Concurrent Anti-Spyware

[Iain]

Whilst I'm aware that running dual anti-virus programmes concurrently
are forbidden, does the same hold true for anti-spyware?

 

[peter]

Re: Concurrent Anti-Spyware

no

pk
"Iain" <iain@comnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:5ortipFnlpfbU1@mid.individual.net...
> Whilst I'm aware that running dual anti-virus programmes concurrently are
> forbidden, does the same hold true for anti-spyware?

 

[Charlie42]

Re: Concurrent Anti-Spyware

Iain <iain@comnet.co.uk> wrote:

> Whilst I'm aware that running dual anti-virus programmes
> concurrently are forbidden, does the same hold true for
> anti-spyware?

It's not forbidden, but you shouldn't run two anti-virus programs (or
two firewalls for that matter) at the same time, since they may conflict
and even cause crashes.

As for anti-spyware, it's the other way around. No single anti-spyware
program has a good enough detection rate, it is therefore recommended to
run at least two, hoping that the second program picks up what the first
didn't and vice versa. Conflicts are not a big issue with these
programs.

Charlie42

 

[GTS]

Re: Concurrent Anti-Spyware

There's no harm, in fact it's advisable, to run occasional scans with
multiple spyware tools. Running multiple resident programs, however, may
cause conflicts and performance problems.
--

"Iain" <iain@comnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:5ortipFnlpfbU1@mid.individual.net...
> Whilst I'm aware that running dual anti-virus programmes concurrently are
> forbidden, does the same hold true for anti-spyware?

 

[Hank Arnold (MVP)]

Re: Concurrent Anti-Spyware

Iain wrote:
> Whilst I'm aware that running dual anti-virus programmes concurrently
> are forbidden, does the same hold true for anti-spyware?

Not at all. I'd be careful about running multiple programs monitoring
real time (mostly because of the resources used), but scanning for
spyware with multiple scanners is not only allowed, it's still
considered a "best practice"...

--

Regards,
Hank Arnold
Microsoft MVP
Windows Server - Directory Services

 

[Straight Talk]

Re: Concurrent Anti-Spyware

On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 04:14:48 -0400, "Hank Arnold (MVP)"
<rasilon@aol.com> wrote:

>Iain wrote:
>> Whilst I'm aware that running dual anti-virus programmes concurrently
>> are forbidden, does the same hold true for anti-spyware?
>
>Not at all. I'd be careful about running multiple programs monitoring
>real time (mostly because of the resources used), but scanning for
>spyware with multiple scanners is not only allowed, it's still
>considered a "best practice"...

No. It's considered "nonsense" - like any "scanning" for malware in an
up-and-running environment is.

 

[Doug]

Re: Concurrent Anti-Spyware

"Straight Talk" <b__nice@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5k0mi3lpqmu8o7j3os5jh06vmjd565bfkv@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 04:14:48 -0400, "Hank Arnold (MVP)"
> <rasilon@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>Iain wrote:
>>> Whilst I'm aware that running dual anti-virus programmes concurrently
>>> are forbidden, does the same hold true for anti-spyware?
>>
>>Not at all. I'd be careful about running multiple programs monitoring
>>real time (mostly because of the resources used), but scanning for
>>spyware with multiple scanners is not only allowed, it's still
>>considered a "best practice"...
>
> No. It's considered "nonsense" - like any "scanning" for malware in an
> up-and-running environment is.

Your advice is therefore?

 

[Straight Talk]

Re: Concurrent Anti-Spyware

On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 14:26:20 -0000, "Doug"
<just_me@fake_address.replytogroup> wrote:

>"Straight Talk" <b__nice@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:5k0mi3lpqmu8o7j3os5jh06vmjd565bfkv@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 04:14:48 -0400, "Hank Arnold (MVP)"
>> <rasilon@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Iain wrote:
>>>> Whilst I'm aware that running dual anti-virus programmes concurrently
>>>> are forbidden, does the same hold true for anti-spyware?
>>>
>>>Not at all. I'd be careful about running multiple programs monitoring
>>>real time (mostly because of the resources used), but scanning for
>>>spyware with multiple scanners is not only allowed, it's still
>>>considered a "best practice"...
>>
>> No. It's considered "nonsense" - like any "scanning" for malware in an
>> up-and-running environment is.
>
>Your advice is therefore?

Simple. Don't install it in the first place.

 

[Doug]

Re: Concurrent Anti-Spyware


"Straight Talk" <b__nice@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:s6imi3tc1nk2rs58l3qlr2fmcvq8ksvnlm@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 14:26:20 -0000, "Doug"
> <just_me@fake_address.replytogroup> wrote:
>
>>"Straight Talk" <b__nice@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:5k0mi3lpqmu8o7j3os5jh06vmjd565bfkv@4ax.com...
>>> On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 04:14:48 -0400, "Hank Arnold (MVP)"
>>> <rasilon@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Iain wrote:
>>>>> Whilst I'm aware that running dual anti-virus programmes concurrently
>>>>> are forbidden, does the same hold true for anti-spyware?
>>>>
>>>>Not at all. I'd be careful about running multiple programs monitoring
>>>>real time (mostly because of the resources used), but scanning for
>>>>spyware with multiple scanners is not only allowed, it's still
>>>>considered a "best practice"...
>>>
>>> No. It's considered "nonsense" - like any "scanning" for malware in an
>>> up-and-running environment is.
>>
>>Your advice is therefore?
>
> Simple. Don't install it in the first place.

Please clarify. If by "it" you refer to the malware, it installs itself
unbidden! How should I keep it out? If by "it" you refer to anti-spyware
software, are you saying that its use is a bad idea and that spyware should
be left unmolested? Or is it that periodic manual purges are OK but that
spyware blocking in real time messes up the up-and-running environment?

 

[Straight Talk]

Re: Concurrent Anti-Spyware

On Sat, 3 Nov 2007 08:17:27 -0000, "Doug"
<just_me@fake_address.replytogroup> wrote:

>Please clarify. If by "it" you refer to the malware, it installs itself
>unbidden!

Of course it (malware) doesn't. It just doesn't magically appear.

>How should I keep it out?

By not installing all kinds of crappy software from questionable
sources and by running not inherently broken software like IE.

Malware is primarily caused by user's lack of knowledge/care and buggy
software.

BTW, how bad is the malware-situation on Vista anyway?