NIS & CCleaner -- Spybot needed?

N

Narmo23

New member
Long time user of the program, but a first time poster.

I've been using Spybot for a long time without really asking myself, "Do I really need this?" The reason I'm asking this is because the two programs, NIS and CCleaner, seem to be good enough for me. Why? Because I've yet to see Spybot detect anything that's considered dangerous (besides the usual trackers that one gets from surfing the web [ex: multiple Statcounter trackers])

Back when I had Spybot, the process would usually go like this: NIS >> Spybot >> CCleaner. Most of the time, it would be Spybot >> CCleaner because I only would do a full system scan once every week. But back on topic: the only stuff that Spybot would detect are the usual trackers that you get when you surf the web. However, CCleaner takes these out, so it's not really needed.

Anyways, I'm just curious if Spybot is really needed. Maybe I'm just getting lucky, or NIS isn't doing its job (which it should be). If Spybot is really recommended, would I need to use the immunization + teatimer, even if I already have NIS? In other words, would those extra features conflict with NIS?

Appreciate it.
 
Last edited:
Norton and spybot

although a search on NIS forum will show that NIS techies and the unwashed uninformed will recommend NOT those with experience- including ME say go ahead
for example

http://community.norton.com/norton/..._feedback&message.id=1285&query.id=1047#M1285

t-timer is the only gotcha
sd helper if you use ie and immunize should work fine and are recommended

If you look at the reports on NIS effectiveness in AV and Firewall
well
a second opinion should be mandatory

anyone else have any comments on t-timer and NIS
did you search this forum?
 
What version is Norton Internet Security?

To be honest with you, you have a pretty decent configuration. Anti-virus and firewall included in NIS is good. CCleaner would be your "housecleaning" tool and Spybot-SD for your anti-spyware application.

Spybot-Search&Destroy does not use any memory unless it is executed (with the exception of TeaTimer and SDHelper). My conclusion is that, whether to use Spybot or not is up to you. No one knows your system better than you do.

There are some dozen of anti-spyware applications out there, besides Spybot-SD. Although I have to say that Spybot-SD's Immunize and TeaTimer features are useful. The Immunization as a passive protection and TeaTimer as a watchdog.

I won't persuade you to use it. It all depends on your perspective and what your tastes are. Good luck.
 
I've searched this forum about NIS and Spybot, but couldn't find anything useful :(

I'm using NIS 2008.

Anti-virus and firewall included in NIS is good. CCleaner would be your "housecleaning" tool and Spybot-SD for your anti-spyware application.
Click to expand...

This was my interpretation back when I was using Spybot (have yet to add it on my newly-formatted HDD -- trying to weed out all of the junk that I had on my last format).

Whenever I installed Spybot, I would just use it to scan my comp, and that's it -- no immunization, teatimer, SDhelper (I use Firefox, so no need for this). I didn't add immunization or teatimer because I felt that NIS was good enough.

More than likely I'm going to add Spybot again, like I normally do.
 
That is fine. If that's how you like your configurations then I wouldn't question you. Safe surfing. If there is any other questions, feel free to ask.
 
"Lock it down" meaning... non-accessible to whoever uses this computer? If that's the case, I'm pretty much the only one who uses this computer :X.

Anyways, just added Spybot again, and trying out the immunization + teatimer. So far, I've yet to see any slowdowns, so all's well.

By the way, quick question: if I were to disable teatimer + remove the immunization, would the computer work the same as if it never had those?

Thanks again, guys. Appreciate it.
 
The computer would be running just as if Spybot-SD was never installed. However, removing Spybot-SD (uninstalling) from your computer will not reverse the changes made by the Immunization.

What wyrmrider meant about "locking down" Internet Explorer, was not to disable it literally or prevent it from being use. Of course, to me it sounds a bit drastic, because you'll eventually need to use IE for Windows Update and sites that require Active X, such as an online virus scanner (Kaspersky for example). Firefox does not support Active X.

Spybot-Search&Destroy offers three options to "protect" Internet Explorer.
  • Lock Hosts file read-only as protection against hijackers.
  • Lock IE start page setting against user changes (current user).
  • Lock IE control panel against opening from within IE (current user)
 
Last edited:
Glad to know that I can turn off those two (immunize + teatimer) in case they start acting up; saves me a format, haha :X

About the IE issue: I just looked at the "IE tweaks" tab, and noticed that the first option (lock host files) is enabled by default. Would it be wise to enable the other two options, or just leave them as is?

Thanks again!
 
Sorry for the double-post; I couldn't find the edit button for my last post. I'm guessing there's a certain time limit :(

Anyways, I decided to turn off every protection (immunization, TeaTimer, and some other misc. protection that was turned on on default). I decided to do this for two reasons:

1. I noticed that TeaTimer and NIS had some memory-conflicting issues; unusual memory spikes would occur (100% memory being used for a couple of mins = yikes!). If you're curious, this 4 y/o laptop is running on a Pent. M 1.60GHz + 2G RAM.

2. I don't know why I never clicked the link that wyrm provided, but I'm glad I did because the people there pretty much said what I told myself -- NIS is a good-enough program that'll keep you safe; there's really no need for other active protection.

So yeah, I still have Spybot on my comp because it doesn't hurt to have a back-up manual scanner. So really, I'm running the same set-up that I used to run :) The only difference is that I turned off the on-by-default IE tweak -- now Spybot serves to be a manual scanner, that's it.

Hopefully this info eases some peoples' minds about whether or not they should activate any protection from Spybot if they already have NIS.

A "thank you" is in order for the two people who helped me out on this issue :santa: I appreciated the help.
 
Last edited:
this option: Lock Hosts file read-only as protection against hijackers.

can not prevent ALL malware from changing the hostsfile.

sometimes it is checked to me for some reason, but i uncheck it as i change the hostsfile myself (maybe spybot checks it after immunizing with its hostsfile?) and if some security software has an option to monitor hostsfile changes then i turn that option off to not be interrupted in what i do with the hostsfile.
 
Last edited:
Narmo, the option:
  • Lock Hosts file read-only as protection against hijackers.
Makes the HOSTS file as a "read-only" thus, it will prevent any modification of it, with the exception of the Administers on the computer. The HOSTS file is actually a text file. To make a long story short:
Computers do not communicate in words like humans do, so when we type in a site in the address bar, the computer looks up the site in a IP address form. If the site is in the HOSTS file (bad site in most cases), then you are redirected to your own computer (127.0.0.1).

Also, like I said before no one knows your computer better than you do. Configuring and instruction Spybot what to protect will be up to you.

Safe surfing.
 
it will prevent any modification of it, with the exception of the Administers on the computer.
Click to expand...

this is not true, read this:

There are many of these hijackers that add their own entries to your HOSTS file. This is commonly know as redirects. To add a level of protection you might want to consider making your HOSTS file "read only".

Steve C sends along this tip: ZoneAlarm Pro includes an option (in the "Firewall" section, "Main" tab, "Advanced" button) to "Lock host file", which seems to give extremely effective protection to the HOSTS file.

Editors Note: "locking" the HOSTS file does not prevent most applications from either deleting the file or editing the contents. It does add a Layer of Protection, but it is not the ultimate solution. In any case you should always have a backup copy of the file handy in case of any unwanted changes.

from this site: http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hostsfaq.htm

and what he say is true;)
 
Last edited:
yup you are both correct. :)

That is why i lock the host file all the time, and then when i want to immunize my host file with spybot, i unlock it and then relock it when spybot finishes. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top