Spyware Warrior Spyware Warrior
Help with Spyware, Hijacking & Other Internet Nuisances
 
FAQ :: Search :: Memberlist :: Usergroups :: Register
Profile :: Log in to check your private messages :: Log in

Spyware Terminator
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Spyware Warrior Forum Index -> Anti-Spyware and Security Software Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Tokar
Warrior


Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Last Visit: 15 Feb 2008
Posts: 177

PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2006 5:14 pm    Post subject: Spyware Terminator Reply with quote

I don't understand why this program is still listed on the rogue/suspect antispyware programs list.

www.spywareterminator.com

I have installed this program myself, and neither Kaspersky AntiVirus (the best antivirus detection engine, according to www.virus.gr tests) or Microsoft AntiSpyware found any problems. The same goes for AdAware, SpyBot, SpyDefense and Advanced Spyware Remover, all of which don't appear on the rogue/suspect list...well ASR was on the list but was removed as stated by the note.

Besides, the rogue list states at the bottom that the program hasn't even been tested...Spyware Terminator that is.

The two things that I think are the reasons why you STILL list this program is:
a) its supported by www.crawler.com, which you somehow think is still adware/spyware related. They seem pretty safe to me.
b) you say that the developer is associated with IBIS toolbar. Even if thats the case, there is no indication of this program submitting data beyond one's knowledge or installing any kind of adware or spyware.

If you head over to www.softpedia.com, they actually test every software they list on their site. And they have this program listed and tested.
Every program they find clean garners a 100% clean award.

http://www.softpedia.com/get/Internet/Popup-Ad-Spyware-Blockers/Spyware-Terminator.shtml

Award: http://www.softpedia.com/progClean/Spyware-Terminator-Clean-31684.html

Mind I note their lab testing was done AFTER the date you added Spyware Terminator to the list of rogue/suspect products (12/05/05).


Ive been running this software for over a week and found it to be completely safe and not "suspect".
Yes, true, the program connects to the server to submit scan results for analysis, and it lets you also send files back to the server for analysis, but what antispyware program doesnt do this?
Microsoft AntiSpyware does...SpyDefense does...Advanced Spyware Remover does...CounterSpy does.
Im sure there are a host of other products which do the same as well.


Just take a look at the EULA they provide on the site:
http://www.spywareterminator.com//legal/terms.aspx

In CAPS:
Note: CRAWLER IS NOT SPYWARE OR ADWARE. NO POPUP ADS WILL APPEAR WITH THE SERVICES.


I really think you should remove it from the list.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tokar
Warrior


Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Last Visit: 15 Feb 2008
Posts: 177

PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 12:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

well...so whats the call here?


Has anyone at SpywareWarrior even ventured to "try" the program?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fcukdat
Warrior Addict


Joined: 01 Jan 2005
Last Visit: 08 Apr 2009
Posts: 757
Location: Yeovil,England.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Chewyfood and welcome to SWW forums Smile

Your query can only be ansewered by the one person who keeps the rogue/suspect list updated and published for the benefit of all visitors.

At the moment i'm guessing he's busy Wink
http://www.antispywarecoalition.org/events/feb2006agenda.htm

I'm sure Eric will address your topic when he gets a chance but don't forget he's only human so be patient Smile

ps No i have'nt tried it and have no intention of trying it but then that's not a reflection on SpyWareWarrior forums thats as the choice of a member of these forum's.
_________________
Malware hunter....Got Bot ?

MIRT Handler >>>
http://www.castlecops.com/c55-MIRT.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
theCaptain
Warrior


Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Last Visit: 20 Aug 2009
Posts: 85
Location: NY

PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My SiteAdvisor says:

Quote:

Contrary to test results to date, feedback from credible users suggests that downloads on this site may contain what some people would consider adware, spyware, or other unwanted programs.


I ran it and received 3 "critical" cookies on a re-imaged machine (homepage set to default MSN where no doubt the cookies came from).

A user by the name of "Edelman" says it's part of Websearch: http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/spywareterminator.com Indeed they seem to share the same address.

But then again it lists Websearch as an "adware bundler" in its "database". Hmmmm....

It scanned, found things, removed them, but DIDN'T ASK FOR MONEY. So it's not using typical rogue tactics. In fact, I couldn't find any way to buy the software or give them money. Which begs the question, what is their motivation for putting out this software?

Chewyfood, do you have any ties to this company?

-K
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
suzi
Site Admin


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Last Visit: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 10325
Location: sunny California

PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 4:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chewyfood,

The rogue anti-spyware page doesn't say that SpywareTerminator contains or is spyware/adware. It says:

Quote:
vendor connected w/ known spyware/adware distributor (IBIS/Websearch);


See here:

http://www.websearch.com/news.aspx?id=1378

Also note the definition of rogue/suspect at the top of the page:

Quote:
"Rogue/Suspect" means that these products are of unknown, questionable, or dubious value as anti-spyware protection.


I don't know about you, but personally I wouldn't have much faith in an anti-spyware program that came from a known adware/spyware vendor. IMO there's a conflict of interest for a company to be publishing adware/spyware and an anti-spyware program.
_________________
Former Microsoft MVP 2005-2009, Consumer Security
Please do not PM or Email me for personal support. Post in the Forums instead and we will all learn. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Tokar
Warrior


Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Last Visit: 15 Feb 2008
Posts: 177

PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 9:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have 0 ties to the company. Believe me, if could be a viable asset to some company I would already be working for them.
I can't code for bupkus. My limit is "Hello World", pretty much...considering the complexity that goes into programming REAL programs.

All I have is my creative mind, which I use to make suggestions for products I trully believe in.

Anyway...

I have just gone out of my way to try out every one of their softwares...which includes their toolbar, the plugins for the toolbar, the screensavers...all of it. This also includes Spyware Terminator.

This is all due to claims that Crawler is still "dirty".

The only reason I was so inclined to try all the software because it seems there are some people who are abusing the listing on the rogue/suspect list, saying that because there are "TIES" to a known adware company that all their software is bad.
I put "TIES" in quotes because I trully don't believe any connections currently existing are "spyware" related.

Besides, spyware is a misused word in most cases, at least in my opinion.


After trying them all I found no issues with any of it.
In fact, Microsoft Antispyware, Ad-Aware, SpyBot, Kaspersky AntiVirus, SpyDefense, and Advanced Spyware Remover had no problems with it.

And unlike programs which are regarded as spyware, all of these Crawler programs:
1) provide uninstallers which remove all traces of the software
2) provide EULA's
3) don't bundle anything that antispyware products find bad
4) provide full support for their software
5) don't ask for money in any way
6) don't advertise one product in another...as in you don't see advertisements for Crawler Toolbar in Spyware Terminator.


So I really don't see why the "TIES" associated with Spyware Terminator are a basis for having the program on the list when there is no evidence (no evidence I could find) of such.

