Printable View
Downloaded file, extracted .exe to Spybot folder; closed Firerfox. Opened Spybot, ran check; less than two minutes, approximately, to scan bookmarks.Quote:
Originally Posted by PepiMK
While I don't know what Spybot is now doing, in terms of your comments about "titles and urls", nor do I really care, I can state that whatever it is that Spybot is doing is "much more betterer like" now.
(apologet la Jack Webb, badge#714)
No FF3 as incompatible, no Opera950 as buggy-for-me ..
With 080702 updates:
SSD v1.6.0.27(aka RC1) Immunizations=72981 scantime=14:32
(no Immunization for K-Meleon yet here .. whenifever is fine)
previous versions uninstalled in anticipation of :) "I feel like coffee, Joe. You?"
@Always Confused: good to hear that it's better now :)
Sorry if I'm talking too much tech, that comes with the
@all:
We did work through the installer today, included newest language files, updated installer languages, and some this and that. Made a new package, 1.6.0.28, build 20080702, most probably final. Tested that huge list of "silly stuff" like how it's behaving on Windows 95, ... etc. ;)
There's one thing though we missed for some time about July 4th: it's a Friday :laugh: Bad choice to release something on such a short notice on a holiday with following weekend, could be difficult to get to mirrors etc.. So I tend to have an RC 2 tomorrow, to give it some time to get played with over the weekend, and release Monday if everything's working. Hope that would ok with everyone ;)
You are not the only one: I was having a serious Comodo firewall problem a few weeks ago. There were some messages on the relevant forum about this problem, so I added my own request for assistance.Quote:
Originally Posted by PepiMK
After a few days, having received no replies, I started a new thread, which went through quite a few messages (and work for me), all to no avail. Finally, the person who had first posted the method of fixing the problem in the earlier threads answered me in the thread I had started; he apologized for using slang which he assumed everyone understood, and gave me what was an extremely easy fix.
Now, if you want to carry out a technical discussion, please let me know which of the following topics you would like to pursue. You may pick any three of the two choices:
1. Medieval History.
2. Structural Firefighting.
(Yes, I actually am at least somewhat qualified in those two quite-unrelated fields of endeavor, and can provide all sorts of "meaningful" technical talk.)
Not only that, but I can even finish your sentence above that has no ending....
Well, here's something to consider before a potential final...
I believe that whitelists are overriding blacklists - and if so, I think that may be a bad idea.
The behavior I saw relates to my need for QuickTime but my dislike of its autostart Registry entry. So I manually disable it, but some obnoxious things like to force it back in - the most annoying of which are certain web sites which do this without an appropriate browser prompt.
To counter that behavior, I told TeaTimer to automatically block any attempt to make the associated QuickTime Registry change. Works quite well.
Come along 1.6 and its whitelists which apparently must have an entry to allow the QuickTime Registry change. Then couple that with the previously reported problem of TeaTimer not saving the b/w-list enabled/disabled settings.
So I surf the web, access a site which tries to silently re-enable the QuickTime entry, reboot, and see that damned blue Q sitting in my system tray...
That means I forgot to disable the appropriate settings and TeaTimer therefore allowed the Registry change even though I have a blacklist entry explicitly forbidding it.
Is this really the way it should work?
I would expect explicit end user blacklist entries to always override anything else, but at least here they don't. In fact, I get two pop-ups: one saying the action was blocked and then another immediately saying it was allowed!
http://img356.imageshack.us/img356/2777/spybotbwtv1.png
:nono:
I'm thinking that black should always override white regardless of any settings and in the case of any conflicting rules. Correct? Or am I just missing certain issues or possibilities?
Is it just me or has the secure shredder been removed from the tools menu?
I still see it - but I do think I remember it not being selected by default during installation. Maybe that's what happened to you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Broken Hope
@Always Confused: and I even forgot to finish the sentence, the missing word was simply "stress" I guess, nothing technical this time ;)
Medieval history is surely interesting, but I usually prefer it in amateurish form of historic novels etc., would be similarly :lip: there ;)
@ZerO Voltage: I checked the order in which lists are tested:
1. User lists
2. LASSH lists
3. File scanner
4. Security app whitelist
The problem here was that #2 was indeed not honoring previous decision from #1. Updating that :)
@Broken Hope: as ZerO Voltage said, it's an option during installation now. The button inside will just open the external app, which is now required, since it's no longer an internal tool finally.
Unsticking thread to make place for RC 2 ;)
A bit late to this party. For me the RC1 works fine on XP SP3, about the same speed as the beta 2..
One comment on reading this thread, question if you select multiple .txt files, right click, click edit: on my system all the selected files open rapidly one after the other. I haven't installed the scan with S&D context menu item, so can't test that.