Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by sunniebear

  1. Ye Jahn certainly appears to be no problems running the two together here, and I keep my SAS Pro real time enabled, reading through the information in the links in the thread you directed me to I wonder if it's just a precaution for the installation process of KIS2010 so that there are no conflicts or glithches during the installation itself. Well I'm pretty happy that I've done the upgrade to my security suite and still have my SAS protection running
  2. Thanks for the link to information on this. I went ahead and uninstalled SAS Pro and the KIS 2010 installation then ran without a hitch and then reinstalled SAS Pro and things are running just as they where before and there doesn't appear to be any problems with both programs up and running, so far anyway.
  3. Hi long time since I've posted but just came up against something odd. I am in the process of upgrading from KIS 2009 To KIS 2010. During the installation of KIS2010 I was asked to uninstall SAS as it was incompatable and if I proceeded it woud uninstall it for me. I have cancelled the installation for the time being. I have ran SAS pro with KIS for some time now with no problems. Anyone have any experience of this senario please let me know how you proceeded my thought is to uninstall SAS and then install it after the KIS installation and see what happens but if there is a genuine known conflict between the two I can just reinstall KIS 2009 again. Thanks in advance for any responses to this dilemma.
  4. Hello Nick and team. Haven't been around for a while, why because SAS just runs like a dream giving me no problems. I have been meaning to drop a line all the same just to say nice job on the latest versions and the seamless running with Vista with all the UAC issues resolved, automatic updating and upgrading just happening in the background. No more uninstalling and reinstalling to do a version upgrade, (handy for me as I always forgot to do the transfer licence bit first ). Just want to say thanks and look forward to future versions.
  5. I was going to comment on this in another thread but then saw this one. I too am only seeing around 300 odd K in the task manager and thats with real-time protection on. At first I thought it couldn't be right and wondered if the real-time was actually on, so I watched the little spikes in CPU usage against SAS in the task manager as I worked around the PC for a bit, so yes I guessed SAS was following me and watching my every move. My complete scan time has also greatly reduced. These things where never an issue to me with 3.9, or an other version before that, as SAS has never caused any system lags for me. But these reductions are quite drastic so I thought it was worth mentioning. I'd love to know what diet Nick put SAS on, I fancy trying it!
  6. Thanks robinb9 for the tips. I have never turned the UAC off in Vista as I too had come across various articles about problems it can cause. It's not that big a headache to me anyway, you get used to it and I would actually feel a bit odd now without the occasional prompt, if I turned it off Have installed SAS V4 pre-release at the weekend. I uninstalled 3.9 rebooted and installed. Only problem I had was that an old issue reoccurred for me, (that I had actually forgotten about). During the installation of V4 I went ahead and re-entered my licence code when the wizard came up. Then everytime I restared the machine the 'Would you like to check for up-dates now' window came up, followed by the 'Set-up Options Wizard'. I had to uninstall and reinstall, only this time I didn't enter my code and waited until everything was finished and entered it via the option on the right click menu, this is how I solved this before. (Sorry admin. that ended up in doing the licence transfer twice!). All is grand now. At least for those more forgetful using Vista and updating manually to avoid the UAC prompt can now set SAS to give them a reminder to update, neat!
  7. Thanks for the thumbs up on that. You know what I'm like about beta's/pre releases; sit on the sidelines and watch every one else have a go to see how muddy or clear the water is first Might just go ahead with it this weekend, up to my eyes until then
  8. I think that what is interesting is that when you come across a good consumer review somewhere for SAS it's because the program got that consumer out of sticky situation, and usually where other programs had failed. Look at how many users have droped by the forum to give words of thanks because they got a problem resolved using SAS. You don't see that on many other vendor's forums, and to me is proof in the pudding that people appreciate that SAS lives in 'the real world' dealing with the real malware situations that face us everyday. PS. Some people are impressed by glossy advertising, fancy GUI's and lightening fast scans, others are impressed by actual results
  9. Yes, I am running the pre-release version build 1106 & I did uninstall 3.9 before installing 4.0 Thanks & hoping for a solution. Again, I am sure that this is a Vista problem, but hoping that someone could help. Maybe to be a little more clear, the stop comes up when I right click on the icon in the task bar and check update. A window comes up and says "a program needs your authorization to continue" and it is from the UAC. Thanks again, Normandie Hi Normandie, I have been running SAS Pro on Vista since around March of last year. UAC is asking for permission for the updater to run. I found the best way to avoid this prompt from UAC, (apart from turning UAC off, which many Vista users end up doing because it can seem annoying at times), is to open the SAS Main Menu interface and click the 'check for updates' button. You won't get the prompt from UAC, updating this way. I have got in the routine of manually checking for updates daily as soon as I start up the PC, usually after work, and occasionally, if it has been on all day, I will have a second check later on in the evening, only takes a second. I'm still on version 3.9, (waiting for the final release of 4), don't know whether this issue with the updater and Vista UAC will be overcome for the final release of version 4 or not but doing it manually from within the main interface is a way to workaround this prompt in the meantime.