The only thing I found "bad" about Crawler software was associated with the Toolbar. They don't give you the option of not setting your default IE pages to Crawler ones, like most toolbars do, especially google. It just does it by default without your consent. However, none of the active scanners in antispyware programs I'm running warned that the pages were "bad"...it just alerted me that they were trying to be changed and whether I wanted to authorize them.
This isn't a big deal in my mind. While annoying, the sites are perfectly safe (at least how I see it) and are easy restored to their defaults thru the IE Internet Options.


Obviously I can't force anyone to try something they don't want to, but after trying each one of the softwares I can honestly say they are clean and safe to try. I would suggest you give it a try.

I mean, like, what do you have to lose?
Softpedia says Spyware Terminator is 100% clean. So if it isn't then you can raise a sh!tstorm with them for an improper award, and can blame them for any problems, but ot should never get to that point since the software is clean.

Unfortunately Softpedia hasn't listed any of the other Crawler softwares outside of the Spyware Terminator program, and therefore they haven't tested them in their labs for adware or whatever (but I'm sure they would find nothing anyway). But when they eventually get added (as I contacted Crawler and told them how much I enjoyed their programs and told them they should request Softpedia add their softwares) they should be given the 100% clean award.



It may sound like I'm someone from Crawler or something, but I'm not. It just irks me to see a perfectly clean software on the list of rogue/suspect programs, when its perfectly safe and clean. It also irks me when people abuse this listing and think everything from that particular company is therefore "bad". And I just wish to get things cleared up as fast as possible.


theCaptain: if you don't believe me, I can PM you my info and have you look me up. I have 0 ties to Crawler...let alone any internet company.
I may be a little preferential to Softpedia as a download site, but hey, when you believe in something you try to push it as hard as possible Smile.

to fcukdat: didn't realize or know who did what here at SW.com. Alright well hopefully Eric can address it in a timely manner.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
trickyricky
Warrior


Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Last Visit: 15 Apr 2009
Posts: 192
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2006 3:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Regardless of the lack of detectable malware in the program, is it actually any use? How effective is its protection, how rigorous is its scanning and detection? How accurate is its malware database?

You've tested it thoroughly for the presence of malware, but all you've said that it's malware-free, which is no recommendation at all.

Notepad.exe is also 100% free of malware, yet I wouldn't recommend it as an anti-spyware application.

What exactly does it report back to base? You reported that it does call home, but you've not analyzed what data is sent back to base. As others here have said, it comes from a company which is known to be associated with the bad guys. Would you knowingly buy a life insurance policy from the Mafia? Even if its terms & conditions looked fine? I very much doubt it...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
suzi
Site Admin


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Last Visit: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 10325
Location: sunny California

PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2006 10:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cheweyfood,

You wrote:
Quote:
The only reason I was so inclined to try all the software because it seems there are some people who are abusing the listing on the rogue/suspect list, saying that because there are "TIES" to a known adware company that all their software is bad.


Repeating what I said before - the definition of rogue/suspect:

Quote:
"Rogue/Suspect" means that these products are of unknown, questionable, or dubious value as anti-spyware protection.


Again, the fact that the app is published by a known adware/spyware vendor makes it *suspect* in my eyes.

I can't imagine why anyone would recommend an anti-spyware program made by a known adware/spyware comoany when there are well known, trusted apps like AdAware, Spybot Search & Destroy and Microsoft AntiSpyware around, that are free, not to mention the reputable paid apps.

As for Softpedia, they have a number of rogue apps listed there.
_________________
Former Microsoft MVP 2005-2009, Consumer Security
Please do not PM or Email me for personal support. Post in the Forums instead and we will all learn. Smile


Last edited by suzi on Sun Feb 12, 2006 7:56 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Tokar
Warrior


Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Last Visit: 15 Feb 2008
Posts: 177

PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2006 11:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

trickyricky wrote:
Regardless of the lack of detectable malware in the program, is it actually any use? How effective is its protection, how rigorous is its scanning and detection? How accurate is its malware database?

You've tested it thoroughly for the presence of malware, but all you've said that it's malware-free, which is no recommendation at all.

Notepad.exe is also 100% free of malware, yet I wouldn't recommend it as an anti-spyware application.

What exactly does it report back to base? You reported that it does call home, but you've not analyzed what data is sent back to base. As others here have said, it comes from a company which is known to be associated with the bad guys. Would you knowingly buy a life insurance policy from the Mafia? Even if its terms & conditions looked fine? I very much doubt it...



Well it mimics the interface of MS...so users of MS would feel right at home.
The active scanners are exactly like MS's.
So it alerts me of every IE page change, and asks if I want to authorize.
It alerts me of every IE BHO. In the case of safe ones, like Google Toolbar, it does the same thing as MS, where it says the BHO has allowed to be installed.
Im sure for BHO's that are unsafe I would get the same deal as MS asking for my permission. But seeing as how I don't have any intentions on installing such, i probably won't see it anytime soon.

It scans cookies, files, registry, active process...
It lets you report false positive results to the server using the built-in submitter.
So far, the only false positive it has found is a startup entry remnant from uninstalling Windows Live Messenger.

It lets you send back files you find suspicious the server.

It does a lot of the same things MS does...protect IE pages, protect IE BHO's/ActiveX, Quarantine, Ignoring, built-in software/definition updates, service monitoring, startup registry monitoring, win.ini system.ini HOSTS and file extenion monitoring, and WinSock protection.
It associates the removal process with System Restore.
Scheduled scans.


In each update to the definitions, it actually tells you what new things were added to the definitions. I don't know of any program that does this.

So for example:
"On February 10, 2006 the following items were added to the database:
Trojan/WinFa
Trojan/ServM
Ctlx
Hpmonz
Trojan/Bancos-KB
Trojan/Progent-DA"

It detects both safe and unsafe items just for record keeping.


If you want to see its detection library you can see for yourself online:
http://www.spywareterminator.com/stdata/list.aspx

It lists everything from safe to unsafe...and has a classification for each.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tokar
Warrior


Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Last Visit: 15 Feb 2008
Posts: 177

PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2006 11:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

suzi wrote:
Cheweyfoor,

You wrote:
Quote:
The only reason I was so inclined to try all the software because it seems there are some people who are abusing the listing on the rogue/suspect list, saying that because there are "TIES" to a known adware company that all their software is bad.


Repeating what I said before - the definition of rogue/suspect:

Quote:
"Rogue/Suspect" means that these products are of unknown, questionable, or dubious value as anti-spyware protection.


Again, the fact that the app is published by a known adware/spyware vendor makes it *suspect* in my eyes.

I can't imagine why anyone would recommend an anti-spyware program made by a known adware/spyware comoany when there are well known, trusted apps like AdAware, Spybot Search & Destroy and Microsoft AntiSpyware around, that are free, not to mention the reputable paid apps.

As for Softpedia, they have a number of rogue apps listed there.


I don't understand the point you are trying to make by continuously pointing out the definition of "rogue/suspect ".



I recommend it because, like every other antispyware product on the planet earth, it will find stuff others won't. And it has some awesome active scanners while being free.


