updating Spy Sweeper (paid) gives ambiguous "latest version" info?

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by jaygo, Dec 28, 2007.

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

    jaygo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Posts:
    40
    Hi,

    When I update Spy Sweeper (NOT Spy Sweeper with AntiVirus), paid version, for my PC with XP Home SP2, I always get the latest definitions BUT the resulting web page, that lets you know whether the program version is the most current, currently says:

    Your current version is 5.5.7 (build 122)
    Latest version is 5.5.7 (build 103)

    Obviously 122 is "later" than 103.

    Does anybody know if there is a build 122 of Spy Sweeper 5.5.7. available for Spy Sweeper (paid version)?

    I can't find a webpage on Webroot's website that lets you know what the latest version (and build) of Spy Sweeper (paid) is.

    Finally, since Webroot's own in-house support system is not the greatest, does anybody know of a great forum (like this one) that has a section for "official" Spy Sweeper support (this forum has several sections for "official" support for various software but not Spy Sweeper)? Thanks. Nella
     
  2. Acadia

    Acadia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Posts:
    4,048
    Location:
    SouthCentral PA
  3. Randy_Bell

    Randy_Bell Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Posts:
    3,004
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA
    Build 122 is the latest build. I think their notification page has an error on it. Hopefully that will be fixed soon. It sounds like you already have the latest build.
     
  4. jaygo

    jaygo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Posts:
    40
    Randy,

    Thanks; I just found your program update post on 12/17/2007 at https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=194891

    Unfortunately, because of the disparity I mentioned in my recent post (the order of the "versions" when I recently updated was the opposite of the image in your post cited above), I uninstalled Build 103 and redownloaded, this morning, the latest version (so I thought) from SpySweeper's website, using the "link" http://www.webroot.com/updates/redownload/request.

    What I got, on installing the "fresh" download today, was Build 103, and when I ran "update" on that, no newer version was indicated.

    So either:

    a. When you use the aforementioned webpage, you get the version of the program in existence when you purchased (or renewed) SpySweeper, or, alternatively,

    b. Spysweeper is not making Build 122 available from the aforementioned webpage.

    I did find, using Google, various websites that purport to offer Build 122, but I'm reluctant to try them. Guess I'll be patient and wait for Webroot to wake up. Thanks for responding. Nella
     
  5. jaygo

    jaygo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Posts:
    40
    Acadia,

    Thanks for letting me know; that was an informative link. Nella

     
  6. jaygo

    jaygo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Posts:
    40
    Good grief,

    As I mentioned earlier today, I uninstalled Build 122 (using the conventional "uninstall" mechanism) and reinstalled Build 103. Just this second I received the following e-mail from Webroot tech support. It's odd that this advice is not posted anywhere on the Webroot website, as far as I can tell. Nella

    --------------------------------------------------------

    Subject: latest version of SpySweeper

    Response (Sivachandar) - 12/28/2007 06:04 AM

    Hi,

    Our apologies for the inconvenience that has been caused.

    We are experiencing some technical issue with our beta release of the version 5.5.7.122 and so we request you to uninstall the it and reinstall the Spy Sweeper version 5.5.7.103.

    Please uninstall the Spy Sweeper Program completely using the SSCCleanup tool attached with this email.

    Important Note: In order to remove Spy Sweeper you will need to download an uninstall tool. To access the download, please click the update link that is available in this email and access your account to update the incident. Once you have accessed the incident, scroll down the page to the bottom and click on the link labeled “SSCCleanup.zip”. When prompted, please save the download to your desktop and extract the SSCCleanup.exe.

    Please do the following to uninstall Spy Sweeper using the SSCCleanup.exe removal tool:

    Shut down the currently installed version of Spy Sweeper by right-clicking the icon in the lower right-hand corner of your screen, then left-clicking on Shut Down option. You will only need to do this if you have Spy Sweeper installed and it is running.

    Once Spy Sweeper is shut down, double left-click on the SSCCleanup.exe that is on your desktop.

    You will be prompted to accept the license agreement. After you have accepted the license agreement the cleanup process will start. The process is complete when the last line of the dialog window says “Removal procedures have been completed” and the Close button is highlighted.

    Close the cleanup utility window and the SSCCleanup.exe file will disappear from your desktop. At this point, please restart your PC.

    Once your computer has restarted, please reinstall Spy Sweeper. We advise that you request the latest version of Spy Sweeper by going to the download request website at: http://www.webroot.com/updates/redownload/request.

    This will send you a new set of installation instructions to complete your reinstallation of Spy Sweeper version 5.5.7.103.

    Thanks for choosing Webroot Software.
     
  7. Fly

    Fly Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Posts:
    2,069
    I have the (paid-for version) of the Spy Sweeper, build 103.

    Recently, I was confused by Webroot's mentioning of build 103 and 122 when doing a manual update. I can't remember all the details, there was some issue of the manual update saying I had the latest version, while elsewhere on the same page a different build was mentioned as the latest version. Now, when doing a manual update, I just see 103.

    I never had to do an uninstall.

