Petition to remove TeaTimer from default installation.

[ght1]

Hello m00nbl00d

My suggestion: TeaTimer should be a separate tool

[djpailo]

Perhaps in a custom installation you can have the option on whether you want to install it or not?

[Greyfox]

Perhaps in a custom installation you can have the option on whether you want to install it or not?

???????
There is the option available during the installation to NOT have Teatimer.
There is the option after install to turn off Teatimer or turn on Teatimer via the Tools/Resident page on a "semi permanent" basis, or to disable Teatimer on a temporary basis via the right click menu from the task bar icon. How many more options do you need?

[PepiMK]

And more important: as I mentioned it won't be in 2.0 this way anyway

The decide-on-unknown will be an option the user has to turn on himself if he wants it. Incompatible parts can be disabled one by one, even automatically (if detection of incompatiblity provides that information).

[m00nbl00d]

Hello m00nbl00d

My suggestion: TeaTimer should be a separate tool

Hello. Where have I "seen" you before, uh? :D

That's an option. I believe your point, is that, those, who do not wish to use Spybot, could still use the TeaTimer as a stand alone HIPS?

Still, there's alot people who have no idea how to deal with such tools, hence, I believe, that a smart behavior blocker would be better. That way, those users wouldn't fear if whatever they just allowed would harm their system or if they blocked something they shouldn't have.

Perhaps something like HauteSecure has, but take it further, as in, protecting the whole system and not just working, mainly, with the web browsers, specially IE and Firefox, in HauteSecure's case.

Just a thought.

Regards

[m00nbl00d]

And more important: as I mentioned it won't be in 2.0 this way anyway

The decide-on-unknown will be an option the user has to turn on himself if he wants it. Incompatible parts can be disabled one by one, even automatically (if detection of incompatiblity provides that information).

What do you think of the suggestion I mentioned to ance, about making a smart behavior blocker/sandboxing tool alike HauteSecure?

HauteSecure makes life easier to users, even if just protecting, mainly, IE and Firefox. It will automatically block behaviors, when checked against a list of rules already set to block.

For the more advanced users, they could still use TeaTimer or the new TeaTimer you plan to implement, and tweak it for their taste.

It would work both sides, and it would still be usable by unknowledgeable users.

What you think? Or is it something like that you're implementing?

Regards

[ght1]

Hello. Where have I "seen" you before, uh? :D

Wilders / AVG Free?

See also http://forums.spybot.info/showthread.php?t=45083

[PepiMK]

Between things yesterday I looked at the code and found that a simple "paranoid mode" switch in old TeaTimer would not be more than a handful of lines as well. After reading this thread we also took a look at uninstallation feedback and found TeaTimer to be mentioned

If anyone wants to give it a try and give feedback, it might become a quick update: test version.

[ght1]

Only change is a "paranoid mode" switch that allows to use TeaTimer only for flagging bad, not unknown, entries.

What does that mean? Will I get a pop up everytime a blacklist entry is noticed?

[PepiMK]

As I said, it's just a quick solution, no big change in overall functionality.

For registry entries, first all black- and whitelists will be consulted (the LASSH for the entry, scanning the file associated with the entry, etc.), and if one of them matches, it will behave as usual - you'll see the balloon near the tray area, if you've got balloons enabled.

Only in cases where the Allow/Deny dialog would have been shown (which was on unidentified only anyway), it would get skipped with paranoid mode disabled.

The process scanner is not affected by that, since it only complained on detected bad stuff anyway