ZoneAlarm Spy Blocker

When updating ZoneAlarm Free. I get it asking me if I want to install this free toolbar.

Does anyone know anything about it?:confused

 

I'm not a user of any ZoneAlarm products anymore as I think they've become kind of bloated and resource hungry over the years. And my feeling about toolbars is that if you have one (I use the Yahoo toolbar with IE), you're probably covered. I've seen PC's with so many toolbars installed, to where the actual window is about half the size it should be. If you think you need the ZA toolbar and it's "benefits", then by all means give it a shot. Just be sure it's easy to remove cleanly if you decide you don't want (or like) it....

 

I'm not too sure whether this is a good thing or not. According to Zone Alarm's publicity, Spy Blocker "prevents an Internet surfer from unintentionally ending up at a malicious Web site, such as one that downloads "drive-by spyware" to unsuspecting visitors. Unlike browser-based technologies, ZoneAlarm's Spy Site Blocking also prevents malware from "phoning home" back to a Web server." If this is true (and it most probably is), then this is definitely a GOOD thing.

On the other hand, ZA's FAQ seems to say that they use it to track your surfing. It says, " The ZoneAlarm Spy Blocker toolbar does not monitor or report back to ZoneAlarm information about where you are traveling when you leave the ZoneAlarm Spy Blocker toolbar service, or what you do on other Web sites." [My italics]. If this is so, then the Tool bar is a form of spyware itself, which is BAD!

Going on ZA's awesome reputation, my guess is that the jury will finally give it the thumbs up ... but for now I am going to keep a close eye on that jury room door!

 

I noticed the toolbar option when I updated my ZA as well. I decided not to install the toolbar, as I have programs galore to help protect me.

(AdAware, Spybot S&D, Microsoft Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool, Spyware Blaster, Windows Defender, Advanced Windows Care, and A-Squared)

 

I got rid of ZA completely because of the extra bloat since their beta even though I've been using it happily for over 5 years. I switched to PCTools FW, nice and simple and similar to the ZA of old in functionality and feel. I can't stand the suites which everyone seems to be going to.

 

Don't

Every toolbar has some sort of blocker or other. Internet Explorer also has one. It's all too easy to get them blocking each other (and you).

 

This is absolutely incredible, thank you ever so much for going through my programs for me! Very much appreciated!

Ok, great, thanks!

I didn't realize that once a month was all I needed with MS Malicious Software Removal Tool. I've been running a scan once a week.

I have the free AdAware SE personal program. I run a scan once a week. I should get rid of the ASquared?

I scan with Spybot once a week, and immunize after updates.

I don't believe I have "Tea Timer". You recommend that I uninstall the Advanced Windows Care?

Thank you very much for your help!
:wave

 

I don't use a firewall, my router's NAT is good enough.

 

I also have a router, what about outgoing stuff that you may want to know about? I do my banking online and I'd like to know if something is 'phoning home'. Only reason I have a FW installed.

 

From what everybody has said, it seems to me that we have here a fundamental problem: namely, of losing sight of the different kinds of threats amidst a jungle of possible software plans.

There are, in fact a number of different threats, which no single security software program can deal with. So, whether we like it or not, we need many different types of types of security programs if we and our computers are to stay safe. For example:

If we wish to stop hackers hacking in, and intruders phoning home, then we need a software firewall. Likewise, if we wish to block viruses, then we need an antivirus program. OK, so far so good; that's two threats, each with a single solution. People can argue over which FW, or which AV program, but (so far as I know) all security experts agree that two programs are needed.

The difficulties start with spyware, which, although it only has one name ("spyware"), is really not a single threat. Let me explain.

Firstly, the term 'spyware' encompasses several different kinds of malicious software (worms, trojans, adware, etc); secondly, it encompasses malware which is delivered by different kinds of deliver system; thirdly, it encompasses malware delivered with and without the users' active participation. In practical terms, the term 'spyware' covers many different kinds of threats, each of which needs its own solution.

There is no single security program that protects against all of these spyware threats. Indeed, it seems that some kinds of protection do not need any special software. Certainly, there is no single program that totally protects against more than a fraction of them. So a whole armory of protections is going to be needed if you and your computer are to stay safe. But exactly what?

Here we encounter our final problem, which is that, while there is lots of wild conjecture, and no end to the speculations, there is a major shortage of serious research on which to plan one's protections. But here is my take:

(Remember, I assume that you have a software FW and AV. I am now dealing only with spyware threats.)

In dealing with spyware threats, we have three main challenges:

• Firstly, we want to prevent spyware from getting into our computer without our knowledge;
• Secondly, we want to prevent ourselves from accidentally inviting it into our computer;
• Finally, if it does sneak in, we want to be able to quickly find and remove it.

The last of these challenges is easy, because the method for doing it very familiar to anybody who has ever used an AV program. You install a few AS programs, and use them to routinely scan every week or two.

So how many AS programs, and which ones? Spywarewarrior has tested a large number of them, and provides a short list of those proven safe and effective. They recommend that you choose any two of a short list of half a dozen commercial products, plus maybe Spyware S&D (which is free but is not particularly useful). The commercial products in their list (such as Spyware Doctor and Webroot) consistently perform well in independent spyware catching tests, and any two of them can be expected to catch most spyware programs that get into your system.

But what about the first two challenges? Personally, I think there is much to be said for stopping the spyware before it can get into your machine, and here is what I do:

I use SpywareBlaster and Spyware Guard (both recommended by SpywareWarrior) to block off sites known to host malware. These are 'passive' blockers, in so far as they require no action on my part. If the site is known to be 'bad', it simply won't load properly.

Next, I use a number of programs to warn me when I encounter a risky site. Firefox browser has such a warning built-in; McAfee Siteadvisor offers a second (but different) line of defence; Zone Alarm Spy Blocker should (if it proves OK) offer a third defense.

In the meantime, to protect myself against drive-by infections, I have my User Account locked down (set to 'Limited' in XP, 'Standard' in Vista); plus I have 'No Script' (a Firefox add-on) set to automatically to block javascript on any new web domains that I visit. (I then manually unblock the domain once I am satisfied that it is safe).

Does this regime work? This is very hard to say. I have used it for about 4 years now on a network of PCs with very few infections, and none at all that caused damage or loss of data. But maybe that was just luck?

Anyway, the point of all of this is this: Zone Alarm Spy Blocker cannot possibly be a substitute for a scanner-type program, nor vice versa; they are different beasts, designed to meet different threats.

 

Steve, I understand the point of the thread; I was one of the first to post to it. My point was that the ZA Blocker does seem to offer a benefit which none of the other programs offer, namely, it offers a head-up warning of problems with a site. Given the fact that user behavious is such a critical factor in surfing security, this seems to me to be a great potential benefit.

As I commented earlier, there are other programs that do this, including McAfee SiteAdvisor (in MSIE and Firefox), and indeed MSIE and Firefox, each in their own way. But Site Advisor certainly, and the two browsers possibly, warn of different things from the ZA Blocker. So it is at least possible that the ZA Blocker is providing a unique service.

There is much more that can be said about these head-up warnings - especially about their grotesquely ham-fisted methods - but, given the agreed importance of user behavious, I think they are the way of the future.

In the meantime, thank you for the rest of your comments. I will certainly check out SpywareGuard, as you suggest. Unless it proves absolutely useless for XP users, however, I will continue to recommend it, as I cannot rely on users all being Firefox users. Indeed, as Firefox's own statisitics show, only a relatively small percentage of users use it (though I will admit they are probably the best percentage).