Superantispyware

because it isn't just an adblocker?

 

@ Nick Skrepetos, thanks for the feedback.

@ DA, great reply really.

 

Don Pelotas,
Thanks. I have done so and again it came up clean. I have already e-mailed Nick about it.

 

Anybody else tried it more? I am currently trying and comparing it, and will come back with the results-- results of scans I mean, and I will request u people to draw the conclusions.

 

Installed it after running a myriad of other AT, AV, AS software. After running it produced only false positives (including yahoo desktop search, etc.).

Maybe in the future it may be pretty good but for now, I've removed and will stick with my old standbys: adaware, spybot, spyware doctor, pest patrol, kav online scanner, and trend micro online scanner.

 

Would you mind sending your scan log and a .zip of the files to nicks at superantispyware.com so I can have them removed? We have a new rules set going out today that whould resolve all of the reported FP's.

Next week we have a new version coming out that has a "report false positive" button in it to send the file and that way we can immediately remove the signature.

I really appreciate everyone reporting any and all issues with SUPERAntiSpyware - so far we have cleaned up quite a few machines and had great feedback. We look forward to making this a solid choice for all users.

Nick Skrepetos
SUPERAntiSpyware.com
http://www.superantispyware.com

 

I have the pro version running. After installing and running a complete scan nothing was found (thanks to other progs as well), so no FP's on my machine. I bought the pro version with lifetime update (good offer).
13K priv. bytes, not slowing down. Nice toy.
My setup today: prevx1, ewido, SAS, extended hosts file, no additional AV

Gerard

 

We have released core definition set 2831 that resolves all known false positives - you can check for updates and they will be automatically downloaded and applied.

Thank you everyone who reported these and sent in files - I really appreciate the teamwork effort.

Nick Skrepetos
SUPERAntiSpyware.com
http://www.superantispyware.com

 

First tried Pro version, at first it took out many items but after the so-called update it found almost nothing, what a hell of difference just by one update, so what you should expect by next updates!!
On my system, it freezed my PC during its update, may be some bug in my system or in this software, I am not sure, anybody got this experience?

I am not able to check real time protection, however it seems to protect home page.

 

In the scan before the update there were some reg enteries for Zongo search bar that might not be false positive, I wonder. I just could not take snap for that scan.

 

Just finished scan by Free version, scan results are same. But its install added 2 ads on my desktop, it,s really radiculous. I hate it.

 

Just I ran a quick scan from trial of Trend Micro antispyware, and it is finding these enteries. I always feel TM antispy is buggy on my PC, and it is also giving false positive, what u think? Sorry for distracting but i just compared the 2.

Also I scanned with Spyware doctor old version trial, the result is clean.

 

The cmesys.exe found in the other scanners quarantine, is not af false positive. It´s a "genuine" Gator file .

 

I did not say. It is file from PC Security Test 2005( BTW so called tests).

 

Nick,

May i ask a question regarding updating SAS definition's. It appears that the update also applies to the SuperAdBlocker Antispyware module. Meaning that when i update SuperAntiSpyware, then SuperAdBlocker gets updated as well. I guess it would work the other way around, yes? Could you confirm that they both share the same definition file set.

muf

 

They do share the core definition rules sets, that is correct. The definitions are also used by our FileResearchCenter.com (http://www.fileresearchcenter.com ).

Nick Skrepetos
SUPERAntiSpyware.com
http://www.superantispyware.com

 

VaMPiRiC_CRoW,

I have located the issue you experienced with the large files (over 4MB) being scanned. It appears that if there is a SHORTCUT (.lnk) to the file, the size was not being checked as to the file it was pointing to, and thus could trigger the scan of a large file.

The release next week will resolve this and add some other scanning options.

Nick Skrepetos
SUPERAntiSpyware.com
http://www.superantispyware.com

 

I decided to install SUPERAntispyware and downloading was at 8kb/sec so I'm a bit frustrated WIFI kills radiation .. anyway I'm glad you're at the good site, facing the questions and listening to the actual users ..

@ the "Hi-Jack Protection" list should include some extra registry entries anyway if they would even want to compete with SPYSWEEPER...kinda looks the same anyway .. add a kernel based driver within this program blocking those regentries with your own approval .. uploading from within the program itself when possible threats are detected .. and you got yourself a "self-building" honeypot ... if you could achieve that, integrated into a decent HIPS module (KIS2006, Ewido V5?, Boclean V5?, ... possibly .. )

best wishes,

 

Great, Nick

Thanks

 

Have just tried and immediately re-moved SuperAntiSpyware. Having found the program to be buggy in the sense that it does not conform to the instructions given it....plus.....fe:

1) The program at start-up tries to update itself....even when the auto update is NOT ENABLE.......

