The Spyware Warrior List of  

Rogue/Suspect Anti-Spyware Products & Web Sites

About This Page - Please Read:

Those who have followed the development of this page since 2004 will have noted that the list of "rogue/suspect" anti-spyware products has not been updated since May 2007. Unfortunately, other time commitments have precluded our efforts to keep that list up to date. Since the last update dozens of "new" rogue anti-spyware programs have hit the 'Net. The vast majority of them, however, are not really new, but are simply re-branded clones and knockoffs of the same rogue applications that have been around from years. In most cases, they are being pushed through the same deceptive practices by the same parties responsible for earlier versions. See in particular these "families" of anti-spyware products, which continue to live on through shameless re-branding: 15, 18, 19, 21, 22, & 23. 

If you are looking for information on the most recent rogue anti-spyware applications, we recomend visiting these sites:

• BleepingComputer.com: Spyware & Malware Removal Guides
• MalwareBytes: Newest Rogue Threats
• MalwareBytes Blog
• Bharath's Security Blog
• VitalSecurity.org
• Sunbelt Blog

• Rogue/Suspect Anti-Spyware Products
  - Notes
  - Listing Criteria
  - Special Cases
  - De-Listed Applications
  - Not On the List
  - Old News
• Rogue/Suspect Anti-Spyware Sites
  - Bogus Security Pages
• Legitimate/Licensed Clones
• Trustworthy Anti-Spyware Products
• If Your PC is Infested w/ Spyware...
• Google & Anti-Spyware Products
• More Information
  - News Stories
  - Complaints & Enforcement
• About These Web Pages
  - Linking to These Pages
  - Questions & Contact

These pages are maintained by:

Some of the products listed on this page simply do not provide proven, reliable anti-spyware protection or may be prone to ridiculous false positives. Others may use unfair, deceptive, high pressure sales tactics to scare up sales from gullible, confused users. A very few of these products are either associated with known distributors of spyware/adware or have been known to install spyware/adware themselves. Not all products exhibit the same problems, however. Please see this "note to readers" for more information.

Users are advised to rely on the short list of Trustworthy Anti-Spyware Products with deserved reputations for quality performance.

Criteria & Testing

Criteria that we use to classify anti-spyware programs as "rogue / suspect" are discussed below in the Listing Criteria section.

Testing was performed with most of the apps listed below, though not all of them. The notes section below contains definitions and descriptions of some of the key terms used in the comments for the applications listed. Be sure to consult the Anti-Spyware Family Resemblances and Orphans & Outcasts companion pages for more information on the applications listed.

De-Listed Applications

Some applications that were originally included in this list of "rogue/suspect" anti-spyware programs have been de-listed after the vendors for those programs took steps to correct the problems identified on this page. For each program that has been de-listed there is a note explaining the circumstances at the bottom of the main "rogue/suspect" list. For more information on the process of de-listing application, see THIS discussion below.

Note: before contacting us about programs not included on the main list below, please check the list of lesser-known anti-spyware applications that we have tested as well as the list of legitimate, licensed clones of other anti-spyware programs.

More Information

For additional information on "rogue/suspect" anti-spyware products, see the More Information section towards the bottom of the page. Suzi has put together a "Top 10 Rogue Anti-Spyware" list HERE.

For reports on more extensive testing with a select group of anti-spyware utilities, see HERE. A short list of anti-spyware applications that are recommended as useful and trustworthy can be found on the list of Trustworthy Anti-Spyware Products below. An extended list of quality anti-spyware products is HERE.

If your PC is already infested with spyware or adware, see the instructions below for getting help. 

Most recent additions:  AntiVirusPCSuite (5-4-07), ExpertAntivirus (5-4-07), SpyVampire (5-4-07), SpyWare Secure (5-4-07), Malware Stopper (4-22-07), AVSystemCare (4-22-07), Adware Remover (4-11-07), AntiVirus Protector (4-11-07), Antivirus Solution (4-11-07), Spyware IT (4-11-07), SpyLocked (4-11-07), AntiSpyZone (4-11-07), PerfectCleaner (3-7-07),  SpyAway (3-7-07), SpyDawn (3-7-07), SpyCrush (3-7-07), NeoSpace (3-7-07), Copperhead AntiSpyware (3-7-07), AntiVirusAdvance (3-7-07), Ad Armor (1-9-07), Fixer AntiSpy (1-9-07), Spy Analyst (1-9-07), Spy Officer (1-9-07)

Most recent de-listings:  TrueSword (12-26-06), 1-2-3 Spyware Free (12-26-06), Maxion Spy Killer & MaxNetShield (12-26-06)

Most recent re-listings: SpyCleaner (5-12-06)

Please read this note on the Trustsoft AntiSpyware application (8-21-05).