  10. I was trying Comodo on Vista and all was great until windows update. The defence+ messed with the installation of the updates and everytime the computer was restarted and the 'configuring updates' message appeared on start-up, it would do a reboot and all the update installations failed. I tried turning off the defence+ and still had problems so I uninstalled Comodo, (one of those nights when I didn't have time to play around with things), just to get the updates in. I was going to try it again, taking the option to disable the defence+ during the installation process and see how it went a second time round but on my travels came accross this little app., Vista Firewall Control and read some good reviews about it, so I thought I would give it a go first. http://www.sphinx-soft.com/Vista/order.html It's not a standalone firewall, it integartes with the Vista Firewall and the security centre. It's not glossy and the free version gives very basic application control, but I have done a few leak tests on it and they got blocked until I decided what to do. I had thrown these same tests at the Vista Firewall before installing this and, well, they leaked basically. I only have it on a few days so too early to draw a conclusion but think I will try it out for week or so as it is using hardly any resources. I think the Vista Firewall could be great if you know how to create firewall rules, I have looked through the Advanced interface and decided it was a bit 'out of my league'
  11. Really ? I was under the impression that using more then 1 real time protection of each type was a bad thing, HJT advisor's say only 1 real time protection of each type should be run at any one time, eg 1 firewall, 1 anti virus and 1 anti Spyware product, and when running standalone scanners these should be disabled whilst running them to avoid conflict as sometimes they could be fighting each other, or do you know something I haven't heard on this ? 8210GUY I can only speak from my own experience with my own PC. As I have Vista Windows Defender is already there and I use SAS Pro with real-time enabled. I have a tendency to forget all about Defender being there and the two ran together with real-time enabled for a long time. I turned the real-time in Defender off a while back and there was absolutely no difference in the running of the PC with it either off or on with SAS on all the time, so I would conclude that they do run fine together. I also use KAV.
  12. I only get the information of what is included in the updates when I update SAS by clicking on the 'check for updates' button in the Main Menu within the program, on Vista. Since using SAS with Vista I have been just updating manually this way, checking daily after I start up the PC. I have found it a simpler method than going through the UAC permissions. I am the only user on the PC and only have the one account set up at present, which is the administrator account. Hope some of this info. helps.
  13. Yes. That is exactly how I actually first heard of SAS.
  14. Woudn't be anything to do with all those 'love/hate' relationships that seem to go on over there On a serious note though. During the threads on this topic 2 other programs that 'site advise', (for want of a better way of putting it), have been mentioned TrendProtect and LinkScanner, both giving SAS's site a 'green'. I think the McAfee verdict is something that needs to be veiwed on subjectively although it is a shame of the impression it gives to a 'newbie'. Hopefully it will get corrected somewhere along the line.
  15. That would be fab! That's one show I would sit up all night for to watch, would give me such a thrill I too am too chicken to venture into those depths. Maybe one day when I have 2 PC's to play with
  16. Here's the link to the MacaFee report on Superantispyware.com: http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/supera ... e=IEPlugin It's not just the forum - it's the whole site. This is what they say about their 'affiliations' warning: "Online Affiliations examines how aggressively the site tries to get you to go to other sites that we've flagged with red verdicts. It is a very common practice on the Internet for suspicious sites to have many close associates with other suspicious sites. The primary purpose of these "feeder" sites is to get you to visit the suspicious site. A site can receive a red warning if, for example, it links too aggressively to other red sites. In effect, a site can become "red by association" due to the nature of its relationship to red flagged domains." That's enough to put anyone off visiting this site! And yet, as I said, and as you confirm - we can't actually find any links at all! I hadn't thought of that! On the other hand, if that were the case, then I imagine that almost every forum would contain a few dodgy links - so you'd expect all forums to get MacAfee's red flag. But they don't. Thanks for the link. I can now see properly what people are taking about in the thread.
  17. Hi Alan D, I have read many of your posts and like that you come to the forum for clarity and understanding of an issue. That's exactly what a forum is for; learning and sharing experiences and knowledge I don't use McAffee site advisor so I can't actually see what associated links it is showing as red or otherwise. I have had an afterthought on this. Is there any possibility that these links that McAffee is referring to have been posted within the 'Spyware, Adware and Malware Diagnosis' section of the forum during research . (Of course this section of the forum requires special access so that the general user or visitor doesn't accidently infect themselves!) Just a thought, because I can't find any other doddgy links either, (or has McAffee simply made a mistake).
