I use Windows Defender in Win10 and don't have any problems. If you aren't clicking everything in your e-mail, you're probably good.
If you're hanging around on Win7/8, then Bitdefender and Kaspersky are both rated highly.
I'm not a huge fan of Kaspersky, but that's less for its effectiveness, and more because of the way it's just totally fucking breaking lately. Safe Money has been causing problems with sites, the certificates Kaspersky uses has been blocking legitimate https sites (like fucking Google)... the program is a mess.
Which is too bad, because they're great security researchers.
I've never once used Safe Money--mostly because I know it's going to break every other extension I use in Chrome by design. Hell, the <10 extensions I use in Chrome regularly cause conflicts with Google, including those promoted by Google's Parent Company, because Chrome is fucking bonkers, and I'm an idiot for stubbornly returning to it. That would be my suggestion.
I recommend anything other than Kaspersky. Use nothing, because installing Kaspersky is basically giving up.
Kaspersky has been found to exfiltrate data from computers it's installed on, and Russian laws mean that any data they hold is freely available to the Russian government.
Do not use Kaspersky unless you are comfortable with Putin having access to everything on your PC.
I'll bite--would you mind elaborating? Out of a morbid curiosity, as I've heard this theory presented before--and I won't lie that it reminds me of family I have overseas that, a ~2 years ago, discarded their phone plans from US-backed companies because, roughly translated from Mandarin, "Don't use these phone plans unless you are comfortable with Obama having access to all your phone conversations." Now, they just don't use cell phones when they visit the US (which admittedly you can actually adapt to fairly easily).
It's also worth mentioning that one of Kaspersky's upper management people was arrested for treason this month (in Russia, not the US).
It is worth consideration--though I do like how, for some people (not necessarily anyone in this thread, but you get the meaning), with any further details, this will turn a Russian national they've never met or prior heard of from 1) inherently suspicious, untrustworthy Eastern European probably in cahoots with the only Russian person they know they name of to 2) innocent martyr and victim of an autocratic government, personally singled out by aforementioned name.
It's sort of like how 3 years ago, when the government issued a scathing critique of Roskosmos (the space agency) that saw a round of firings and recommended dismissals, citing wastefulness and internal and external corruption (endemic problems across multiple areas of governments, sometimes cripplingly so). The comments sections on Engadget (haha, what a shock) were suddenly packed with people crying out that career bureaucrats were being persecuted by a fundamentalist government.
EDIT: Also, I'm very easily amused.
EDIT EDIT: Also, terrible top. It's surprising to hear that Windows Defender has recovered some of its standing in the field--or at least is less likely to be criticized for being overly invasive than a lot of major products.
I use Windows Defender in Win10 and don't have any problems. If you aren't clicking everything in your e-mail, you're probably good.
If you're hanging around on Win7/8, then Bitdefender and Kaspersky are both rated highly.
I'm not a huge fan of Kaspersky, but that's less for its effectiveness, and more because of the way it's just totally fucking breaking lately. Safe Money has been causing problems with sites, the certificates Kaspersky uses has been blocking legitimate https sites (like fucking Google)... the program is a mess.
Which is too bad, because they're great security researchers.
I've never once used Safe Money--mostly because I know it's going to break every other extension I use in Chrome by design. Hell, the <10 extensions I use in Chrome regularly cause conflicts with Google, including those promoted by Google's Parent Company, because Chrome is fucking bonkers, and I'm an idiot for stubbornly returning to it. That would be my suggestion.
I recommend anything other than Kaspersky. Use nothing, because installing Kaspersky is basically giving up.
Kaspersky has been found to exfiltrate data from computers it's installed on, and Russian laws mean that any data they hold is freely available to the Russian government.
Do not use Kaspersky unless you are comfortable with Putin having access to everything on your PC.
I'll bite--would you mind elaborating? Out of a morbid curiosity, as I've heard this theory presented before--and I won't lie that it reminds me of family I have overseas that, a ~2 years ago, discarded their phone plans from US-backed companies because, roughly translated from Mandarin, "Don't use these phone plans unless you are comfortable with Obama having access to all your phone conversations." Now, they just don't use cell phones when they visit the US (which admittedly you can actually adapt to fairly easily).
It's also worth mentioning that one of Kaspersky's upper management people was arrested for treason this month (in Russia, not the US).
It is worth consideration--though I do like how, for some people (not necessarily anyone in this thread, but you get the meaning), with any further details, this will turn a Russian national they've never met or prior heard of from 1) inherently suspicious, untrustworthy Eastern European probably in cahoots with the only Russian person they know they name of to 2) innocent martyr and victim of an autocratic government, personally singled out by aforementioned name.