Yes, that is true, Softpedia does list "SUSPECT" (according to the definition they aren't necessarily unsafe) apps. But again, find me one app where its known to be full of spyware/adware and Softpedia gave it a 100% clean award?
But at least Softpedia editors are willing to test out every application and see if its clean. If you don't believe me I would be happy to give you the friendly editors contact information so you can talk to them personally, which is something I do on a daily basis. However, you can clearly see from the quality screenshots they put out for every application would be an indication of actually installing all the software they get.
Everyone's favorite Download.com I'm sure does similar testing, but they make no indication as to whether a program is clean or not. All those Ares hacks which include New.net or WhenUsave are all "free" according to download.com. However on Softpedia, those same hacks are regarded as "Adware" and don't have the 100% clean award, where as Ares Galaxy (the official client) it listed as Free and has the 100% clean award. So at least Softpedia is making a concerted effort to distinguish clean from not.
The same cannot be said for Tucows, Betanews, Snapfiles, Download.com etc.

For example:
New.net and WhenUSave aren't exactly...as bad as they one used to be, however they still are regarded as adware. Don't get me wrong, I still treat them as such. However they aren't as unsafe as they once were, and are very easy to uninstall.

HOWEVER, if you go and find all those apps that have it in the installer you will find softpedia lists them but not as 100% clean.

So Middle_Man for AIM once was clean and Softpedia had it as such:
It includes WhenUSave: no more 100% clean award:
http://www.softpedia.com/get/Internet/Chat/Other-Chat-Tools/middleman.shtml

By including WhenUsave it didnt make the software BAD, it just made it unclean. I still think the program is better than most AIM advertisement hacks, and it worthy of listing on Softpedia, but its not clean and therefore doesn't deserve a reward for being clean.

Would I recommend it to anyone? No, I don't feel like telling people they have to go into Add/Remove progs to uninstall whenusave.


However, its like this...
Spyware Terminator has no spyware, adware, popups or whatever.
Its free.
It includes an active scanner.
It provides the same protection as MS at half the RAM cost
(MS: phys 14,976 + 12,948, virt 10,268 + 5,036...vs ST: phys 13,192, virt: 10,312).
Its another free tool one can use for cleaning.
If it finds false positives you can submit them to the developers inside the program.


So the question shouldn't be...
Why would you use/recommend it?
It should be...
Why WOULDNT you use/recommend it?



And of course the generic answer is that Crawler is suspect.

However I challenge anyone to find any problems with any of the Crawler software...or the Crawler websites.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eburger68
SWW Distinguished Expert


Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Last Visit: 18 Nov 2008
Posts: 575
Location: Clearwater, FL

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 5:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chewyfood:

Our policy is to list programs with known ties to adware or spyware vendors on the Rogue/Suspect page regardless of the performance or functionality of the program. We do that because we regard adware and spyware vendors to be an untrustworthy source for anti-spyware programs, and I will not make an exception to that policy for Spyware Terminator.

That said, I have been in contact with Crawler/IBIS, which maintains that the company has exited the adware business. Spyware Terminator (and its vendor) are currently on a three month probation period that will end in early March. When the probation period expires I will re-test Spyware Terminator and re-examine IBIS's track record. If at that time the program and the company's performance checks out clean, the program will be de-listed.

Note that I actually have tested Spyware Terminator -- see this page for screenshots:

http://www.spywarewarrior.com/orphans_outcasts.htm

The listing of Spyware Terminator in the "not-tested" list was outdated.

Regards,

Eric L. Howes


Last edited by eburger68 on Sun Feb 12, 2006 8:34 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Tokar
Warrior


Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Last Visit: 15 Feb 2008
Posts: 177

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 4:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

eburger68 wrote:
Chewyfood:

Our policy is to list programs with known ties to adware or spyware vendors on the Rogue/Suspect page rgeardless of the performance or functionality of the program. We do that because we regard adware and spyware vendors to be an untrustworthy source for anti-spyware programs, and I will not make an exception to that policy for Spyware Terminator.

That said, I have been in contact with Crawler/IBIS, which maintains that the company has exited the adware business. Spyware Terminator (and its vendor) are currently on a three month probation period that will end in early March. When the probation period expires I will re-test Spyware Terminator and re-examine IBIS's track record. If at that time the program and the company's performance checks out clean, the program will be de-listed.

Note that I actually have tested Spyware Terminator -- see this page for screenshots:

http://www.spywarewarrior.com/orphans_outcasts.htm

The listing of Spyware Terminator in the "not-tested" list was outdated.

Regards,

Eric L. Howes



Probation from who or what?...the website testing?

I mean, this isn't a public school...you guys are just a website just trying to spread the truth and accurate information about all-important antispyware programs.
There is more harm is holding off testing this program for a month, than doing the test right now.

If you are backed up in testing programs, that I can understand; but holding off on testing a product because its on "probation" from the website...come on.

Again, I have no affiliation with the company, I just believe you are another popular website that strives to provide the truth to users, and therefore you shouldn't "delay" doing this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eburger68
SWW Distinguished Expert


Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Last Visit: 18 Nov 2008
Posts: 575
Location: Clearwater, FL

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 6:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ChewyFood:

Quote:
Probation from who or what?...the website testing?


The probation period is a moratorium on de-listing or re-testing until a period of good behavior has been established. We have imposed similar probation periods in other cases, and have at least two other programs currently on probation.

Quote:
There is more harm is holding off testing this program for a month, than doing the test right now.


Harm to whom or what? You seem more interested in the program and the vendor than in actual users -- much, much too interested to be a disinterested observer. The right of unsuspecting users to learn of this program's connection with a known adware distributor seems not to concern you at all, which raises serious questions about your judgment.

Quote:
If you are backed up in testing programs, that I can understand; but holding off on testing a product because its on "probation" from the website...come on.


"Come on" is not a good reason to break with the policy that we have followed in other cases. Moreover, I already HAVE tested the product, as noted in a previous post.

Quote:
Again, I have no affiliation with the company, I just believe you are another popular website that strives to provide the truth to users, and therefore you shouldn't "delay" doing this.


The truth of this situation also involves the connection of the company, a known adware distributor, with the program -- information prospective users deserve to know, even if you seem rather unconcerned with it. The "delay" is not arbitrary or capricious, as you seem to imply, but rather well-warranted caution based on the history of behavior from this particular vendor.

Keep in mind that there are many in the anti-spyware community who will argue that I should *never* give this company or program another chance, given the outrageous and illegal practices associated with the company's previous adware programs (Wintools & Websearch). I'm going to give the company another chance -- I simply maintain that the company ought to establish a history of good behavior before that chance is granted.

Eric L. Howes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Tokar
Warrior


Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Last Visit: 15 Feb 2008
Posts: 177

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 10:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

eburger68 wrote:
ChewyFood:

Quote:
Probation from who or what?...the website testing?


The probation period is a moratorium on de-listing or re-testing until a period of good behavior has been established. We have imposed similar probation periods in other cases, and have at least two other programs currently on probation.

Quote:
There is more harm is holding off testing this program for a month, than doing the test right now.


Harm to whom or what? You seem more interested in the program and the vendor than in actual users -- much, much too interested to be a disinterested observer. The right of unsuspecting users to learn of this program's connection with a known adware distributor seems not to concern you at all, which raises serious questions about your judgment.