Total applications listed: 349
 

SmartSecurity

---

---

  Return to top...

Testing: Testing was performed with most of these apps. Apps not tested include: 2004 Adware/Spyware Remover & Blocker, about:blank 2005, AdProtector, Adware Hunter, AdwarePro, Adware & Spyware Firewall, Elimiware, AntiVirusAdvance,  AntivirusPCSuite, Anti Virus Pro, BestGuardPlatinum, InternetAntiSpy, KillAllSpyware, MicroAntivirus, Oxford Spyware Remover, NetSpyProtector, PAL Emergency Response, PCArmor, SpyBlast, SpyBuster, SpyDeleter, SpyEliminator, SpyKillerPro,SpyWiper, SpywareAvenger, Spyware Cleaner & Pop-Up Blocker, Spyware Destroyer,  Spyware Immobilizer, Spyware Remover (alwaysfreealways.com), System Detective, Spy Sniper Pro, Spyware B1aster, Spyware Remover, Spyware Striker Pro, Spyware Suite 2005, The Web Shield, Titan AntiSpyware, VirusGuard, WinAntiSpy 2005, XSRemover.

False positives: In cases where it is noted "false positives work as goad to purchase," the apps in question produced inexcusable false positives on a "spyware-free" system (previously scanned with AVP 3.5, Trojan Hunter 4, Ad-aware SE, Spybot S&D 1.3, & Spy Sweeper 3) and then demanded payment to clean that non-existent "spyware"/"adware." Scan logs, reference database files, screenshots, and other related files from the tests have been archived. "Ridiculous false positives" are noted in cases where an app produced inexcusable false positives on a "spyware free" system but did not demand payment to clean that non-existent "spyware" / "adware."

Poor scan reporting: This means that the application either did not provide information about what it found (e.g., it simply reported "8 spyware items found" without identifying particular parasites by name) or did not report enough information about the basis for the items it found (e.g., it reported finding the Look2Me parasite, but did not report what Registry keys, files, or folders it had identified as Look2Me).

Knockoffs/rip-offs: The term "knockoff" means at the very least that the app in question substantially imitates the look, feel, and experience of another program (usually Ad-aware). With some of these "knockoff" apps there may be evidence (e.g., scan logs) of more serious borrowing from other programs, but there are no specific allegations to that effect as yet from the affected parties. The term "rip-off" means that there are specific allegations from the affected parties of unauthorized borrowing from their applications (usually Ad-aware or Spybot Search & Destroy). See the Anti-Spyware Family Resemblances companion page for screenshots of most of these applications. (Screenshots for applications not included on the Family Resemblances page can be found on the Orphans & Outcasts page.)

Aggressive/deceptive advertising: "Aggressive" advertising consists of the obnoxious, intrusive, use of pop-ups, false GUI elements, or other advertising techniques designed to badger, pressure, or coerce users into buying the application advertised. "Deceptive" advertising employs advertising techniques and information designed to create a false sense of alarm among users in order to stampede them into purchasing the application being advertised.

Flawed, inadequate detection schemes: "Flawed, inadequate detection schemes" refer to scanning techniques that are insufficient to produce reliable detections of spyware, adware, and malware. These detection schemes typically rely exclusively on matching file names/path and Registry names/paths without using MD5 hash checking or signature matching to uniqiuely identify detected components. In some cases, there may be other problems with the detection scheme, such as failing to scan all drives on a system or skipping key system areas during scanning.

Dates: Significant dates are listed in the format MM-DD-YY. A: date that entry for application was added to list; U: date that application was last checked/tested or entry was last significantly modified/updated.
  

  Return to top...

When we evaluate an anti-spyware product, we look at the complete package, including the performance of the application itself as well as the advertising and marketing used to promote the product.

