what dangers are out there. Don't they know, for example, whether or not Flash Player or Reader is already installed A simple check to see if Youtube works fine, tells them straight away if Flash is installed properly, and if not, just uninstall and reinstall with the previously downloaded installer when first installed it, or a new one from Adobe's own website. Is it hard to keep the link in the favorites or even copy and paste in a *.txt file? If they don't know how to operate a computer with a minimal knowledge, then don't use it, at least to access bank account or to input sensitive information in certain websites.

There are little details that make a heck of a difference between having an infected system or a clean one.
The problem is that most people simply don't care or don't want to waste their time to care. I never mentioned they should be Einsteins; but a minimal interest about their own security would be welcome.

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

From your previous statment above:

How are users supposed to know Youtube uses Flash? People are interested in security, but they have to be taught, not called stupid - this is the problem - technical people aren't interested in teaching they assume everyone should some how magically "know" things automatically.

I think everyone (end users) will love our new education center that will be available shortly - we are actually taking steps to teach and educate in a "safe" environment where users won't be put down for lack of knowledge.

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

Well, for starters if Flash isn't installed, Youtube will complain they need to install Flash, and will even provide a link for Adobe's website.

* Are you teaching them?
** Same question applies: Are you teaching them?

(The question also applies to every other security vendor. You seem more interested in selling (Yes, you provide a free version, but the free version also helps increase the detection rate, and if those are happy with it, then they made pay for the full version. Nothing is really for free, now is it? )

I'd eager to see what that will be. If security vendors start explaining users how to actually make use of what O.S has to offer to protect them, properly configured web browsers, how are you going to keep your business? Or is it going to be a new model business? Teaching for security, and get paid?

When I mentioned

, it was more than clear that I was including myself in the same bag, because I also mentioned

. This latter statement, obviously shed the lights that most users wouldn't be able to deploy it, so stupidity would be left to those who can, like myself. So, I never called these users (I have these users in the family) stupid. The only thing I called them was lazy.

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

Education, configuration and a change of old habits will prevent this scenario.

Those things that happen as you say, happen for a reason. And the reason is ignorance. Malware coders know this and so does the anti-malware industry.

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

We have provided over 35 MILLION free copies of our software to users to help them rid their system of spyware/malware - clearly this is not "just a money game" to us. Yes, we need to make money or we can't have a full time staff to create the required technology and process the over 30,000 samples PER DAY we receive and harvest.

We provide lots of education, but there will always be the need for the prevention and removal tools as no matter how "safe" a person is, infections can still happen.

Our new education center will be of course 100% free - you won't turn this into "businesses are evil and just trying to make money".

I am glad you raise these questions as it's important to make sure users understand that we do care, and we do help out for free. Thanks!

 

Re: SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0

I can agree totally with this, you are one of the most awesome owners of software Dev and I personally can say you are not in this for the money but helping folks stay ahead of the crapware out there!!
You dont have to explain yourself but understand how these folk force a response..you just keep truckin!!!