Quote:
If you are backed up in testing programs, that I can understand; but holding off on testing a product because its on "probation" from the website...come on.


"Come on" is not a good reason to break with the policy that we have followed in other cases. Moreover, I already HAVE tested the product, as noted in a previous post.

Quote:
Again, I have no affiliation with the company, I just believe you are another popular website that strives to provide the truth to users, and therefore you shouldn't "delay" doing this.


The truth of this situation also involves the connection of the company, a known adware distributor, with the program -- information prospective users deserve to know, even if you seem rather unconcerned with it. The "delay" is not arbitrary or capricious, as you seem to imply, but rather well-warranted caution based on the history of behavior from this particular vendor.

Keep in mind that there are many in the anti-spyware community who will argue that I should *never* give this company or program another chance, given the outrageous and illegal practices associated with the company's previous adware programs (Wintools & Websearch). I'm going to give the company another chance -- I simply maintain that the company ought to establish a history of good behavior before that chance is granted.

Eric L. Howes


Alright well your explanations (on the probation period) are fair and I trust your judgement. So I won't comment on them any further.

In that last part I wasn't saying you hadn't tested them at all...i was referring to holding off on the second round of testing.

Harm in that...like every AS program, ST will detect things others won't. Not to say people SHOULD use ST, its just that scanning with another AS program would find an infection more likely than not.

I only seem so animate because there are people reviewing this software on download sites specifically stating your listing as the reason why they:
1) tell users to stay away
2) will not try the program

It just really IRKS me to see this three month old listing as such a reason for reviewers persistence in saying the program is "bad".

It irks me even more to see such comments about a software when reputable sites like Download.com, Softpedia.com, and ZDnet list the software.

So this posting and thread is just the downhill peak of animosity towards reviewers.


My judgement is not clouded. I have been using this product for 1 to 2 weeks with no problems. At the same time I have a trust in Softpedia in the work they do (based on the hundreds of conversations I have had with both the lead Windows Software Section Editor, and one of the main Site editors) so I have complete faith in the 100% clean award they granted the software.
I feel that after using the product for this period of time, it is worthy of my recommendation. My recommendation is of no value to most people...obviously, but to my family and friends it is. At this point my computer is the only computer running Spyware Terminator, however, any computers that experience any future adware infections, whether it be my mom's or my friend's or family friends', will have ST installed on the machine as a secondary scanning product to Microsoft Antispyware for cleaning purposes.

I have used their other software, the Crawler Toolbar. In the computer world I would be looked at as a complete idiot for doing this...but someone has to take the plunge and spread the good word if there is one to be spread...which there is, by the way.

Its like that guy who did the research on stomach ulcers. He probably did years of experimentation with the bacteria that causes ulcers on lab animals, which is fine, but when the time came to prove that the bacteria had the same effect on humans, someone had to take the plunge and ingest the bacteria.
He took the bacteria. Soon after he showed signs of stomach ulcers and now he is the proud owner of the 2005 Nobel Prize in Medicine.

I mean I dont expect to win an award by trying out Crawler Toolbar, but I think they deserve a good word here and there since they have decided to give up the adware business.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Oldfrog
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Aug 2004
Last Visit: 09 Feb 2013
Posts: 1161
Location: Hewitt, TX

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 7:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

1. It does not seem to detect malicious files with random names. I had two .wmf exploit files and one l2m installer on my system which it failed to detect.

2. It either does not scan system restore points or detect any of the items contained in mine.

3. It does a very good job of detecting 0 byte files named after real malware files
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
theCaptain
Warrior


Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Last Visit: 20 Aug 2009
Posts: 85
Location: NY

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 8:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chewy,

I think "Rogue/Suspect" says it all. The application certainly is suspect until proven otherwise due to it's affiliations. Yes, guilty by association, hardly fair, I know. That's the way it is around here. However, if the software gets tested properly at some point and turns out to do a good or even a reasonable job at fighting Spyware / Adware, then there will be a strong argument for exlusion from this list (IMHO).

-K
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mind control 01
Warrior


Joined: 11 Sep 2004
Last Visit: 03 Feb 2009
Posts: 156

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 8:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Im not an expert, but the saying "I think he protest to much" comes to mind Exclamation
_________________
MORE POWER TO YA.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Oldfrog
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Aug 2004
Last Visit: 09 Feb 2013
Posts: 1161
Location: Hewitt, TX

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 9:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I think "Rogue/Suspect" says it all

Maybe not quite. At its very best the list represents an opinion. For the benefit of the reader Eric has outlined the criteria used to form the opinion. To the best of my ability to determine those criteria have been applied consistently to all of the products listed. Realizing that situations can change and that mistakes can be made there is a procedure for vendor redress to have a product removed from the list. For each item listed, or formerly listed and removed, there is an explanation (often with references and footnoting) indicating why the product is on, or no longer on, the list.

That seems to me quite fair. The bottom line is that if you disagree with the criteria you are welcome to discount the list. If you disagree with the reason for listing in the case of a particular product you are welcome to use it. The sky isn't going to fall in either case.

As Eric pointed out there are those who don't feel that a product should ever be removed no matter what. You seem to want this product removed immediately. Doing either would be outside the stated criteria and redress policy. Strictly adhering to those in an objective manner is what gives the list its validity. A failure to adhere to them by allowing exceptions would reduce it to just another subjective expression of "I like" and "I don't like".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
crawler_team
Junior Member


Joined: 13 Feb 2006
Last Visit: 18 Sep 2006
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 1:41 pm    Post subject: Spyware Terminator Reply with quote

This is one of the Crawler team members. I wanted to say hello to all the Spyware Warrior members and thank everyone for doing a wonderful job with this forum and site.

I came across this post today based on one of the reviews at download.com in which it mentions comments from Spyware Warrior. I wanted to thank Chewyfood for his defense for our company. The points you have made are greatly appreciated. As far as I know there is no one posting as Chewyfood from Crawler, I wanted to make sure that was clear. It is against our poliy to post comments as users.

If you read the reviews for Spyware Terminator at download.com and other sites its clear that people simply state that the product is spyware/adware with out any substantial evidence based on the rogue listing. The company disagrees with the 3 month probationary period, since Crawler products never consisted of adware/spyware; however, we will wait out the 3 months as required by, Eric. Again the objective of our team is to build trust and confidence with our users, and also with active members with in anti-spyware community.

I would like to state publicly that even though we disagree with our listing, the work done by Eric has been very valuable for users and I thank him for his hard work.

I wanted to make a few points regarding Crawler:
1) Crawler is a separate company with a new beginning.
2) Spyware Terminator removes all Websearch products if they are detected.
3) Spyware Terminator is provided free of charge to increase brand awareness of its Crawler products (2GB Webmail, Toolbar, Screensavers, etc.).
4) The team that was brought in to promote Crawler products was not part of the past.
5) We will be launching a $25,000 guarantee shortly that will state our product will be spyware/adware free today and in the future to address everyone’s concerns.
6) Spyware Terminator will be adding an anti-virus and parental control module with in product shortly as well to further increase the value of the product. Our goal is to make this the best free product in the market.
7) The company generates it revenue from search, which is primarily generated through the toolbar.
8 ) We have received hundreds of testimonials from users who have loved Spyware Terminator.
9) We would appreciate it if the forum members would test the product and provide feedback/suggestions.
10) Those of you who are not aware ‘Spyware Terminator’ offers 100% free real-time detection anti-spyware software.