The following practices are guaranteed to get a program listed as "rogue/suspect":

1. Installing adware, spyware, or malware

2. Hijacking users' browsers & desktops

3. Being installed by adware, spyware, or malware

4. Being regularly or frequently advertised through adware or spyware

5. Being aggressively or stealthily installed without users' full, knowing consent

6. Being pushed through aggressive, deceptive, or misleading advertising

7. Being offered by a known adware/spyware vendor or being strongly associated
    with a site known to install malware

8. Using false, deceptive, misleading, or confusing scan reports or other GUI elements
    to badger, coerce, or trick users into purchasing the product

We also evaluate such things as:

1. Sophistication and comprehensiveness of the scan (including the design and execution
    of the scan detection scheme)

2. Accuracy and reliability of the scan (including the nature and quantity of false positives)

3. Nature and accuracy of the scan reporting

4. Information about company and program available online

5. User reports of experiences with program

6. Currency of definitions

Not every program will exhibit all of the problems listed above, and in some cases our decision to list a program as "rogue/suspect" is a judgment call based on our extensive knowledge of and experience with anti-spyware scanners.

It is worth noting that quality anti-malware applications are difficult programs to develop and maintain. For information on what makes quality anti-malware applications difficult to develop and maintain, see these discussions: 1, 2, 3.

Properly evaluating anti-spyware applications and the advertising used to promote them can also present challenges. For information on the problems associated with evaluating anti-spyware applications, see these discussions: 1, 2. False positives, in particular, are tricky to evaluate, since all anti-malware scanners will produce false positives as some point. For discussions of how we evaluate false positives, see these forum threads: 1, 2, 3.

Note to Readers:

Please keep in mind that anti-spyware applications can appear on this list for a variety of reasons. On the low end, some applications might have a problem with egregious false positives or a poorly designed and implemented scan engine. On the high (dangerous) end, some of these applications might hijack users' PCs or install adware, spyware, or malware themselves. For each application we list the specific problems that we observed, and readers should take care not to make unwarranted assumptions about applications beyond the problems that we specifically list on this page.

Put another way, the characterization "rogue/suspect" does not mean that every product listed on this page is a "scam" or that every product listed here is "dangerous" and installs malware itself. It simply means that in light of the established, proven alternatives that exist, we cannot recommend that users rely on the apps listed on this page.

For Vendors: De-listing Process

We have de-listed applications from the Rogue/Suspect Anti-Spyware page when the vendors of those programs have made sufficient changes or corrections to their programs or advertising/marketing to warrant a de-listing. When an application is de-listed, an entry for the program remains in the main list, however, that entry serves only to point to an explanatory note in the De-Listed Applications section below. After the application has been de-listed for one year, we remove the entry for the program from the main list, however, the explanatory note remains.

Vendors who wish to dispute a listing on this page and request a review of their products may email Spyware Warrior. In that email, vendors should clearly lay out their reasons for disputing a listing and requesting a review. Reasonable requests for review will be given timely and careful consideration. Threats will not only be disregarded, they will be publicized and discussed on this page and elsewhere on the Net. Vendors who are interested in disputing a listing on this page and requesting a review of their products are strongly encouraged to read THIS discussion thread at Spyware Warrior.

Please note that it is our policy to restrict vendors to one review every three months. Once a product has been reviewed, we will not reconsider a decision to continue listing the product until three months time has lapsed.

One final note: although we will provide feedback to explain our decisions to continue listing programs on this page, it is not our responsibility to fix vendors' products. Thus, we will not be drawn into extended discussions in which we essentially provide free consulting for vendors. By turns, it is our policy to refuse all requests to perform consulting in return for compensation from vendors whose products are listed on this page. The reviews we provide are free, however, they are limited to providing sufficient explanation to justify the listing of an application on the Rogue/Suspect Anti-Spyware page.
 

  Return to top...

Occasionally there is additional information about the applications listed above that cannot be fit into the standard note form used in the main list itself. In such instances, additional information is provided below.
 

The last version that I tested (a beta version) still generated horrendous, inexcusable false positives just like its predecessor (1). Whether the final release also does so I cannot say, as I have been unable to test the software. 

Clearly the vendor for Privacy Tools 2004 wants to shut up critics and prevent critical information about his software from being disseminated. Moreover, the vendor for Privacy Tools 2004 has threatened to distribute malware himself (1), making him a completely irresponsible source for anti-spyware protection. Thus, my recommendation to users is to stay away, as the software and the vendor cannot be considered trustworthy or reliable in my opinion.
 

