Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
JackR

Windows Defender

Recommended Posts

Rons

I know how. I missed it the first time as well! :thumbsdown:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LilBambi

LOL! Glad I was not the only one! Makes me feel much better now Rons!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Marsden11
No that is not what I am saying. I am saying that SpywareBlaster protects against spyware and such without using any resources. Spybot S & D do the same.
How exactly do they run without loading into memory or consuming CPU cycles?What you are suggesting is impossible...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rons

Well after going thru the help menu's, it is stated in the EULA that this beta version will expire on 12-31-06.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gary
How exactly do they run without loading into memory or consuming CPU cycles?What you are suggesting is impossible...
Then I suggest that you contact the people that put out SpywareBlaster as it does not consume any resourses while in use. Maybe they can inform you how they perform the impossible.Maybe THIS will explain the magic. Edited by Gary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LilBambi

SpywareBlaster only needs to be run to apply your preferences.It does not need to run in order to work, which keeps the system from needing to run one more startup program.Opening SpywareBlaster weekly and updating/enabling protection (for the new items from the update) is all that is needed.SpywareBlaster is very effective at blocking many known web bugs. It blocks access to some websites, prevents Active-X spyware to be installed and in some cases allows you to look at websites safely that otherwise would have left a lot of spyware on the machine.

Edited by LilBambi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Temmu

ala hosts file, perhaps? there's your static protection.in reality, it's making your browser do the work? the browser hits the hosts file first, then dns for what it doesn't find.i'm speculating.and rambling.[temmu jumps in his rambler, where uma therman awaits with a picnic basket.]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Marsden11

So this program just installs Block Lists... They recommend updating these lists once a week.That is pretty D*** lame in my book...With no TSRs running in the background it has to be lists or it is messing with the ACLs.It may be protection for some but I would definitely not call it Real Time protection.Why? You do an update on Monday and from Tuesday until the next update you are vulnerable to any zero day exploit that comes along.It is my personal belief that protection based on definitions is a fools notion of security. I would much rather focus on behaviors and monitor those in real time with an "active" program.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LilBambi

NO, that is not all it does. Please read my previous post again.Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Marsden11

What exactly did I miss? From what I can see after I downloaded it and installed it... it does three things...Installs a block list for bad sites.You can configure it to block tracking cookies.Installs a block list for Active-X spyware if you want.There is zero protection by default. You have to turn some or all of it on for any kind of pseudo protection.What is does not offer or do is block ANY malware from a site not in its database trying to install on your system. It can't, by its very nature of only installing lists to compare against. It can't block anything found in an attachment in email. It can't block anything nasty piggy backing on a legitimate program. That is not protection!Is it just me or are none of you seeing the limitations of just checking a list or two for so called protection?

Edited by Marsden11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeber

I think anyone these days who relies on a single line of defense for their system is at risk. WinDef may provide a layer of security in conjunction with other, more proactive solutions. It may cover weaknesses in other programs. On both my main computers, laptop and desktop, I have ZA Pro, SpySweeper, Avast, WinPatrol Plus and Script Sentry as my primary line of defense. MS WinDef and the other programs like S&D I consider my secondary line.I'm a firm believer in layered protection on machines that are on-line as much as mine are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Temmu

marsden11, i certainly don't think an acl is the answer to protection; just commenting on how a program uses 0 memory / cpu cycles... temmu: hey uma, pass the fried chicken... and put up that samuri sword!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
redmaledeer
I think anyone these days who relies on a single line of defense for their system is at risk. .... I'm a firm believer in layered protection....
I think this is the main point. What Windows Defender **does** do is important, not what it **doesn't** do. If it provides protection that worth having considering the cost of running it, then run it and let other programs handle the things it doesn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LilBambi

I also think everyone should take very seriously crashes during scans within a day or three of installing any 'security' program.Windows Defender is a very nice program....but it is still Beta.I also want to note that if you are experiencing some slowness and no obvious reason on your computer, open the Windows Defender UI from the start menu, it may be in the middle of a scan and opening the UI apparently does actually show what state Windows Defender is in at the time.I also had a prompt on my screen that the Windows Installer had been looking for DNS information through my firewall at some point during the night. I hadn't been updating anything that I wasn't familiar with and had no indication what program was using the Windows Installer at that time.Then I remembered the msiexec.exe which was the actual file asking was also used during the Windows Defender. So it may have been getting updates or something. I had originally given it access to everything it needed except I do want to know when the Windows Installer wants any kind of access just as a matter of course. I know that msiexec.exe is an OK thing, but it has also been abused by malware a few times as well.A later on this morning, I was experiencing a bit of a slowdown on the computer. I closed all programs to maybe free up some memory, and it still seemed that something was going on. We are not talking major slowdown, but an obvious one to me. I checked TCPView ... nothing overt going on.Then I decided to do my manual anti-spyware scans to see if there was any reason for this.I already had a report from Spy Sweeper from overnight that there was no spware on my computer. I have a full scan set to run during the AM hours by Windows Defender which runs about 3 hours after a Spy Sweeper sweep during the nigh so these two are out of the way before I get up.Neither of these two programs are my realtime protection.I opened the UI for Windows Defender to manually check for updates to make sure it was getting it's updates OK, and it's in the middle of a scan....Yes, it shows you its in a scan and what time it started if you open the UI during a scan. That's a cool feature.But I think to myself hmmm, since 5:01 AM which it does show, but the objects searched and stuff was not filled in immediately when I opened the UI?It's now 9:26 AM?! It's still doing a full system scan?EDIT: I finally decided to cancel the scan and it got an unspecified error. Interesting. AND it didn't stop the scan. I used the Task Manager to kill it and opened it again. It reported no problems on the computer and said it completed the scan from 5:02 AM. Hmmm.I can understand if the program was 'niced' down to do it's scanning during idle time, but no one was up using the computer at 5AM and only email was actively running.I am quite sure that Windows Defender will be a very good program when they get some things ironed out, as was it's predecessor MS AntiSpyware Beta, but it is still Beta....and not even close to the best in the pack....yet.So far, I like Windows Defender fine, but I want to see some indication of when a antispyware scan is going on. Period. I also really want the ability to CHOOSE for myself whether I want to see the UI or not.If they wanted this program to JUST be for idiots (like idiot lights on cars) or others who don't want to know what's going on with their computers, fine.But if computer professionals are to run this on their computers as well...we want more control and feedback during processes.Just my two cents.

Edited by LilBambi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LilBambi

I am going to move the scans for Windows Defender to during the day and try it with and without updates prior to the scans, and see what's going on with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LilBambi

Still keeping an eye on it. Hasn't crashed today. This program has crashed or gotten unspecified errors several times since installation.Will keep the scans going during the day to watch what is going on with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gary
I think anyone these days who relies on a single line of defense for their system is at risk. WinDef may provide a layer of security in conjunction with other, more proactive solutions. It may cover weaknesses in other programs. On both my main computers, laptop and desktop, I have ZA Pro, SpySweeper, Avast, WinPatrol Plus and Script Sentry as my primary line of defense. MS WinDef and the other programs like S&D I consider my secondary line.I'm a firm believer in layered protection on machines that are on-line as much as mine are.
Especially if this program is a Beta such as WD.As stated repeatedly I use three programs which I believe is enough. What I do not need or want is a PC loaded with Spyware blocking programs. I use:1. SpywareBlaster2. Adaware SE3. Spybot S & D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Marsden11

Google Mail has been in beta for 2 years now... I have WD installed on 8 machines and not a single problem with any of them so far.I uninstalled SpywareBlaster. Why transfer the bulk of resource use to Winsock to resolve DNS in the blocking lists?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Temmu

i think the prev. ver of wd was the greatest, but it appeared to (noticably) slow machines down, and the scans took a good while...now, scans in adaware or spybot s&d also took 4-ever on a heavily infested machine.i've d'loaded wd, but not put it on my machines (yet) as i'm a bit busy with a couple of other "interesting" projects... it's encouraging to hear that wd has no side affects, marsden11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LilBambi

Well, as far as Windows Defender goes. Microsoft doesn't give a rat's patudy about dialup users or those with slower than 1G processors.This morning, after I had previously (yesterday) set it not to get updates before scanning, it knocked out my entire bandwidth on dialup to get it's updates regardless before it proceeded to scan.I have very little bandwidth to begin with and this was the last straw.It is now set to NOT do automated scans or updates. I will check when it's convenient for me and run their scans when it's convenient for me.Dialup users and those who are still stuck in pre 1G computer land -- beware.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gary
Google Mail has been in beta for 2 years now... I have WD installed on 8 machines and not a single problem with any of them so far.I uninstalled SpywareBlaster. Why transfer the bulk of resource use to Winsock to resolve DNS in the blocking lists?
Maybe you haven't had any problems on any of your 8 machines because WD could be missing a great deal of spyware. I would never trust any of my machines to a BETA spyware program. But to each his own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JackR

Sooo, it is 10 days since I installed WinDef.The setting is.WinDef. as an Active AntiSpyware Application.Norton Firewall 2003 (I own 2004, 2005 and functionally prefer 2003).AntiVir7, as the active Antivirus Program.Since the cheapest thing in the computer hardware, is Hard Drive Space (just picked an addition 200GB from Staples for $39.99) I do not care about HD space and frivolously install many applications (just because I can :o ).Therefore, I have SpyBot, Spysweeper, and Ad-Ware, installed, as scanner.During these 10 days, I ran each day all the four programs as scanners.I also checked few times a day the Running Processes, the use of Resources, as well as the status of the StartUp configuration.As compared to the others, WinDef. does use few more MB of RAM when fully install and acting as Active Guard.In the last two days my Grandson is visiting and he uses one of the computers with the above settings for Gaming and other teen-age type of activities. This time, I decide to ignore whatever he is doing (within a reason) since I wanted to test the security.I had No crashes, No trouble, and security is kept 100%. At the moment, I see No reason to change the arrangement as described above.When running different scanners there is always minor differences, it even depends on the temporal order that applications are invoked. Changing the trust of the system every time that there is a minor miss by one application or the other, is something that I would waste my time on.I did not run any Benchmarks, using "Gut Feeling" as a Benchmark :hysterical: I do not feel slow down (Intel 2.4GHz with 1GB RAM).However, as the famous Doris Day song goes “Que Serra, Serra, what ever ill be will be the future is not ours to seeâ€. :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LilBambi

Clients and friends with faster computers and bandwidth here, no problems either with it.It's just those of us on dialup or with computers with sub 1G processors (in my case 600mhz PIII with 256MB RAM). :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...