At the end of the day I think we all agree actions speak louder then words, and if our product is of quality, then users will download the product. I hope to continue to improve our product and build that trust over the next few months. I hope I have addressed some of the concerns stated earlier. Thank you and have a nice week. :- )
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fcukdat
Warrior Addict


Joined: 01 Jan 2005
Last Visit: 08 Apr 2009
Posts: 757
Location: Yeovil,England.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Shocked Oh my,welcome to spyware warrior forums
crawler_team

Are you saying Crawler and IBIS are 2 seperate entities with no common history ?

Just to highlight how a broad selection of Botkillers react to software from the IBIS stable>>>
http://www.spywarewarrior.com/elh/ibis-detections.htm

and this is quite possibly the Captain's reason for being sympathetic to your cause>>>
http://www.spywarewarrior.com/elh/aj-detections.htm
Are you still Director of Internet Security and Privacy@Ask Jeeves, Inc ?

But lets dispence with the spin if this site has a grudge its against con artists that exploit user's of the internet.

Have you heard the one about "Leopard and spots" ?
_________________
Malware hunter....Got Bot ?

MIRT Handler >>>
http://www.castlecops.com/c55-MIRT.html


Last edited by fcukdat on Mon Feb 13, 2006 11:47 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Oldfrog
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Aug 2004
Last Visit: 09 Feb 2013
Posts: 1161
Location: Hewitt, TX

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Welcome to these forums, crawler_team, assuming that you are sincere in your desire to develop a quality product you should get some useful feedback here.

Quote:
I wanted to make a few points regarding Crawler:
1) Crawler is a separate company with a new beginning.
Oldfrog wrote:
Cool, once your AS product has passed its probationary period it can have a new beginning as well

2) Spyware Terminator removes all Websearch products if they are detected.
Oldfrog wrote:
I checked the database for the product and noted that the IBIS and Websearch products were listed. A good sign

3) Spyware Terminator is provided free of charge to increase brand awareness of its Crawler products (2GB Webmail, Toolbar, Screensavers, etc.).
Oldfrog wrote:
If it is effective then it might end up doing that

4) The team that was brought in to promote Crawler products was not part of the past.
Oldfrog wrote:
Promotion and development are still two entirely different things. A rose is a rose no matter who promotes it. So is a horse apple.

5) We will be launching a $25,000 guarantee shortly that will state our product will be spyware/adware free today and in the future to address everyone’s concerns.
Oldfrog wrote:
I think that has already been fairly well established both by Softpedia and those of us who have tested it.

6) Spyware Terminator will be adding an anti-virus and parental control module with in product shortly as well to further increase the value of the product. Our goal is to make this the best free product in the market.
Oldfrog wrote:
Good luck with that, sincerely meant.

7) The company generates it revenue from search, which is primarily generated through the toolbar.
Oldfrog wrote:
Ah, the hook. I assume that users can use the AS without the toolbar.

8 ) We have received hundreds of testimonials from users who have loved Spyware Terminator.
9) We would appreciate it if the forum members would test the product and provide feedback/suggestions.
Oldfrog wrote:
That will probably happen and if it turns out to be a great product I think our members will tell you so.

10) Those of you who are not aware ‘Spyware Terminator’ offers 100% free real-time detection anti-spyware software.
Oldfrog wrote:
As do Spybot S&D TeaTimer, Javacool's SpywareGuard, MWAS, and various evaluation products out there.


At the end of the day I think we all agree actions speak louder then words, and if our product is of quality, then users will download the product. I hope to continue to improve our product and build that trust over the next few months. I hope I have addressed some of the concerns stated earlier. Thank you and have a nice week. :- )
Oldfrog wrote:
Your willingness to come here and interact with what you probably perceive to be a hostile audience is certainly a point in your favor. I hope that I speak for all of us here when I say that you will get a fair hearing.
Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
fcukdat
Warrior Addict


Joined: 01 Jan 2005
Last Visit: 08 Apr 2009
Posts: 757
Location: Yeovil,England.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 5:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fao Crawler_team

Just for the kicks and a change of heart i've downloaded ST to evaluate the software.Since i have no need for realtime protection(ProcessGuard&Winpatrol take care of this for me) i was principly testing the scanning engine&reporting etc

A couple of bugs to report back to you and a request for some infomation as well Question

Test bed being my Pc that is definetly clean of malware and should not be generating any detections unless F/p's or very dubious classification etc

So complete with pic's and commentary here goes Smile



I dont want realtime protection active so it is deselected at stage2



I'm not a fan of submitting data without knowing what is being submitted so cautiously i decline ET the right to phone home at step3



Next up i allow the software to run.Scotty barks and alerts me to this value being added.Now thats not right Sad



Next up PG wants a piece of the action.Did i not state and select no active shields please Shocked


Ok so i allow the ET to update before scanning by granting a one time rule(Kerio2.1.5 firewall ineffect Very Happy ) to connect to the mothership for updating and then run a full system scan.

I'm pleased but not surprised to say that no critical objects were found Cool
Shocked However 35 objects were detected with no explaination of why they were detected Confused

If required i can post a copy&paste of the GUI report at the end of scanning and the txt report generated by ST at the end to shed any light from my end.

So question number 1 to crawler_team why are these objects which are completely legitimate files/softwares being highlighted after a full system scan ?

Ok i've given the software a run and now i want to uninstall it.As soon as the uninstall process starts ET wants to phone home Shocked




Like i said earliar i only granted one time permission for internet access so Kerio is doing what it dose best.
So crawler_team pray do tell what is being phoned home to the mothership Embarassed
_________________
Malware hunter....Got Bot ?

MIRT Handler >>>
http://www.castlecops.com/c55-MIRT.html


Last edited by fcukdat on Mon Feb 13, 2006 11:52 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
channi
Warrior


Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Last Visit: 12 May 2006
Posts: 267

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 8:28 pm    Post subject: Re: Spyware Terminator Reply with quote

crawler_team wrote:


I came across this post today based on one of the reviews at download.com in which it mentions comments from Spyware Warrior.

I wanted to thank Chewyfood for his defense for our company.

As far as I know there is no one posting as Chewyfood from Crawler, I wanted to make sure that was clear. It is against our poliy to post comments as users.



[emphasis added]

"Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

Given the deeper background of this however. I bet if one looked at the tag on that slip "crawler_team" is wearing. They will find it bears the Freudian designer label.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. But then again.


Thank you fcukdat for your great post. Leopards and spots indeed.


leopards and spots
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wawadave
Warrior Obsessed


Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Last Visit: 24 Jul 2009
Posts: 3448
Location: Illegitimus non carborundum

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

fcukdat test spoke volumes for me!!!

i would use a packet skiffer and see what its trying to send from a vm,ed machine. but i don,t see this program as worth the effort.