As explained in my several postings to the DSLReports.com Security forum (1), it is important to recognize that there are two distinct and separate issues here: 1) Aluria's decision to "certify" WhenU as "Spyware-Safe"; 2) Aluria's decision to partner with WhenU, an adware vendor. Even if WhenU merited certification because of improvements to its privacy practices (a point we dispute), Aluria should never have entered into a partnership with an adware vendor because of the serious conflict of interest problems that such a deal raises. Not only did it put Aluria in the untenable position of having a financial stake in the adware advertising market, but Aluria and WhenU were offering a anti-spyware scanner that removes competitors to WhenU. That undeniable conflict of interest made both Aluria and WhenU untrustworthy sources for an anti-spyware program, and other reputable critics agreed with this assessment (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). 

It should be noted that several reputable anti-spyware companies have also been approached by adware vendors looking for similar deals (1, 2, 3, 4). They all refused on principle, as one would expect an anti-spyware firm to do. In choosing to partner with WhenU, however, Aluria effectively decided to keep company with other disreputable vendors that bundle adware with their anti-spyware programs (1, 2), all of which are listed on this page. Just why Aluria and WhenU ended their relationship in 2005 is unknown.

Even putting aside the controversy over the Aluria/WhenU deal, we simply cannot recommend an anti-spyware scanner that bundles adware, as the UControl scanner did, given that there are a number of excellent adware-free alternatives available to those looking for an anti-spyware scanner (1, 2). In this judgment we are completely consistent with our earlier decisions to list other anti-spyware applications that are adware-supported or that install spyware. Neither can we recommend Aluria's Spyware Eliminator in the light of Aluria's earlier decision to partner with WhenU, for all the reasons elaborated above.

Note: At one time, you could read Aluria's several responses to criticism of its partnership with WhenU here: 1, 2, 3. At present, the first two articles have been removed from Aluria's web site (the interview with Aluria still remains at CastleCops.com). You can still read WhenU's defense of its privacy practices here: 1, 2.

 [A: 12-4-04 / U: 3-4-06]

Nonetheless, we do urge users to exercise caution with this product, as the vendor behind this product was prosecuted by the Federal Trade Commission in June of 2005 for a range of unfair and deceptive practices related to the company's earlier anti-spyware product, SpyKiller 2005. See below for more details on this case.

As always, we urge users to stick to the short list of "trustworthy" anti-spyware products listed below or the expanded list of anti-spyware products listed HERE. 

[A: 8-21-05 / U: 8-21-05]

In May 2006, however, it became known to us that SpyCleaner was bundling WhenU Save, an adware application, with the free version of its application. Given that such behavior is clear grounds for listing on the "rogue/suspect" anti-spyware list, we re-listed SpyCleaner on 12 May, 2006.

[A: 6-26-04 / U: 5-12-06]
 

 Return to top...

Some applications that were originally included in this list of "rogue/suspect" anti-spyware programs have been de-listed after the vendors for those programs took steps to correct the problems identified on this page. An entry for each of the applications de-listed during the past year remains in the main list above solely to point to the explanatory notes below, which detail the circumstances of the de-listing. Applications de-listed over a year ago are listed on a separate historical page.
 
That an application has been de-listed should not be understood as an endorsement or recommendation of any kind. We still recommend that users consult the short list of "trustworthy" anti-spyware applications. For more information on the process for de-listing application, see THIS discussion in the Spyware Warrior forums.

  Return to top...

There are a number of lesser-known anti-spyware applications that we have tested but decided were not appropriate to include on the "Rogue/Suspect Anti-Spyware List" above. We used to keep a list of these "other" programs here. We called it the "not-on-the-list list," and it was essentially a list of programs that folks didn't need to email us about because we were already familiar with those apps.

Unfortunately, all too many users simply ignored our blatant disclaimer that the "not-on-the-list" list was not another list of rogue/suspect products and began treating the list as a kind of black list. As a result, we were forced to withdraw the list because some irresponsible users were using it to tarnish the names of products on the list when that was never our intention.