    Again, I don't know the difference between the different builds, but please pay attention to the offered (opt-out?) ask.com (toolbar?) and the search assistent. I seem to remember that at first that was installed by default, unless you chose the customize option (I don't remember the exact words).

    I recommend you pay attention to issues like that.
     
  8. Fly

    Fly Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Posts:
    2,069
    Actually, I contacted Webroot about this issue.

    I just checked their answer.

    They said (but that was some time ago) that 122 was the latest version.

    It seems that Webroot support sometimes has a hard time getting its act together. (Not the first time ...)

    I think that the Spy Sweeper (I don't have the antivirus) is still a pretty good product, but I use higher than default security settings, and I use it in combination with another antispyware program that has strong active protection.

    According to my experience, the Spy Sweeper is a lot better at preventing infections than detecting and removing infections on your machine.
     
  9. jaygo

    jaygo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Posts:
    40
    Fly,

    Thanks for relaying your experiences and thoughts, especially about the toolbar and search assistant; I will not select these in future installs. Nella
     
  10. Wordward

    Wordward Former Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Posts:
    707
    Ok, so does SS slow down ones PC or not? I only have 512MB of RAM, and have heard of people noticing a lag in their PC with 1024 of RAM after installing SS. Anyone? Also do any of the Shields help protect against unknown threats that could possibly infiltrate Firefox?
     
  11. Sportscubs1272

    Sportscubs1272 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Posts:
    340
    I have one 1 gb of ram and it slowed down my system when I tried it. It uses about 20+ megs of ram and takes forever to load up. I have a Pentium 4 2.6 ghz computer which is over four years old.

    Only thing it picked up was a cookie or two! I believe ZA Antispyware does a better job of that.
     
  12. Acadia

    Acadia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Posts:
    4,048
    Location:
    SouthCentral PA
    I did not renew my subscription to Spy Sweeper therefore I am no longer receiving the signature updates. My question: do you folks know which of the many SS features do NOT rely upon updating, in other words, only monitor behavior. Figure I can still use them forever, but would like to "turn off" everything else.

    Thanks,
    Acadia
     
  13. Wordward

    Wordward Former Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Posts:
    707
    Thanks Sportscubs1272. I have the same Pentium chip, but less RAM than you so I am thinking SS may slow down my PC as well. Spyware Terminator is running fine, but since SS is one of the few security programs I haven't tried I may still give it a go. Thanks again.
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2007
  14. Fly

    Fly Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Posts:
    2,069

    My system: AMD CPU at 2.08 Ghz, about 3-4 years old, 512 MB RAM, Windows XP Home Edition, McAfee Virusscan Plus 2008, Counterspy.
    These load when I boot my PC. After this has loaded I manually load the Spy Sweeper program (not the version with antivirus, that one is supposedly slower). I believe that one or two Spy Sweeper services are loaded at startup anyway.

    I have NEVER noticed any slowdown caused by the Spy Sweeper. And I use elevated security settings (like using a customized sweep that scans for rootkits, 'verify executable programs ...').

    McAfee though, takes ages to load.
     
  15. Sportscubs1272

    Sportscubs1272 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Posts:
    340
    I had ZA Anti-spyware and Threatfire on at the same time as S.S. TF might caused the bloatware feeling along with S.S. I'm testing Comodo Firewall with S.S. and it seems to do better. I wish I could get the S.S. email attachment to work with Comodo.
     
  16. Wordward

    Wordward Former Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Posts:
    707
    Well I installed it, ran a scan (nothing found, but three cookies) and played around a bit, but I didn't see anything that made me say wow. It's version 5.5.7.48 though not 103. I think Spyware Terminator with its Guards and HIPS, plus Web Security Guard could be as effective at malware prevention as SS is. It's great for free though and should be a nice program for most people. I liked the layout of it and the help file is good. And it ran well on my PC. Its two processes only ran around 8000K in Task Manager. Also it uninstalled very well and I couldn't find any traces of it left on my PC, even in the registry. Again however, I see nothing here that makes me say wow, or want to spend any money on it, but for free how could anyone go wrong?
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2007
  17. jaygo

    jaygo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Posts:
    40
    One thing that hasn't been mentioned in this thread, is the value of choosing the "password" option offered in SpySweeper (neither Spyware Doctor nor CounterSpy offer a "password" option).

    I note that the highly rated anti-virus program (NOD32) I use offers a password option.

    I assume using a password (the stronger the better) makes it more difficult for a hacker to change your SS settings.

    It's hard to know how much extra protection using a strong password in SS adds, but since the "password" option is available in SS, my thoughts are why not employ it, since the inconvenience of having to enter the password when required, is minimal. Nella
     
  18. TopperID

    TopperID Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,527
    Location:
    London
    I don't use SS, but speaking generally the password feature on security apps is intended to prevent other users from changing the settings on the app. Thus it has no value if you are on a home machine to which no untrusted person has access. It is not intended to hamper hacker attacks.
     
  19. Acadia

    Acadia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Posts:
    4,048
    Location:
    SouthCentral PA
    Topper is correct, passwords on this type of program are meant, for one example, to prevent someone's children from changing the settings.

    Acadia
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.