Evil or Very Mad
_________________
RFID tags! SPYWARE
Tired of proprietary Cor-pirationware?
http://www.openoffice.org/
Installing Vista http://tinyurl.com/2l9qyd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Tokar
Warrior


Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Last Visit: 15 Feb 2008
Posts: 177

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 9:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

When I installed it I let it do active scanning...so letting it enter my startup programs list wasn't a big deal.


I havent looked into this, but are scheduled scans turned on by default?
If so, then that would be the reason why it would insert itself into the startup registry. To do the scheduled scans the program has to be running.


fcukdat, I think the things that you said it detects is all the safe stuff on your machine. At the results there should be a few tabs...
Safe SW, Unknown SW, Critical Objects, and Log.

Take a look at Safe SW. Thats all the safe stuff it found.

The definitions, it seems, are built to detect safe stuff...
Not sure why, possibly for sending back data in improving the definitions...*shrug*.

Just take a look at the library of what ST detects:
http://www.spywareterminator.com/stdata/list.aspx

If you look at the bottom you will see the key...
Dialer, Adware Bundler, Spyware, Tracking Cookie, SAFE, Other, Developer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Turtledove
SWW Graduate


Joined: 26 Dec 2005
Last Visit: 04 Feb 2011
Posts: 343
Location: California

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 9:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oldfrog said:

["As Eric pointed out there are those who don't feel that a product should ever be removed no matter what. You seem to want this product removed immediately. Doing either would be outside the stated criteria and redress policy. Strictly adhering to those in an objective manner is what gives the list its validity. A failure to adhere to them by allowing exceptions would reduce it to just another subjective expression of "I like" and "I don't like"."]

fcukdat said:

["Like i said earliar i only granted one time permission for internet access so Kerio is doing what it dose best.So crawler-team pray do tell what is being phoned home to the mothership "]

Execellent posts Oldfrog and Fcukdat. Applause Cool
Crawler_team has some homework to do.

Turtledove Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fcukdat
Warrior Addict


Joined: 01 Jan 2005
Last Visit: 08 Apr 2009
Posts: 757
Location: Yeovil,England.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 11:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Chewyfood Smile
Quote:
When I installed it I let it do active scanning...so letting it enter my startup programs list wasn't a big deal


Like i 've stated i declined realtime protection so this is a biggie for me.I've made my choice and the software has over ruled it Sad
Quote:
If so, then that would be the reason why it would insert itself into the startup registry. To do the scheduled scans the program has to be running.


Scanning is one thing,realtime protection is another Wink

At the end of the day these are software bugs,nothing that some quality recoding can't sort out.Time will tell...

Quote:
fcukdat, I think the things that you said it detects is all the safe stuff on your machine. At the results there should be a few tabs...
Safe SW, Unknown SW, Critical Objects, and Log.

Take a look at Safe SW. Thats all the safe stuff it found.

The definitions, it seems, are built to detect safe stuff...
Not sure why, possibly for sending back data in improving the definitions...*shrug*.


Shocked Evil or Very Mad

Now this is the "killer" for me,
Why would an anti malware software be data harvesting my legitmate software.

If ET is phoning home a list of legitimate software installed then in my books without upfront disclosure this is
SPYING type behaviour being exhibited.

So if this is the case i hereby make my claim for the $25000 pot Laughing

Quote:

5) We will be launching a $25,000 guarantee shortly that will state our product will be spyware/adware free today and in the future to address everyone’s concerns

_________________
Malware hunter....Got Bot ?

MIRT Handler >>>
http://www.castlecops.com/c55-MIRT.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Tokar
Warrior


Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Last Visit: 15 Feb 2008
Posts: 177

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 1:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

fcukdat wrote:
Hi Chewyfood Smile
Quote:
When I installed it I let it do active scanning...so letting it enter my startup programs list wasn't a big deal


Like i 've stated i declined realtime protection so this is a biggie for me.I've made my choice and the software has over ruled it Sad
Quote:
If so, then that would be the reason why it would insert itself into the startup registry. To do the scheduled scans the program has to be running.


Scanning is one thing,realtime protection is another Wink

At the end of the day these are software bugs,nothing that some quality recoding can't sort out.Time will tell...

Quote:
fcukdat, I think the things that you said it detects is all the safe stuff on your machine. At the results there should be a few tabs...
Safe SW, Unknown SW, Critical Objects, and Log.

Take a look at Safe SW. Thats all the safe stuff it found.

The definitions, it seems, are built to detect safe stuff...
Not sure why, possibly for sending back data in improving the definitions...*shrug*.


Shocked Evil or Very Mad

Now this is the "killer" for me,
Why would an anti malware software be data harvesting my legitmate software.

If ET is phoning home a list of legitimate software installed then in my books without upfront disclosure this is
SPYING type behaviour being exhibited.

So if this is the case i hereby make my claim for the $25000 pot Laughing

Quote:

5) We will be launching a $25,000 guarantee shortly that will state our product will be spyware/adware free today and in the future to address everyone’s concerns



I didnt say that was the DEFINITE reason for detecting them.

I think a better guess (than saying they would send the info back for "harvesting") would be for your own information.
If you didnt know what "iexplore.exe" was (god forbid) Spyware Terminator would tell you.


I think that with the way MS is taking their product (implementing WGA into the installer), ST might end up being the choice product among windows pirates.
Windows Defender (MS AS Beta 2) is provided as an MSI package, not like windows update hotfix EXE files. I don't know of any easy way to get rid of WGA in the install.


By the way...I kinda forgot what the safe items detected showed did so I just did a scan. It just scans the active processes and lets you know that the program has detected the program and it is safe.





Its actually quite useful. As you can see, it not only shows the location of the process executable, but it describes what the program is, which is great for inexperienced users.

Notice in the second picture ST does not know what AdMuncher is.


The only thing I don't like about the program is that you can't resize the window, which is something that a lot of programs (including MS AS) lets you do.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Oldfrog
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Aug 2004
Last Visit: 09 Feb 2013
Posts: 1161
Location: Hewitt, TX

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 5:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I found it to be pretty well behaved as far as calling home. The only times it has tried to do that were when I manually initiated an update. I haven't uninstalled as yet so can't confirm fcukdat's observation that it tried to when he did so.

I did notice something else strange, though. I have my system set up to do its scanning during the night with NAV kicking off at 0300. For two nights in a row the system logged an error and then rebooted at 0309. After removing ST from the startup list yesterday I noted that the NAV scan completed during the night without incident. (Just a note for the Crawler team)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
theCaptain
Warrior


Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Last Visit: 20 Aug 2009
Posts: 85
Location: NY

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 6:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have no interest in whether ST is a "rogue" or not. I have a huge interest in knowing the integrity of the Rogue list because I use it as a factor in significant business decisions probably about once a week. I usually smoke test software after consulting the list anyway. I treat everything with a huge dose of skepticism, so don't think that I'm coming to anyone's defense.