The upshot of all this is that we encourage you to email us about anti-spyware products and anti-malware products that are new and that you think might warrant investigation. If you email us about the product and we haven't seen it before, we will acknowledge your email and begin looking into the product. If, however, you email us about a product that we're already familiar with and have decided is inappropriate for the list, we may or may not respond to your email. If you don't receive a response, that's a good indication that we're already familiar with the product.

Please keep in mind that the Rogue/Suspect Anti-Spyware list does not include such programs as:

• rogue system snoopers (e.g., key loggers, screenscrapers, etc.)
• rogue system/Registry/drive cleaning applications
• other types of rogue privacy & security products

So, we ask that readers not email us to suggest that programs like ErrorFixer, WinFixer, Drive Cleaner, and the like be added to the Rogue/Suspect Anti-Spyware list, because such programs aren't anti-malware applications that we would consider listing here.

 Return to top...

FTC Strikes a Third Time [4 August 2005]

On August 3, 2005, just five months after moving against SpywareAssassin and two months after moving against SpyKiller 2005, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission announced that it had settled a complaint against Advertising.com, the company behind SpyBlast, an "anti-spyware" product that has been listed on these pages since June 26, 2004 (the very day this list was first published). In its complaint, the FTC specifically noted that the SpyBlast program installed adware that tracked users' surfing activity without clearly and conspicuously notifying users outside of the EULA that such adware would be installed. According to the FTC:
 

You can read more about the FTC's action against SpyBlast and Advertising.com here:

• Press Release
• Case Documents

The FTC and Advertising.com settled on a consent order that "prohibits the respondents from making any representations about the performance, benefits, efficacy, or features of SpyBlast or any of their other programs promoted as security or privacy software, unless they clearly and conspicuously disclose that consumers who install the program will receive advertisements, if that is the case."

FTC Strikes Again [26 June 2005]

On June 23, 2005, just 3 months after moving against SpywareAssassin, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission announced that it had taken action against Trustsoft, the company behind SpyKiller 2005, an "anti-spyware" product that has been listed on these pages since June 26, 2004 (the very day this list was first published). In its complaint, the FTC specifically named several of the more deceptive and unfair practices that are employed by many of the "anti-spyware" applications listed on this page, namely:

You can read more about the FTC's action against SpyKiller 2005 here:

• Press Release
• Complaint (PDF doc)
• Temporary Restraining Order (PDF doc)
• Stipulated Preliminary Injunction (PDF doc)

The FTC secured a temporary restraining order on June 1, followed by preliminary injunction on June 14. (Please note that SpyKiller 2005 is a different product from Maxion Software's SpyKiller, which is also listed on this page.)

Update (8-21-05): Please read this note on the new Trustsoft AntiSpyware application.
Update (1-6-06): Trustsoft has now settled with the FTC.

Rogue/Suspect List Hits 200 Apps!   [9 June 2005]

Almost one year after the Rogue/Suspect Anti-Spyware page at SpywareWarrior.com was launched, Spyware Warrior added the 200th application to its list of sub-standard anti-spyware applications. Credit goes to Simon Clausen of PC Tools for pointing us to the 200th rogue/suspect anti-spyware application, Winkeeper, which was added to the list on June 9, 2005. (The Rogue/Suspect page was officially launched on June 26, 2004.)

A Dubious Milestone

This event in itself is a dubious milestone. It does serve as painful reminder that the majority of anti-spyware applications to be found on the internet are woefully short of offering the kind of robust protection from unwanted advertising software that all too many spyware/adware victims are desperately in need of.

Why So Many?

We at Spyware Warrior are often asked why so many poor quality anti-spyware applications exist. The answer is a simple one: spyware and adware are afflicting millions of innocent victims, leading to an exploding market for anti-spyware tools. These victims are desperate to fix their hijacked web browsers and trashed PCs, which are overrun with unwanted toolbars and popup advertising. These users are angry, frustrated, and even scared. Unfortunately, they also have problems distinguishing between the small number of quality anti-spyware applications available from reputable vendors and the great mass of disreputable anti-spyware utilities. 

This combination of fear, frustration, ignorance, and desperation makes spyware and adware victims ripe to be exploited again -- this time by disreputable anti-spyware vendors, many of whom have simply rushed out poor quality applications to rake in money from a hot market and who do not shirk from using aggressive, misleading, and deceptive advertising to bamboozle scared and confused spyware and adware victims. Sadly, some of these vendors are not above installing adware and spyware themselves onto victims' PCs.