2) The above occurred each time the program was started .

3) The actual updating was taking several minutes an finally was blocked by way of the firewall.....There is no feature to stop the update so it had to be blocked........an the ctrl/alt/delete was used to close the updater. No update was actually achieved after several minutes....just a lot of activity ..no update

4) When un-installing the program it attempted to call-home.........actually starting up internet explorer.......no permission to do so was requested....it just did what it wanted.....(or thought it could)

5) The feature “keep a detailed log of scanning reports”....when DISABLED... kept re-enabling itself


This is supposedly an anti-spyware program but in fact used the very same tactics many spyware programs use.....to wit...calling home without the permission of the computer owner.

Due to this maverick behavior..imo the program is far from being suitable for purchase an much in need of further beta testing....if the vendor is in fact honestly trying to make a decent program.......in its present condition its behavior resembles something less than trust worthy.


Good luck to all those using this program.......it wont go back on my computers again.......no vendor should dare attempt to impose his/her will onto the computer owner.................products that call-home
without permission do just that........forced imposition of the vendors Will onto the computer owner

 

To ur surprise, many well known programmes also do this. U can imagine! I am using many trial versions and whenever I uninstall a trial, many of them do so. Shame on them. It,s radiculous. However Superantipsyware only can,t be blamed when amny well known programmes are doing that.

 

Sorry but I don't agree. If the majority does it wrong, that doesn't mean it is right.

 

usually the product phones hometo bring you up to a survey telling why you unistalled thier product, i find it uneeded

 

Erik said it as well as it can be said............an my compliments to Him for having the courage and backbone to stand up for his values instead of laying down like a floor mat for software vendors to wipe their feet on.
There is no compromising with spyware..... nor spyware vendors...........take a freezing snake into your home an lay it down by the fireplace an just as soon as it gets warm......it sure as hell will bite you ! Such is the nature of snakes and such is the nature of spyware vendors.
Its a very weak person who is willing to compromise honest values simply because others are doing it. Evil is evil.....an right is might..........when the security community comes together as a complete group its a very formidable adversary than can defeat even the worse of spyware..........its happen many times over the years............un-fortunately many newbes were not around to see the results..........no one need compromise their values.............an no matter how many programs do something wrong.........we need never accept those results..............shareware vendors need our financial support to survive.......... make it known that there wont be any compromising.........an vendors either walk the line of rightous programming.....or take a hike ..........nothing complicated about that.


In the case at hand......the vendor of SuperAntiSpyware may be a very decent person.......maybe........but it was a major mistake to present a program to the public that Calls-Home.....no matter what the reason for doing so.........its just plain wrong.......nay, arrogant....of a vendor to assume he/she can do however they please with a computer that is the property of another individual......taking the rightful owner totally for granted ... just as if the owner was some worthless person undeserving of common courtesy ................any vendor who does this.....no matter how high they pile them.....is as wrong as wrong can be........



metallicakid15....most likely the reason you gave was the correct one.......but after awhile a person just gets tired of all the "un-knowns".....having to "guess" why its calling home......



but as always....each person has their own choice in such matters.

 

I wanted to address the group of you and the comments about SUPERAntiSpyware "phoning home". We do not transmit any user data - the only reason our product connects to our server it to get updates - that's it - period. If you run your packet sniffer, you can see we only pull the updates and pull the definitions. We don't send anything out.

When we uninstall, we have an uninstall survey to help improve the product - that is certainly not "phoning" home. We receive many very useful comments from users and we implement many of the suggested features. If more users provided constructive comments to software developers software would meet the needs of users at a much faster pace.

The issue with the checking for updates if the option is unchecked and with the logs, are simple "bugs" that have been resolved in the release that ships this coming week. Why not simply contact the software vendor and ask the question, or make a suggestion instead of going on wild rants on the forums? All you do is cause damaged reputations where they may not be deserved.

The tens of thousands that have downloaded and cleaned their computers in the past week have not had any problem with us checking for updates. I understand your "concerns" with "phoning home". The simple two bug fixes completely eliminate any contact to our server without the user's permission.

Let me know if there are any other "security" related concerns with the product.

Nick Skrepetos
SUPERAntiSpyware.com
http://www.superantispyware.com