Unfortunately, in the Anti-spyware world, it's typically "Guilty until proven innocent". Sometimes with good reason, sometimes not. On top of that, there is a total lack of due process in most cases. The Anti-spyware coalition is trying to address this problem with the risk model and vendor appeals process, but it's still quite prevalent in the industry.

The bottom line here is whether or not the software passes the "Pepsi Challenge".

1) Does it produce false positives
2) Does it satisfactorily detect malware
3) Does it do a good job of removing the malware

FACTS are what I listen to and make judgments by. I say let's see some facts (not assumptions) before jumping to any conclusions.

-K

Disclaimer: Views expressed are my own and not the company I work for.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Oldfrog
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Aug 2004
Last Visit: 09 Feb 2013
Posts: 1161
Location: Hewitt, TX

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 7:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
1) Does it produce false positives
2) Does it satisfactorily detect malware
3) Does it do a good job of removing the malware

It sounds so simple doesn't it? But......

Does it produce false positives The answer has to be "yes". I am not aware of any that haven't produced at least some and even some well respected products have done some significant system damage as a result. So now we have to decide how many and how often are acceptable. Then throw in how quickly those are dealt with (and how), what mechanisms are in place to try avoid them in the first place, and even whether they are really false positives or classification issues. Add to that the capability of the product to quickly and easily reverse those changes.

Does it satisfactorily detect malware To answer that one we have to look at the products definition of 'malware' (classification again) and throw something in about how quickly they respond to new threats. Does the company do active research or are they playing 'follow the leader'? We have to look at their signatures to see what combination of name, location, and hash they are applying. Do they apply any heueristics in the case of unknown or random named files? Do they whitelist objects with digital signatures?

Does it do a good job of removing the malware I think that we can all agree that if a product fails to remove the executable and prevent it from automatically starting that it has not done a good job. Beyond that, what constitutes a 'good job'? Is it a percentage of the reg entries, files, and folders originally installed? The answer to this one may even depend on the particular threat. (I have just read a first hand account of Ewido removing SpyFalcon. The executable was removed, along with its startup entry, but the process was left running in memory until reboot. In the case of this threat I think that was a good job.)

I think that we also have to throw something in about the efficiency of the scanning engine. Scanning for malware is intrusive by nature and requires far more resources than simple prevention. Can an indepth scan be completed in a reasonable period of time?

Even then we have only addressed the scanning itself and not even considered other important issues such as prevention capability and the product's resistance to outside meddling. Exhaustive testing of all the products out there would be an impossibility. The prudent course seems to me to be using products which have performed well in tests and then doing a lot of reading to observe empirical results in actual use.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Tokar
Warrior


Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Last Visit: 15 Feb 2008
Posts: 177

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 7:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well I can say this about ST...as far as false positives.

It doesn't detect RealVNC like MS AS/Windows Defender detects.
It doesn't detect Favorites in folder named SPORTS, like SpyDefense does.
It doesn't detect FlashGet like SpyDefense does.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wawadave
Warrior Obsessed


Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Last Visit: 24 Jul 2009
Posts: 3448
Location: Illegitimus non carborundum

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 8:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Any app that does not stop running a major feature that was checked "NO" is no better than spyware and forced installs.
NO means get this "NO" its not a hard concept to figure out????

What part of NO does the program not understand or is unable to handle???
As stated yes it can be reprogrammed to understand "NO" and obey it correctly also.
But will it be reprogramed to except "NO" as a true command given by the end user? Than not install the feature?
This may be a concept the malware spyware writer just may not be able to grasp!!!! All that time of making spyware your program seems to follow the same methodology of install come hell or high water!
This to me is absolutely unacceptable!!!


Any program that calls home with out my permission and with out total upfront disclosure of what exactly will be sent and why is also totally unacceptable.
_________________
RFID tags! SPYWARE
Tired of proprietary Cor-pirationware?
http://www.openoffice.org/
Installing Vista http://tinyurl.com/2l9qyd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Oldfrog
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Aug 2004
Last Visit: 09 Feb 2013
Posts: 1161
Location: Hewitt, TX

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 8:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
It doesn't detect RealVNC like MS AS/Windows Defender detects.

I believe that is a classification issue rather than a false positive. There is a very important distinction between the two.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
crawler_team
Junior Member


Joined: 13 Feb 2006
Last Visit: 18 Sep 2006
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 8:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wanted to thank everyone for there comments. I think it’s fair to say that we must prove our selves before our product is considered seriously as a legitimate product, and we will do what ever is required to build that trust.

Oldfrog, I appreciate your comments and desire to evaluate the product fairly. Yes, we have every intention of providing a quality product and winning the trust of our users, and the anti-spyware community members. Yes, the toolbar is not required to use Spyware Terminator. No, I don’t think we are coming into a hostile crowd. I can understand the questions and concerns the members will have now, and in the future and we’ll do our best to address those points. However, thank you for your warm welcome. :- )

To all, please keep in mind that this is version 1 of our product, and I am sure we will have a few bugs/improvements that will need to made. We take suggestions/feedback/bugs very seriously, and we’ll try to resolve them in a prompt manner.

Few points and answer to questions:

1) We have compared our program to the Spyware Warrior test (http://spywarewarrior.com/asw-test-guide.htm ) and from what I understand we have preformed well.

2) We have a clear Privacy Policy and Terms of Use that I think it should address any concerns of what information we collect. We are open to improving on the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use if required in the future.

3) Currently the real-time shield file also processes the scheduler and auto-update. If the two processes outside of real-time shield are active then real-time shield will be added to the start up.

Spyware Terminator real-time shield is removed from startup when:
a) Tray icon is disabled
b) Real-time protection is disabled
c) Scheduler is disabled

To sum it up, currently if you select automatic update only then the process will start automatically. This will be modified with in the next update. This will be added with in the main application when you launch ST to prevent this from occurring.

4) Here is the quick definition of Objects. We will see how we can clarify it further for the users.

Object Scanned = overall count of object (object = file, registry value, process.....)
Object Identified = object is found in database (safe, bad, etc)

5) Classification of Cookies - We're re-considering how to classify cookies. Standard practice is to evaluate apps based on number of objects found so cookies - although they can't do real damage, cookies are detected by most apps.

6) During the un-installation process we just report to our servers that the app was uninstalled, there is no personally identifiable information sent back to the servers. No personal information or computer-specific information is sent back. The information is just the application version and identifier. This is the same during the installation. You are more then welcome to utilize a packet sniffer to verify this.

I hope I have answered some of your questions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Oldfrog
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Aug 2004
Last Visit: 09 Feb 2013
Posts: 1161
Location: Hewitt, TX

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 9:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the info Very Happy

Quote:
5) Classification of Cookies - We're re-considering how to classify cookies. Standard practice is to evaluate apps based on number of objects found so cookies - although they can't do real damage, cookies are detected by most apps.

That must be nightmare and a minefield of potential litigation. Personally, I could care less whether a scanner even addresses cookies and normally turn that feature off. With major browsers now incorporating really useful cookie control and management features I prefer to do it there, at the outset, rather than after the fact. I also wish that I had a nickel for every poster I have seen who rushed into a forum convinced that their system had a trojan because a doubleclick or 2o7.net cookie had been detected. IMO this is the area of your product that deserves the least emphasis. (People are still using MWAS even though cookie scanning was totally removed)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Tokar
Warrior


Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Last Visit: 15 Feb 2008
Posts: 177

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 11:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

hey crawler_team...

