Windows Defender Enough?

The only spyware protection I am running is Defender. Would it be redundant
to run Spybot S&D also? Is it necessary?

Joe wrote:
> The only spyware protection I am running is Defender. Would it be redundant
> to run Spybot S&D also? Is it necessary?


It's usually a good idea to use multiple adware/spyware detectors, as
so single product seems to catch everything.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell

I downloaded Spybot S&D. I've been using it for years on XP but was a little
apprehensive about Vista. It seems to work great so far. Upon inital scan, it
caught some tracking cookies that Defender missed.
Thanks


"Bruce Chambers" wrote:

> Joe wrote:
> > The only spyware protection I am running is Defender. Would it be redundant
> > to run Spybot S&D also? Is it necessary?
>
>
> It's usually a good idea to use multiple adware/spyware detectors, as
> so single product seems to catch everything.
>
>
> --
>
> Bruce Chambers
>
> Help us help you:
> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
> They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
> safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin
>
> Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell
>

Hello Joe,

The simple answer is Spybot S&D is finding cookies and WD doesnt scan

for cookies as they are not a threat to your system and contain no code.

http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/win...x?=&qu=cookies
--


"Joe" wrote:

> I downloaded Spybot S&D. I've been using it for years on XP but was a little
> apprehensive about Vista. It seems to work great so far. Upon inital scan, it
> caught some tracking cookies that Defender missed.
> Thanks
>
>
> "Bruce Chambers" wrote:
>
> > Joe wrote:
> > > The only spyware protection I am running is Defender. Would it be redundant
> > > to run Spybot S&D also? Is it necessary?
> >
> >
> > It's usually a good idea to use multiple adware/spyware detectors, as
> > so single product seems to catch everything.
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Bruce Chambers
> >
> > Help us help you:
> > http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> > http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
> >
> > They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
> > safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin
> >
> > Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell
> >

On Sun, 12 Aug 2007 10:28:01 -0700, Joe
<Joe@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

> The only spyware protection I am running is Defender. Would it be redundant
> to run Spybot S&D also?


No.


> Is it necessary?



Absolutely necessary? No. But running at least two anti-spyware
products is a very good idea.

Note what Eric Howes, who has done extensive testing on
Anti-Spyware products, states:

"No single anti-spyware scanner removes everything. Even the
best-performing anti-spyware scanner in these tests missed fully one
quarter of the "critical" files and Registry entries" See
http://spywarewarrior.com/asw-test-guide.htm


--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

I run two spyware protection products (Defender and another program) under
both Vista and XP, and recommend that anyone do the same.

--
Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@gmail.com
* NEW! Catch my blog ... http://msmvps.com/blogs/rgharper/
* PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
* The Website - http://rgharper.mvps.org/
* HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


"Joe" <Joe@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:45B67894-B239-443F-B153-6F6E9D8F30DD@microsoft.com...
> The only spyware protection I am running is Defender. Would it be
> redundant
> to run Spybot S&D also? Is it necessary?

"Richard G. Harper" <rgharper@email.com> wrote in message
news:uHvVfVT3HHA.4672@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I run two spyware protection products (Defender and another program) under
>both Vista and XP, and recommend that anyone do the same.

On Vista I am only running Defender and Spybot S&D, also Ccleaner but that's
not anti-spyware software but it is a good idea to use it as it cleans out
all the crap. On my Win2K box though I have Adaware, Spybot, Spywareblaster,
SuperAntiSpyware, A-Sqaured, Ccleaner, MVP Hosts file, and use FF with
noscript plugin. That's my usual anti-spyware regime and it keeps me safe
and clean.

"Crazy Noddy" <SPAM@BLOCKER.ACTIVE> wrote in message
news:NnYvi.429168$LL7.378483@fe08.news.easynews.com...
> "Richard G. Harper" <rgharper@email.com> wrote in message
> news:uHvVfVT3HHA.4672@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>I run two spyware protection products (Defender and another program) under
>>both Vista and XP, and recommend that anyone do the same.
>
> On Vista I am only running Defender and Spybot S&D, also Ccleaner but
> that's not anti-spyware software but it is a good idea to use it as it
> cleans out all the crap. On my Win2K box though I have Adaware, Spybot,
> Spywareblaster, SuperAntiSpyware, A-Sqaured, Ccleaner, MVP Hosts file, and
> use FF with noscript plugin. That's my usual anti-spyware regime and it
> keeps me safe and clean.

Webroot Spy Sweeper works fine with Vista. Recently Webroot Window Washer,
which was a favourite of mine under Windows XP, has become Vista compatible
too, doing a much better job than Vista's own Disk Cleanup. They work well
in tandem.

Just note that these products do not work on 64 bit Vista!!

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:51:26 +0100, "Doug"
<just_me@fake_address.replytogroup> wrote:

>
>"Crazy Noddy" <SPAM@BLOCKER.ACTIVE> wrote in message
>news:NnYvi.429168$LL7.378483@fe08.news.easynews.com...
>> "Richard G. Harper" <rgharper@email.com> wrote in message
>> news:uHvVfVT3HHA.4672@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>I run two spyware protection products (Defender and another program) under
>>>both Vista and XP, and recommend that anyone do the same.
>>
>> On Vista I am only running Defender and Spybot S&D, also Ccleaner but
>> that's not anti-spyware software but it is a good idea to use it as it
>> cleans out all the crap. On my Win2K box though I have Adaware, Spybot,
>> Spywareblaster, SuperAntiSpyware, A-Sqaured, Ccleaner, MVP Hosts file, and
>> use FF with noscript plugin. That's my usual anti-spyware regime and it
>> keeps me safe and clean.
>
>Webroot Spy Sweeper works fine with Vista. Recently Webroot Window Washer,
>which was a favourite of mine under Windows XP, has become Vista compatible
>too, doing a much better job than Vista's own Disk Cleanup. They work well
>in tandem.

"Doug" <just_me@fake_address.replytogroup> wrote in message
news:urS5sKz3HHA.5724@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Webroot Spy Sweeper works fine with Vista. Recently Webroot Window Washer,
> which was a favourite of mine under Windows XP, has become Vista
> compatible too, doing a much better job than Vista's own Disk Cleanup.
> They work well in tandem.
>


Yea, but those are not free progs. All the progs I listed are free and do
the job just as effectively. Ccleaner does a much better job than Vista's
disk cleanup, check it out.

http://www.ccleaner.com/