1.5.1.12 still not showing all tracks after scan

[Rosenfeld]

Just clean installed 1.5.1.12, Teatimer not used. All updates.
Scanning for all file sets.

After a scan the only tracks shown are
Cache
Common dialogs
Cookie
Log

I should have lots more

XP home SP2 IE 7 WMP 11 all updates except .NET framework 3 (1.1 and 2 are installed).
I attach pic

--- Spybot - Search & Destroy version: 1.5 (build: 20070620) ---

2007-06-21 blindman.exe (1.0.0.6)
2007-06-21 SDMain.exe (1.0.0.4)
2007-06-21 SDUpdate.exe (1.0.6.3)
2007-06-21 SDWinSec.exe (1.0.0.8)
2007-06-21 SpybotSD.exe (1.5.1.12)
2007-06-21 TeaTimer.exe (1.5.0.9)
2007-06-22 unins000.exe (51.46.0.0)
2007-06-21 Update.exe (1.4.0.5)
2007-05-23 advcheck.dll (1.5.3.0)
2007-04-02 aports.dll (2.1.0.0)
2007-04-02 DelZip179.dll (1.79.5.3)
2007-06-21 SDHelper.dll (1.5.0.7)
2007-01-02 Tools.dll (2.0.1.0)
2007-06-20 Includes\Beta.sbi (*)
2005-02-16 Includes\Beta.uti (*)
2007-06-20 Includes\Cookies.sbi (*)
2007-05-30 Includes\Dialer.sbi (*)
2007-06-20 Includes\DialerC.sbi (*)
2007-06-20 Includes\Hijackers.sbi (*)
2007-06-20 Includes\HijackersC.sbi (*)
2007-06-20 Includes\Keyloggers.sbi (*)
2007-06-20 Includes\KeyloggersC.sbi (*)
2007-06-20 Includes\Malware.sbi (*)
2007-06-20 Includes\MalwareC.sbi (*)
2007-03-21 Includes\PUPS.sbi (*)
2007-06-20 Includes\PUPSC.sbi (*)
2007-06-20 Includes\Revision.sbi (*)
2007-05-30 Includes\Security.sbi (*)
2007-06-20 Includes\SecurityC.sbi (*)
2007-06-20 Includes\Spybots.sbi (*)
2007-06-20 Includes\SpybotsC.sbi (*)
2005-02-17 Includes\Tracks.uti (*)
2007-06-20 Includes\Trojans.sbi (*)
2007-06-20 Includes\TrojansC.sbi (*)
2007-06-06 Plugins\TCPIPAddress.dll


Superantispyware problem previously reported is fixed, thanks.

[PepiMK]

The Usage Tracks are usually a subset of the stuff used in the normal detection (not a lot of tricky things there obviously), which show all up as functional in our QA tests.

Guess I need to add some new usage tracks detection for some of the software I use, so I that have a better overview of when and what is working there or not ;)

[PepiMK]

Aaah... well, you could temporarily rename the Tracks.uti to Tracks.sbi, because it's a simple file extension link problem ... that's why QA tests (all in a .sbi file) worked. Found and fixed :)

[wk357mag]

:D lol yeah this is what Beta testing is all about

[Rosenfeld]

Renaming tracks.uti ti tracks.sbi works, in a way. But now a lot of the tracks show up in red and checked by default, with the result that the comforting Congratulations no threats found (or whatever the exact wording is) does not come up. This would be confusing for some users.
See pic.

[wk357mag]

I have same issue as Rosenfeld. Mine show and some are marked in RED, which makes them atomatically checked marked. For my first scan it was the Direct3d, DirectDraw.

[wk357mag]

This is my screenie, to show the same issues as the other guy.

[PepiMK]

Sure, renaming Tracks.uti tu Tracks.sbi is only an ugly workaround for this beta to see them at all; it's already fixed for the next one of course.

@Rachelle: please report that in this category (http://forums.spybot.info/forumdisplay.php?f=17); the beta category is - as the name says - about beta versions of the software, and this special topic about usage tracks, not about undetected malware. I'll try to move you post to the proper location...

[wk357mag]

two other things I would like to make mention of as possible things to include in final release ....

Default Settings: Immunize on program start if program has been updated and Use only one CPU for application. Consider having program install with these setting set on by default. Can be unchecked later should it not be wanted, but prolly best choice is this.

Just a thought!

Ok, think were ready for another beta to test now

[PepiMK]

First setting shouldn't be a problem, though that'll be updated/changed soon after 1.5 public anyway. Firefox immunization is ready, but I want to have a new immunization UI, since I doubt adding yet another group box to the immunization page will be good in terms of easy of use and clarity ;)

Any special reason why running on one CPU only by default?

[wk357mag]

Any special reason why running on one CPU only by default?

Presuming on my part here, But I recall that there was an issue with SB and Hyperthreaded/Dual cpu machines. So I thought it would be best to avoid any issue by setting this to SINGLE CPU setting.

I might at though, that I have have Intel cpu with HT on it and have never had an issue with using SB on it. But noticing the options now present in settings, made me think that it might be best to have this set by default, just to avoid any potential. Power users or peeps who can evaluate the pros and cons for themselves and make their changes later.

Once again, I presumed this to be an issue, I had read about it in forums some time ago and seeing it not be an option in latest beta, I presumed it to still be an issue, one that would be corrected with this option and thought it would maybe be best to set it to single cpu by default. This is just my thoughts on it.

Once again, I have an HyperThreaded machine and have never known myself to have a spybot issue cause of it.

[bitman]

Presuming on my part here, But I recall that there was an issue with SB and Hyperthreaded/Dual cpu machines. So I thought it would be best to avoid any issue by setting this to SINGLE CPU setting.

< SNIP >


Did you read the Spybot-S&D Beta, Changes (since version 1.4) (http://www.safer-networking.org/en/spybotsdbeta/index.html) section? If you had you'd have found this along with many other things:

System support

Fixed HyperThreading issues


Patrick: The section heading links on the Beta page are broken. I'd have liked to have linked directly to that section heading.

Thanks,
Bitman

[wk357mag]

Did you read the Spybot-S&D Beta, Changes (since version 1.4) (http://www.safer-networking.org/en/spybotsdbeta/index.html) section? If you had you'd have found this along with many other things:

System support

Fixed HyperThreading issues


Patrick: The section heading links on the Beta page are broken. I'd have liked to have linked directly to that section heading.

Thanks,
Bitman

Thanks, I had looked at that page, but I didnt recall seeing that portion there. Thanks !!!