I have a couple of requests:

1) can you put up a forum on your website (http://www.spywareterminator.com) for discussion about your program and its definitions?

2) can you guys implement a way, in your program, to submit the logs of other programs installed on the machine (i.e. Microsoft, Webroot, Lavasoft, etc.) such that your team can analyze and better improve the detection of your program?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
channi
Warrior


Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Last Visit: 12 May 2006
Posts: 267

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 12:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I raised a huge stink on Download.com about this application, and I believe that is what crawler_team referred to in his introduction. Please read below, from what I just posted at DC, about why I did so. I really don't have anything else to say about this.


I have accomplished for the most part what I set out to do regarding this app. I wanted people like the experts at Spyware Warrior to begin taking a close look at what it actually does, and I wanted downloaders to exercise caution and not just blindly trust the claims of the publisher. Given the business associations and practices of CRAWLER, i.e. their ties to IBIS Websearch, such is more than merely justified it is prudent. It is quite alarming when a vendor with such a past suddenly begins publishing so many applications, especially when they involve data harvesting, whether voluntary or not.

Further skepticism is in my opinion justified, because Spyware Terminator and CRAWLER Toolbar both ignore important user preferences. I hope that CRAWLER's other new anti-spyware app, Security Guard, will also be tested carefully by Spyware Warrior.

Just very recently CRAWLER also began offering many tempting new apps on DC, several of them in just the last few days, their Email Notifier, RSS Reader, Weather (watcher), Wallpaper, Browser Skins, Cursors, Games, and 5 new Screensavers, all come bundled with The CRAWLER Toolbar, and they function only as plug-ins for it. Free accessory apps like these have commonly been used by adware/spyware vendors for data-mining and such, and so of course this also raises a red flag.

Taking all of these things into account and given the fact that CRAWLER has a history of offering tempting freeware which does just that, on behalf of the well known adware/spyware distributor IBIS Websearch, of course it remains that caution is strongly advised. In my opinion even if all of the above apps are found to be adware and spyware free at download and installation, there is still a legitimate concern that these apps may download adware/spyware later, and or the parameters of data voluntarily submitted are later altered during an update.

I would be very happy to learn that CRAWLER has made a complete turnaround, but I am not willing to just blindly accept their claim that they have.

I will leave it to you experts. Sorry for butting in.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fcukdat
Warrior Addict


Joined: 01 Jan 2005
Last Visit: 08 Apr 2009
Posts: 757
Location: Yeovil,England.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 12:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks crawler_ team for coming back and anserwing some of the questions.

Im guessing this one from my second post on this topic is a little bit too thorny to answer honestly Wink
Quote:
Are you saying Crawler and IBIS are 2 seperate entities with no common history ?


By common history i mean owner's,affiliations,funding,staffing etc

Since we've seen a few anedotal comparisons so far in this topic, i would like to try one of my own now.

Take your local mafia boss,he's made a mint out of criminal activities,drug running,whacking etc but after some very prosperous years of crime he starts to see his fellow business associates being banged to rights one by one by the justice system.He's afraid that he's next so he retire's from his life of crime and sets up a a little corner shop with his ill gotten gains.The problem is he set's his store up in a neighbourhood that know's him and know's his criminal history.The store might be legal but the locals are too scared to shop there incase they get whacked....
Hey what if the mafia boss had children and purchased them each a cornershop with his ill gotten gains,if you knew the store was opened with dirty money and you would be lining an ex criminal pockets.Would you shop there Question

But hey some people might be willing to give you the benefit of doubt where as some will view you with suspicion.You might even find some singing your praises along the lines of the 2nd coming.Ain't life grand Wink


Anyway the activeshield bug is very evident even after selecting no to all 3 start up steps and unchecking the scheduler.When ever the TE is started from the Desktop icon it attemps to fire up the realtime shields and add a startup value Rolling Eyes

If anyone wish's to recreate my findings then here's the 3 softwares for the the job Smile
Winpatrol(free version)>>>
http://www.winpatrol.com/

Kerio(free firewall) 2.1.5>>>
http://download.kerio.com/dwn/kpf/kerio-pf-2.1.5-en-win.exe

ProcessGuard(free version)>>>
http://www.diamondcs.com.au/processguard/index.php?page=download

FWIW about bugs I think that some would be more forgiving if you labeled the product a Beta version.

Thankyou for replying about the uninstall phone home
maybe one of the hats with snoopalyser type foo can crack the packet(s) and see if there's non-encrypted/encrypted data present Cool

As genuine feedback i would beg to differ from ChewyFood's opinion of highlighting safe software's.

The principal reason is combining the
2 data's(good software&malware) on the same GUI can be very confusing for the end user.
Being honest it confused me when the scan was running since objects were being detected and i could'nt quite work out the algebraic equation relating to numbers in the right column and object's detected Embarassed



Also in this day and age of ever paranoid user's i think using a tab for unknown software is a dangerous thing until you have a very comphrehensive database for legitmate software.





HTH Smile
_________________
Malware hunter....Got Bot ?

MIRT Handler >>>
http://www.castlecops.com/c55-MIRT.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
fcukdat
Warrior Addict


Joined: 01 Jan 2005
Last Visit: 08 Apr 2009
Posts: 757
Location: Yeovil,England.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 1:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

theCaptain wrote:
I have no interest in whether ST is a "rogue" or not. I have a huge interest in knowing the integrity of the Rogue list because I use it as a factor in significant business decisions probably about once a week. I usually smoke test software after consulting the list anyway. I treat everything with a huge dose of skepticism, so don't think that I'm coming to anyone's defense.

Unfortunately, in the Anti-spyware world, it's typically "Guilty until proven innocent". Sometimes with good reason, sometimes not. On top of that, there is a total lack of due process in most cases. The Anti-spyware coalition is trying to address this problem with the risk model and vendor appeals process, but it's still quite prevalent in the industry.

The bottom line here is whether or not the software passes the "Pepsi Challenge".

1) Does it produce false positives
2) Does it satisfactorily detect malware
3) Does it do a good job of removing the malware

FACTS are what I listen to and make judgments by. I say let's see some facts (not assumptions) before jumping to any conclusions.

-K

Disclaimer: Views expressed are my own and not the company I work for.


Hey K Smile

Thankfully the website resources are not influenced/set by members opinions at these forum's.
I personally trust in Eric's&Suzi's integrity to look after the resource&information available at the SWW Website for the benefit of all webuser's with the exception of the bad guys.

Idea I've got a try that disclaimer thing,thanks for the inspiration Cool
_________________
Malware hunter....Got Bot ?

MIRT Handler >>>
http://www.castlecops.com/c55-MIRT.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Spyware Warrior Forum Index -> Anti-Spyware and Security Software Discussion All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 1 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



smartBlue Style © 2002 Smartor
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group