  18. Another thing to consider is resource usage, especially if you want to use all the on-guard tools in SD. With the infamous hogger of resources Norton having addressed this with NIS 2007 I think SD can now confidently steal the crown of being one of the biggest resource hoggers and causes of system lags, even over a security suite, on the market. SAS Pro on the other hand is as light as feather for real-time protection and gets along with other security applications you may use. I have no regrets in making the switch based on this alone.
  19. You can uncheck that "Yellow" option. Gerard Ye, discovered that one, but I don't actually mind them really. I like paranoid security software, goes with my paranoid mind
  20. I don't know what operating system you are using but I had a similar problem not that long ago after cleaning with Registry Mechanic on Vista, only when it kept rebooting, all started with IE crashes, I couldn't launch a program or access anything, (even safe mode), to do a restore, so had a lovely reformat job. Since getting back up and running and everything reinstalled and reconfigured I did do one clean and repair on the new installation but quickly restored it when IE started crashing again, (and have had no problems since). I have run another scan just to save the log, (no repairs made), I am still trying to pin point what repair caused it! I have used RM for years with no problems and for 4 months on Vista with no problems either until this happened, so you never know the moment. I have taken the decision not to use a registry cleaner on Vista for the time being. I would rather do a 'planned' reformat once in a while than end up with one thrown at me against my will ! I am guessing Spybot S&D is giving you the warnings about changes because you have the 'Teatimer' feature enabled? This is a good feature but I wouldn't enable it unless you have a good understanding of the registry, it can be a bit confusing sometimes as to what you should be allowing and denying. Even with registry cleaners you need to be careful about what you choose to fix and if you are not sure these programs are best avoided or make sure you always have a backup to restore, (providing you can access the system to restore a back-up ). Alan D's suggestion of restoring the registry back-up or trying a system restore is the best route to take. Fingers crossed you get out of this 'pickle'.
  21. I use LinkScanner Pro, which can be a bit over paranoid even with its lowest level 'Yellow' warnings sometimes. I just tested with a google search and I get 'Green' , (my last definition update was yesterday). Even If I got here without going through a search I would have had a pop-up from LinkScanner if there was any warning to give, as I use the paid for pro version which monitors and reacts as necessary to any link I click on. (If any thing changes with this I'll let you know). I guess the definitions or databases with these programs can be a bit subjective sometimes, just like what is classed as a tracking cookie can be very different between various anti-spyware vendors. Sometimes your on common sense has to prevail! @Darth. McAffee Site Advisor does work differently in IE and Firefox, (I used to use it with both browsers when I had XP installed), you only get that additional 'ballon' pop-up with IE and not in Firefox.
  22. For the benefit of others like me who might find themselves in a similar pickle, could you explain what you did after you selected the 'boot.ini' tab, please? Hi Alan D, see this thread for an easy way out of safemode, if you ever get stuck there using BootSafe. https://forums.superantispyware.com/viewtopic.php?t=694 I haven't actually used the BootSafe function yet, personally I just tap F8 at start-up or a re-boot to enter safe mode when I am planning to scan from there and then reboot again to start normally when I'm finished. (Been doing it that way for years, hard to break the habit ).
  23. Like Alan D, I haven't had any infections of my own for SAS to tackle but in a similar story to robinb9 I removed Spylocked from a friends PC with the SAS free edition, when everything else had failed, (if only I had looked to SAS first it would have saved a lot of time flaffing about)! I was looking for a replacement for my antispyware protection around the same time of this event, as I was so impressed with it killing Spylocked that was good enough for me, so I installed SAS Pro. The 'proof is in the pudding' with what happens in todays real world cyber space IMHO and robinb9's experience, like my own proves that SAS knows the right spots to hit in that registry to get rid of stubborn malware.
  24. Well that would be a much simpler explanation than I would have gone 'round the houses' looking for Thanks for posting the info.
  25. LOL, those are two sites I must admit I have never visited, (bet my Sister's kids have though)! I must be getting a bit 'over the hill'. I have always handled cookies through browser settings and regular cache cleaning, and don't see them as a major 'threat'. Never get any of those on a scan either. (Scans are very boring on my PC really ). I know there is no 'fool proof' way to avoid getting infected but common sense and safe'er' surfing practices do go a long way! Has worked for me well for many a year (touch wood ).
  • Create New...