It's sort of like how 3 years ago, when the government issued a scathing critique of Roskosmos (the space agency) that saw a round of firings and recommended dismissals, citing wastefulness and internal and external corruption (endemic problems across multiple areas of governments, sometimes cripplingly so). The comments sections on Engadget (haha, what a shock) were suddenly packed with people crying out that career bureaucrats were being persecuted by a fundamentalist government.
EDIT: Also, I'm very easily amused.
EDIT EDIT: Also, terrible top. It's surprising to hear that Windows Defender has recovered some of its standing in the field--or at least is less likely to be criticized for being overly invasive than a lot of major products.
Yeah. I understand the point of view you're coming from. The Kaspersky situation is a very real "government might be spying on you" situation though because:
1. Kaspersky works very very closely with the Russian government. They're a premier consultant for cybersecurity and are directly involved in tracking and persecuting cyber criminals in Russia. The foreign perspective equivalent would be something like "what if Norton primarily worked directly with the NSA".
2. There are no Russian laws protecting the privacy of American citizens. If Norton or whatever other American company were working with the NSA we'd at least have whatever protections US law grant us.
Re. Windows defender: I don't even know if it's detection rates are any better or not. It's detection rates could literally be zero and it would be better than most av software because Windows has a vested interest in the security of the program and the integrity of the operating system when it's installed. AV software needs a potentially dangerous level of access to your system in order to do its job and if that software has vulnerabilities you're opening yourself up to entire new attack vectors. Things like the ssl cert vulnerabilities I linked in the previous post compromised the integrity of the web browser. Having Kaspersky installed meant that someone could have redirected your bank website to a malicious clone in chrome and you would have been none the wiser. That particular bug was amateur hour material. Nobody who actually has any web security experience would have ever used 32 bit hashes. The fact that this bug is in security software is incredibly worrying.
Yeah, if you do use an AV, *only* use the scanner program. All the other stuff in there is total garbage.
Defender doesn't have the best detection rates, but it's still in the upper-80s and won't fuck up your system. FWIW, pretty much every browser dev on the planet says to use Defender because it doesn't break their stuff like the others.
Even the scanners can be dangerous because most of them come with some form of active protection by default. Very few of the av options out there do so using the AV system hooks that Microsoft provides and instead implement it in other much less kosher ways.
I use Windows Defender in Win10 and don't have any problems. If you aren't clicking everything in your e-mail, you're probably good.
If you're hanging around on Win7/8, then Bitdefender and Kaspersky are both rated highly.
I'm not a huge fan of Kaspersky, but that's less for its effectiveness, and more because of the way it's just totally fucking breaking lately. Safe Money has been causing problems with sites, the certificates Kaspersky uses has been blocking legitimate https sites (like fucking Google)... the program is a mess.
Which is too bad, because they're great security researchers.
I've never once used Safe Money--mostly because I know it's going to break every other extension I use in Chrome by design. Hell, the <10 extensions I use in Chrome regularly cause conflicts with Google, including those promoted by Google's Parent Company, because Chrome is fucking bonkers, and I'm an idiot for stubbornly returning to it. That would be my suggestion.
I recommend anything other than Kaspersky. Use nothing, because installing Kaspersky is basically giving up.
Kaspersky has been found to exfiltrate data from computers it's installed on, and Russian laws mean that any data they hold is freely available to the Russian government.
Do not use Kaspersky unless you are comfortable with Putin having access to everything on your PC.
I'll bite--would you mind elaborating? Out of a morbid curiosity, as I've heard this theory presented before--and I won't lie that it reminds me of family I have overseas that, a ~2 years ago, discarded their phone plans from US-backed companies because, roughly translated from Mandarin, "Don't use these phone plans unless you are comfortable with Obama having access to all your phone conversations." Now, they just don't use cell phones when they visit the US (which admittedly you can actually adapt to fairly easily).
Yarovaya law means that “arrangers of information distribution by means of Internet" have to store for 6-12 months all communications, and make them available to authorities.
Regarding Kaspersky, Jonothan Zdziarski was recently talking about it, saying "Unfortunately, can no longer recommend Kaspersky; they MiTM all your network traffic and there doesn’t appear to be any way to turn it off."
However, his tweets about it seem to have disappeared, as he's left Twitter because Trump? There's a cached version of part of it here.
Using Avast myself. My only issue with it is that it occasionally generates popups trying to induce you to buy the paid version, but it is infrequent enough that it hasn't crossed my threshold for being annoying.
