Talk:Spybot – Search & Destroy

from VfD

On 1 August 2004, this article was nominated for deletion. The consensus decision was to keep the article though there were some additional recommendations for edits. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Spybot - Search & Destroy for a record of the discussion. Rossami 05:05, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Forum Does not exist.

I tried going to the forum but they don't exist so i have removed the link on the forums

It's currently offline, I edited it back in. --Denniss 10:39, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

net-integration.net gone?

Is net-integration.net, one of the main (official?) support sites for Spybot gone for good? Does anyone know what happened to it? --NEMT 05:09, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

TeaTimer?!

The article has no info on this important feature. --Espoo 09:53, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Please see WP:BOLD --NEMT 01:31, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Award Years?

All reports of awards to such programs should include at least the last year for each award. These things are in constant flux, and an old award would be of limited relevance, other than historical. 68.236.103.195 15:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Spybot S&D vs. Symantec (and others)

Shouldn't something be said about this? Solidsnake204 21:58, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

What's the problem with those two ? --Denniss 13:06, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

(belatedly) Symantec products have, on multiple occasions, reportedly detected Spybot S&D or portions thereof as various malicious software. I personally never saw a report of it other than on Spybot's homepage. Of course, I never looked either. Kisc 16:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Norton deals with viruses, trojans, worms and others more efficiently, Spybot deletes spyware, adware, keyloggers, hackers etc. Besides, Symantec is one of the largest (THE largest?) Anti-virus software corporations and Spybot's developers consists of volounteers and some translators. Therefore, it is unfair to compare them with each other. Lifeisagame247 12:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Any comparison between competing products would be subjective, susceptible to change, open to debate, at risk of legal backlash, etc. Wikipedia aint the place. There are plenty of PC mag articles with good comparison write-ups. --Jquarry 03:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

The question is not whether they ought to be compared, but whether there ought to be mention made of the conflict I mentioned in March. I'm not certain whether it is encyclopedic, and, as I've suggested above, finding reports of it this late in the day may prove problematic. A quick glance at google reveals only forum and blog posts. Which is not to suggest that I believe Kolla made it up, just that I don't see any third party verifiable blah blah blah. Kisc 06:40, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

SpyBot still does what it does very well, and better than several of the big names. I feel attempts to force an uninstall of SpyBot by other anti-spyware / anti-virus developers should be considered Anti-Competitive. 68.55.169.90 (talk) 03:38, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Deleted "and keyloggers"

Previous text was "Spybot is not intended to replace anti-virus programs, but it does detect some common trojans and keyloggers.". I deleted "and keyloggers".

According to feature spec of Spybot, it removes "adware, spyware, dialers, keyloggers trojans and other baddies". All of these things are things an antispyware is SUPPOSED to do, except for trojans, which is an "extra".

On the other hand, an anti-virus' task is to remove viruses, trojans and worms. This distinction is often missed which leads to confusions as to where the border between antiviruses and antispyware is. So I thought it was important to correct this, even if it seems like a small thing.

Note: "adware, spyware, dialers, keyloggers" may be the "payloads" of the viruses, trojans and worms. The words "viruses, trojans and worms" describe means of spreading, the other words describes the harm done. I'm pretty sure this is the most correct view at it, even though everyone including AV manufacturers seem pretty confused.

And for the record I had 3 trojans on my PC for 2 years missed by both Adaware and Spybot, but detected when i later installed Kaspersky AV. So I don't believe the trojan detection ratio of Adaware and Spybot is very high. [unsigned]

Easter Egg

Why has the easter egg part been deleted? By the way, the Knight's Tour is accessible by clicking the button next to any option in the advanced mode. GTAddict (talk) 10:40, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Clarification: next to the header in each of the "tools" there should be a tiny icon; click it to open the Knight's Tour. APerson (talk!) 18:10, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

You have got to be kidding me.

180px

'I don't ... believe someone took a picture of his computer screen and uploaded it to wikipedia. DUDE, THERE'S SOMETHING CALLED "SCREEN PRINT"! I have removed this awful picture.'Bold text'''''''Bold text''''Bold text''''

...And this is why we have non-glass screens... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.23.45.101 (talk) 22:00, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Aww, lol, don't be so harsh with the guy. He probably just isn't too familiar with his commputer or computers in general and didn't know about/think about using the "print screen" button. 69.235.219.155 (talk) 07:09, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Nice CRT monitor. TechOutsider (talk) 00:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)TechOutsider

SpywareBot renamed

Rogue antispyware program SpywareBot appears to have been renamed SpywareStop so as to "better distinguish" the brand. I was wondering whether the Malicious clones section should be altered to reflect this, as, while it is essentially the same program, SpywareStop no longer seems to be imitating Spybot - Search & Destroy. What do you think? 3l5 (talk) 00:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

reviews - pls update!

There is a more recent, positive review of the programme on PCWorld, which ought to be included. The 2008 one is rather damaging; the 2009 one describes it as 'a worthy programme'.Ispy67 (talk) 17:39, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Article title

I've reverted the change of the article title from the original "Spybot – Search & Destroy" to "Spybot (program)" for several reasons:

• "Spybot – Search & Destroy" is the official name, not "Spybot" (the short name being "Spybot-S&D")
• "Spybot (program)" is ambiguous, and could be easily mis-interpreted by readers as being about one spybot in particular, or the family of spybot programs in general
• "Spybot (program)" completely changes the meaning of the program name. A similar analogy would be to truncate the name of a program called "Malware Exterminator and cleaner" simply to "Malware".

I hope my change is non-controversial. Regards. --SF007 (talk) 10:00, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree with the reversion - the article should be at the full title of the program. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:44, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

SSD's "hint" (?)

Maybe this site is not a perfect place for what I write here, but how I should interpret this:

Hint Of The Day

Caution! Products from Trend Micro or McAfee might be regarded as malware!

According to the antispyware coalition's definition, programs, such as McAfee and Trend Micro
might be considered Spyware and/or PUPS, which it defines as: "Technologies [...] implemented in
ways that impair user control over [...] Material changes that affect their [...] system security;"

?? I've found this in SSD version 1.6.2.46

PS: Didn't know that there is an "antispyware coalition" ! 178.183.173.241 (talk) 23:06, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Spybot – Search & Destroy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071004044656/http://www.safer-networking.org/en/spybotsd15/index.html to http://www.safer-networking.org/en/spybotsd15/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070502221948/http://www.safer-networking.org:80/en/news/2005-06-22.html to http://www.safer-networking.org/en/news/2005-06-22.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:03, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

BLP merge

The BLP has three sources. One is primary (own website), two are primary interviews. This fails WP:GNG, and WP:NBIO. As a WP:PERMASTUB, better to merge into the actual notability (the software). Regards Widefox; talk 11:21, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Spybot versus Bitdefender

I note that Spybot + AV uses Bitdefender for the anti-virus side of things. What's not clear is whether this gives me absolutely all the protection and functionality of Bitdefender, which is one of the highest-rated anti-virus programs out there. If so, there isn't really any reason to use anything but Spybot + AV, since you get all the power of Bitdefender, plus Spybot's other malware protection. So, is this the case? Correctrix (talk) 04:07, 23 September 2016 (UTC)