A few questions . . .
1) I just installed spybotsd-2.1.21-SR2 and ran immunization. I found that SB S&D removes the comments that I have in my "starter" HOSTS file. I don't think it should be touching ANY of my comments, hey - it's my PC . SpybotSD2 did the same and I removed it for that reason and went back to spybotsd 1.62. Can you please fix this bug? Per Microsoft's comments in their sample HOSTS file, comments are acceptable:
# Additionally, comments (such as these) may be inserted on individual
# lines or following the machine name denoted by a '#' symbol.
# For example:
# 220.127.116.11 rhino.acme.com # source server
# 18.104.22.168 x.acme.com # x client host
After SB S&D immunized my system, all of the my comments following the machine names were removed (example):
127.0.0.1 casalemedia.com # Popunder Ads (Netflix, etc.) 29Aug2012
127.0.0.1 www.casalemedia.com # Popunder Ads (Netflix, etc.) 29Aug2012
127.0.0.1 optmd.com # Popunder Ads (Netflix, etc.) 29Aug2012
127.0.0.1 www.optmd.com # Popunder Ads (Netflix, etc.) 29Aug2012
127.0.0.1 cdn.optmd.com # Popunder Ads (Netflix, etc.) 29Aug2012
127.0.0.1 www.cdn.optmd.com # Popunder Ads (Netflix, etc.) 29Aug2012
2) I really only want SB S&D to perform immunization and the passive blocking like version 1.62 did since I see that the new version with scanning running uses 90-100Megs of ram and increases system loading for some "not-so-powerful" PCs. My primary AV/IS is Kaspersky and I don't think it is a good idea to be concurrently running 2 AV scanners, so I turned off the scanner service. The people at Kaspersky support can be real sticky about other AV programs and if I ask them for support about specific bugs that I have found in their software, the first thing they always say after I submit a dump report is that I have "incompatible software" on my PC that must be removed. I then have to repeatedly tell Ivan that their own forum moderators have even said that running SB S&D in passive mode (without the tea-timer enabled) is not a problem, get off my case and look into the problem that I'm being nice enough to tell them about.
Any comments about concurrently running the scanner service with Kaspersky on systems that have lots of memory and processor power?