But ever since I switched to Chrome + Adblock Plus, + Google DNS I don't even remember the last time my virus scanner detected anything. I also use Secunia PSI to notify me of anything that is out of date. What I like about Secunia is that it doesn't care about non-security updates, just updates that fix a CVE
I'm curious what the specifics around Kaspersky are based on what's been said here. If they are mitm'ing data what gets stored? If it is everything from every Kaspersky user everywhere that's an absurd amount of data.
Assuming the worst, I guess you'd need to treat a Kaspersky uninstall as you would any other deeply entrenched malware and reinstall. I guess?
What's even more disconcerting is that Best Buy is pushing Kaspersky onto a lot of consumers when they buy any computer-related product. We got the offer when my wife bought her new iPad and now I get reminded by BEST BUY every couple of weeks that I haven't activated my key. More "soccer mom/facebook grandma" types (that sounds more condescending than I mean it to be) would have used their key by now.
0
Options
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
What's even more disconcerting is that Best Buy is pushing Kaspersky onto a lot of consumers when they buy any computer-related product. We got the offer when my wife bought her new iPad and now I get reminded by BEST BUY every couple of weeks that I haven't activated my key. More "soccer mom/facebook grandma" types (that sounds more condescending than I mean it to be) would have used their key by now.
It's a choice of one of three security products - Webroot, Kaspersky, or Trend Micro. I wish MBAM was included, but maybe one day.
Using Avast myself. My only issue with it is that it occasionally generates popups trying to induce you to buy the paid version, but it is infrequent enough that it hasn't crossed my threshold for being annoying.
But ever since I switched to Chrome + Adblock Plus, + Google DNS I don't even remember the last time my virus scanner detected anything. I also use Secunia PSI to notify me of anything that is out of date. What I like about Secunia is that it doesn't care about non-security updates, just updates that fix a CVE
Avast seem to be once a boot/day. Not too bad.
But it also flags some file from Chromium source files (I'm like 87% sure it's a false positive) and I can't work out how to add exclusions before giving up. I should get back to that.
Using Avast myself. My only issue with it is that it occasionally generates popups trying to induce you to buy the paid version, but it is infrequent enough that it hasn't crossed my threshold for being annoying.
But ever since I switched to Chrome + Adblock Plus, + Google DNS I don't even remember the last time my virus scanner detected anything. I also use Secunia PSI to notify me of anything that is out of date. What I like about Secunia is that it doesn't care about non-security updates, just updates that fix a CVE
Avast seem to be once a boot/day. Not too bad.
But it also flags some file from Chromium source files (I'm like 87% sure it's a false positive) and I can't work out how to add exclusions before giving up. I should get back to that.
Might be because there's a fair bit of malware that will install infected versions of Chromium, so Avast is "man, fuck Chromium."
Is there any alternative to noScript someone could recommend, or a way of configuring noScript to keep out the bad stuff while allowing the mostly harmless stuff in. With the heavy use of scripts on almost all sites, I find myself allowing through huge numbers of scripts to the point where I'm not sure how much protection noScript is providing. The alternative of not allowing much through means that about 60% of the internet/websites are unusable.
0
Options
OrcaAlso known as EspressosaurusWrexRegistered Userregular
I gave up on noscript years ago. I'm making do with uBlock Origin, RequestPolicy Continued, and Privacy Badger to shore up things.
Basically, this means I'm relatively safe from hostile scripts originating from ad networks.
I'm still boned if any first party hostile scripts show up and aren't caught by other defenses.
This combination is still impressively irritating to configure on some websites however.
It's not really possible to 100% protect against nefarious scripts without blanket disallowing them because there isn't a reliable way to determine nefariousness. I mean, if there were it would be built into the Javascript engines and we wouldn't have to worry about it.
0
Options
OrcaAlso known as EspressosaurusWrexRegistered Userregular
It's not really possible to 100% protect against nefarious scripts without blanket disallowing them because there isn't a reliable way to determine nefariousness. I mean, if there were it would be built into the Javascript engines and we wouldn't have to worry about it.
If those antivirus companies would just get off their asses and solve the halting problem...!
It's not really possible to 100% protect against nefarious scripts without blanket disallowing them because there isn't a reliable way to determine nefariousness. I mean, if there were it would be built into the Javascript engines and we wouldn't have to worry about it.
Yeah...
I mean, there are some calls that should be blocked or such (hello file I/O). But that all falls under sandboxing.
If one were to just use Windows Defender, would you also use a different, 3rd party software firewall? And if so, which one?