Why We're Here

That's what makes the 200th application such a dubious milestone -- and a troubling monument to the myriad ways that greed can exploit fear, confusion, desperation, and ignorance. And it's just this unfortunate trend that the Rogue/Suspect Anti-Spyware page has been designed to combat, by offering users good information about the whole range of anti-spyware products -- from the ever-growing number of untrustworthy tools to the small handful of quality applications that do exist.

FTC Busts Rogue Anti-Spyware Vendor!   [11 March 2005]

You can read more about the FTC's action against SpywareAssassin here:

• Press Release
• Complaint (PDF doc)
• Restraining Order (PDF doc)

And for a discussion of this news, see THIS thread at DSLReports.com and THIS blog entry here at Spyware Warrior.

Update (1-6-06): MaxTheater has now settled with the FTC.

 
Return to top...
 

Spyware/Adware Removers 2004

Adware Report

e-Spyware.com

NonToxic-Internet.com

Online-Survival-Lab.com

Privacy Software Report

Consmer Review of Anti-Spyware

SpySoftCentral.com

SpywareHelpNetwork

Spyware Online Scanner

SpywareRemovalUtilities

Spyware Removal (blog)

Spyware Scan Review

TeslaPlus

The Spyware Review

The Spyware Zone

 
Return to top...
 

Bogus Security Pages

Rogue anti-spyware products have long been known for using aggressive, misleading advertising and marketing, but in the Fall of 2005 a number of these programs began to be pushed on users through incredibly deceptive web pages that were often forced on users through browser hijacks. Many of these pages are deliberately crafted to look like the Windows XP SP2 Security Center, and they may be coupled with flashing tray icons that are designed to look like notices from the Security Center as well as false warnings that malware has been detected on the user's PC.

The Sunbelt Blog discusses a number of these bogus security pages:

• Sleazy Install of the Week

• Another Sleazy Install

• Do You Laugh or Just Cry?

• Seen in the Wild: Another Fake Security Site

• It's a Security Scam Party...

• Another Fake Security Site

• More Security Hijack Sites...

 
Return to top...
 

F-Secure Anti-Spyware

---

---

Norman Ad-Aware

---

 
Return to top...
 

 
When choosing anti-spyware protection, you should rely on products with deserved reputations and proven track records. That means avoiding the new and unknown, and not succumbing to impulse buys of anti-spyware products that you see on the Net, esp. those included in the "rogue/suspect" list on this page or advertised on Google. 

At the very least, you should have an anti-spyware scanner, and there are several reputable anti-spyware scanners available on the Net -- some even for free. But anti-spyware protection goes beyond having an anti-spyware scanner like Spybot Search & Destroy or Ad-aware. Even after installing and running an anti-spyware scanner, you should take steps to lock down your browser and protect your system against further infestation by spyware and adware.

What follows below is a set of recommended steps for installing anti-spyware protection for your PC. If your PC is already infested with spyware or adware, see the instructions for getting help included later on this page.

 
Return to top...
 

 
If your PC is already infested with spyware and adware, resist the temptation to succumb to impulse buys of anti-spyware products that you see on the Net, esp. those included in the "rogue/suspect" list on this page or advertised on Google. Instead, you can get help online from a corps of savvy volunteers who specialize in busting spyware.

To get help with a spyware infestation:

 
Return to top...
 

 
Vendors of "rogue/suspect" anti-spyware products advertise heavily via Google's "AdWords" ("Sponsored Links" on Google's own search pages) and "AdSense" (Google-driven advertising delivered to third-party web sites). 

Users should be aware that a search on the term "spyware" (or any related term) at Google will turn up a variety of anti-spyware products and web sites -- some reliable and trustworthy, some not. The key to distinguishing trustworthy anti-spyware products and sites from non-trustworthy products and sites in Google's search results is learning to distinguish "regular search results" from "paid search results," otherwise known as "Sponsored Links."

Google Search Results for "spyware"

 
Return to top...
 

For additional information on "rogue/suspect" anti-spyware products, see:

Also, there is a dedicated "rogue anti-spyware" remover application that clenas many of the worst applications listed on this page:

News stories...

