SpyBot-Search & Destroy Tools 1.5 Beta (Vista)

[tdinc]

Announcing betas of TeaTimer, and improved scan engine and integration into Vista

Scanning engine

This update cannot be disabled in the download package; it is not only used if you install TeaTimer, but by the main Spybot-S&D scanner as well. The methods available to detect malware have been more than doubled, including new ways to generically detect malware mutations.

TeaTimer

Aside from the fix of the graphical glitch so many users have been waiting for, there have been some important changes under the hood, which will reduce the number of change dialogs where the user has to decide.
TeaTimer now automatically allows any changes during the installation of other security software which follow the ASCs guideline of code-signing all files, as well as a much improved scan of the files associated with registry changes.

Vista Security Center

The Windows Security Center included with Windows Vista has a dedicated entry for malware protection software. Microsoft ships Windows Defender with Vista, however, Spybot-S&D can now easily integrate into the Vista Security Center; which will then monitor if Spybot-S&D is up-to-date and whether the permanent protection (TeaTimer) is running or not.
This update will only show on Vista systems, since previous Windows versions do not offer anti malware integration into WSC.

You can find the download link, as well as a place for discussions of it, in this topic on our discussion forums.

Download beta versions of above tools here

 

[American Zombie]

Why would you need this on Vista when it already has Windows Defender?

 

[dave holbon]

Why would you need this on Vista when it already has Windows Defender?

Because Windows defender has amongst the worst detection rates of any spyware/maleware detection programmes. Maybe it will improve over time but would you by a product from a manufacturer that was designed to plug holes in their own software. Seems a bit strange to me as it would have been better to design the operating system properly in the first place, then there would not be any need for Windows defender or other similar products. The fact that there exists a Windows Defender version for Vista worries me.
:suprised:

 

[madmatt]

Because Windows defender has amongst the worst detection rates of any spyware/maleware detection programmes. Maybe it will improve over time but would you by a product from a manufacturer that was designed to plug holes in their own software. Seems a bit strange to me as it would have been better to design the operating system properly in the first place, then there would not be any need for Windows defender or other similar products. The fact that there exists a Windows Defender version for Vista worries me.

Can you substantiate this claim? I’ve read nothing but rave reviews about Windows Defender.

 

[NetRyder]

Why would you need this on Vista when it already has Windows Defender?

Multiple layers of defense can be more effective compared to a single solution, because one product could detect something that the others might have missed. I'm not saying that one should install every anti-malware product out there (and you should avoid running multiple realtime scanners simultaneously), but running one realtime scanner and having another product or two installed for periodic scans is not a bad idea.

Seems a bit strange to me as it would have been better to design the operating system properly in the first place, then there would not be any need for Windows defender or other similar products. The fact that there exists a Windows Defender version for Vista worries me.
:suprised:

Do you also think cars should be sold without seat-belts because they should be "inherently" safe?

There are multiple approaches to building a secure system. Being proactive is obviously important, and Microsoft has made big strides in this regard with Vista, compared to XP and earlier versions of Windows. But having a backup plan in case an exploit is discovered down the line is a good practice.

You can't simply assume that any large piece of software, especially something as complex as an operating system, is inherently secure. Anti-malware products (like AVs and rootkit detection tools) are available even for UNIX-based systems like Linux and Mac OS X.

If malware that exploits a certain newly-discovered vulnerability is unleashed on the web, a Defender signature update can be pushed out via Automatic Updates quickly and easily to every Vista machine in the world in a short span of time until a patch for the vulnerability is created, tested, and released, which would greatly mitigate the amount of damage caused.

 

[tdinc]

2 cents on this topic is.. There is no perfect anti-spyware out there. Windows defender is a Solid Application. Before Microsoft bought out Giant which created the original software in which the scanning engine was the same as Sunbelts "Anti-spy" it had very good detection. Defender still needs some work to make it better but i see good thing from it. In this day and age Running a hand full of Good Anti-spyware is a must. I Always liked SpyBot-Search & Destroy it always has good detection rates and the product is always getting better. So to see a Vista integration is a good thing.

 

[gonaads]

Do you also think cars should be sold without seat-belts because they should be "inherently" safe?

Really bad example. Computers don't carry people and travel at high rates of speed. Unless they are flying out a window. :speechless: