Originally Posted by Wox

Sir, hardly anyone in the community recommends ST. Some are still skeptical about its company being Crawler. I don't think a ST employee should be advertising/defending the product in a tech support forum (I mean, that's the name of it, right?) while surely nobody needs your info as long as the product stinks.
I used to use ST with enthusiasm, but it just doesn't live up to its name.
"The first completely free internet security suite"? ROFL!!!

Originally Posted by Glaswegian

ST was, of course listed by Eric Howes. Although he has since delisted it, I doubt that many folks will take it seriously. Leopards rarely change their spots. There are plenty of quality applications out there that will do a better job than ST. They will need to go a very long way to convince me.

Originally Posted by eburger68

Hi All:

Since the note at Spyware Warrior regarding Spyware Terminator has become a subject of discussion, let me say a few things about that note.

First, it's important to read the note carefully and not read into it more than is there. For instance, we never claimed that Spyware Terminator was malware itself (in fact, we also said quite clearly that it wasn't) or that Spyware Terminator was involved in the distribution of malware.

We said the the company behind Spyware Terminator had at one time distributed adware, and we initially listed the product on the Rogue/Suspect list because of that connection, until we could get a better sense for the company's course of behavior following its decision to exit the adware business.

Second, it's important to recognize that the Rogue/Suspect list includes a wide variety of products. On the low end, we list products that are bad at what they purport to do -- detect and remove spyware and adware. On the high end we have products that install malware themselves, that hijack users' PCs, or that use fraudulent tactics to push their products on unsuspecting consumers.

My point is, don't assume that because a product is listed on the Rogue/Suspect list that the product or company behind the product is guilty of the worst behavior imaginable. Take the time to read our notes regarding the product.

Third, when we de-list a product, as we did with Spyware Terminator, we do so with the confidence and expectation that the vendors have rectified the problems identified with the product or the practices associated with the product. In this case, the problem was our uncertainty over the vendor's own trustworthiness, given its historical connection to adware distribution. We de-listed the product because the vendor had satisified our concerns. And, I can report, the vendor continues to satisfy our concerns.

We document the product de-listings that we perform, because we think readers of the page deserve to know what happened with a particular paroduct that they know was once listed. As I've told several vendors at this point, "We don't do memory holes at Spyware Warrior."

But it's important that those de-listing notes not be taken for more than they are. They certainly shouldn't be regarded as a kind of "scarlet letter" that forever marks a product -- that's certainly not how we created the de-listing notes.

To those who are debating whether or not to give Spyware Terminator a trial, my advice would be to do so. We don't recommend the product at Spyware Warrior, but that's no reason for readers here not to try the product, if they are so inclined. Spyware Terminator is not malicious in any way and poses no danger to your system. If you encounter what you suspect to be a false positive in its scan results, tehn you should handle it the way you would false positives with any other product: report it/them to the vendor so that they can be corrected.

My apologies for the lengthy interjection here, but I wanted to make sure that folks were clear on just what the Rogue/Suspect list is and how it functions.

Best,

Eric L. Howes
--
Microsoft MVP

Sunbelt Software

Spyware Warrior