Several news stories have been written about "rogue" anti-spyware in the past year:

Complaints & enforcement...

Early in 2004 the Center for Democracy and Technology filed a complaint with the FTC regarding SpyWiper/MailWiper:

In Oct. of 2004, the FTC filed a complaint against Seismic Entertainment over SpyWiper/MailWiper:

In Apr. 2005 the FTC amended its complaint in the SpyWiper/MailWiper case to include one Rob Martinson:

On Mar. 11, 2005, the FTC announced that it had moved against MaxTheater, the company behind Spyware Assassin:

On Jun. 23, 2005, the FTC revealed that it had taken action against Trustsoft over its SpyKiller 2005 application:

On Aug. 3, 2005, the FTC announced a settlement with Advertising.com over its SpyBlast product:

On Nov. 10, 2005, the FTC announced that it had shut down Enternet Media, the company behind the dreaded SearchMiracle/Elitebar spyware application as well as the anti-spyware application Spyware Bomber:

On Jan. 6, 2006, the FTC announced that it had settled with both MaxTheater (SpywareAssassin) and Trustsoft (SpyKiller 2005):

On Jan. 25, 2006, the Attorney General for the state of Washington announced that it had filed a complaint against Secure Computer LLC, makers of Spyware Cleaner:

On Apr. 11, 2006, the Attorney General for the state of Washington announced that it had filed a complaint against SoftwareOnline, makers of InternetShield:

On May 4, 2006, the FTC announced that had secured favorable rulings in its complaints against Odysseus Marketing and Sanford Wallace over SpyWiper/MailWiper:

On Nov. 21, 2006, the FTC announced that it had reached a final settlement with Walt Rines and Odysses Marketing in the SpyWiper/MailWiper case:

Anti-spyware information sites...

There are number of reputable anti-spyware information sites on the Net. Among the best are:

 
Return to top...
 

 Return to top...

These pages have been getting a lot of attention since they were first posted on June 26, 2004, and we've had many requests from other webmasters to mirror or copy them. Given the sensitive nature of the information contained here, we would prefer that there were only one copy of these pages on the Net for us to worry about.

Thus, we must request that visitors not copy, mirror, or otherwise reproduce these pages -- including the "Rogue/Suspect Anti-Spyware" page, the "Anti-Spyware Family Resemblances" page, and the "Anti-Spyware Orphans & Outcasts" page -- on any other web site in whole or in part. That includes hot-linking to these pages via frames of any type. 

You may use these pages as a reference -- e.g., cite or summarize the particular facts, conclusions, observations, and judgments offered on these pages. But please do not copy, display, or produce derivative versions of these pages, which are protected by copyright.

If you want to link to these pages, by all means do so. You can even include a short teaser description or summary with your link.

As these pages are updated frequently, we are not responsible for any inaccurate, outdated, obsolete, defamatory, misleading, or otherwise erroneous information that may be contained on unauthorized versions of these pages elsewhere on the Net. The only authorized versions of these pages on the Net are those here at Spyware Warrior.

We appreciate your understanding and cooperation in this matter.

SpywareWarrior.com

 Return to top...

Questions & Contact

If you have questions or comments about any of the information presented above, please don't hesitate to ask. If you're a vendor whose program is listed on this page, please read THIS discussion of listing criteria and the de-listing process above before emailing us. Also, before contacting us about programs not included on the main list of "Rogue/Suspect Anti-Spyware Products," please check the list of lesser-known anti-spyware applications that we have tested as well as the list of legitimate, licensed clones of other anti-spyware programs.

Best regards,

SpywareWarrior.com

Full disclosure: the maintainers of this page have performed consulting work as independent contractors for Sunbelt Software, makers of CounterSpy. Because of that relationship and the conflict of interest that it represents, we must recuse ourselves from public comment on CounterSpy. That means that we cannot and will not publicly evaluate, test, or even recommend Sunbelt's anti-spyware product. The anti-spyware products that we do recommend, all of which are competitors to CounterSpy, are included above. Moreover, the opinions, judgments, and conclusions found on these pages are those of SpywareWarrior.com alone.

 Return to top...

Return to Spyware Warrior Blog     
Return to Spyware Warrior Forums

Last Updated:May 4, 2007

© Copyright 2003-2007 SpywareWarrior.com