Actually the built in windows firewall is not terrible. I wouldn't worry about using it.
Firewalls for most general use are a pretty hard to mess up technology. Block all incoming connections unless a program specifically asks to open it.
Yeah, you're going to have a hard time beating a firewall integrated into the OS written by the OS makers. It's like asking if you shouldn't use iptables (or nf_tables or whatever they're calling it now) in Linux.
If one were to just use Windows Defender, would you also use a different, 3rd party software firewall? And if so, which one?
Actually the built in windows firewall is not terrible. I wouldn't worry about using it.
Firewalls for most general use are a pretty hard to mess up technology. Block all incoming connections unless a program specifically asks to open it.
Yeah, you're going to have a hard time beating a firewall integrated into the OS written by the OS makers. It's like asking if you shouldn't use iptables (or nf_tables or whatever they're calling it now) in Linux.
Well to be fair the version in Windows XP was pretty terrible.
Mostly just huntin' monsters.
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
It's not really possible to 100% protect against nefarious scripts without blanket disallowing them because there isn't a reliable way to determine nefariousness. I mean, if there were it would be built into the Javascript engines and we wouldn't have to worry about it.
If those antivirus companies would just get off their asses and solve the halting problem...!
You guys should know by now that all nefarious scripts twirl their mustaches while they do their work. #boycottmustaches
====
Also, this works rather well on some "paywall" sites and I don't see any maliciousness in it (I got it from Reddit, so grains of salt...):
If you have a popup that won't go away, RClick -> Inspect Element (I think Reveal Codes works too). Scroll down to the offending line, RClick -> Delete Node.
If one were to just use Windows Defender, would you also use a different, 3rd party software firewall? And if so, which one?
Actually the built in windows firewall is not terrible. I wouldn't worry about using it.
Firewalls for most general use are a pretty hard to mess up technology. Block all incoming connections unless a program specifically asks to open it.
Awesome. I've used BitDefender for a few years, but they're expensive, and I'm not convinced that they provide added security given my habits. I'd rather ditch it and save $$ if possible.
Firefox won't refresh the visuals of a page until I switch tabs and go back while running in Sandboxie.
Sandboxie didn't update, so what did Firefox go and do?
Just in case it helps anyone else:
This seems to have happened before and you need to set Firefoxes own sandbox setting to 0 in about:config. Which I assume turns it off, but if it's in Sanboxie's already I'm OK with that if it lets me see pages without switching tabs first.
It's bad. If your registry is so fucked that you need a tool to fix it you should just reformat.
+3
Options
Mr_Rose83 Blue Ridge Protects the HolyRegistered Userregular
Right, because that's the primary/only purpose of CCleaner?
We use it almost daily on all sorts of machines, mostly to remove temp files and assorted other cruft that Windows should clean up itself but somehow never quite manages to. Barely ever use the registry tool though and that mostly for the sake of completeness.
In the right circumstances it's an excellent tool that will save you hours of manual work to do the same job and also make you look like a miracle worker if the only thing wrong was a gazillion temp files messing with their Outlook.
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
CCleaner does a better job of cleaning up temp files and other garbage that Windows leaves behind than the built in disk cleanup tool, and it's way way faster. The registry cleaner is kind of garbage, but they all are, so...
In a professional environment I'd rather just reimage the machine. In a personal one the disk cleanup utility has always been fine for temp files and the like. The only thing I've ever used CCleaner for is registry fixes and I've already voiced my opinion on that.
Well, reformatting and reimaging is obviously not an option for a home machine (and it shouldn't be, since I'm not being paid to maintain a system with a GPU that costs more than a modern console by itself). In terms of the registry cleaning tool, I've used that specifically to remove registry entries for uninstalled software that persist afterwards (basic configuration stuff most of the time)--I could do it manually once I figured out the location, but that does take longer.
Occasionally the uninstall tool is helpful for something that won't uninstall properly through Windows 10 for whatever reason (usually not malice so much as "Yeah, this basic program is free--and we consider the Windows Store to be the modern incarnation of the German Nazi Party--so don't complain about it not having an uninstall routine in this current release."), but that's pretty rare too.
0
Options
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
Well, reformatting and reimaging is obviously not an option for a home machine (and it shouldn't be, since I'm not being paid to maintain a system with a GPU that costs more than a modern console by itself). In terms of the registry cleaning tool, I've used that specifically to remove registry entries for uninstalled software that persist afterwards (basic configuration stuff most of the time)--I could do it manually once I figured out the location, but that does take longer.
Occasionally the uninstall tool is helpful for something that won't uninstall properly through Windows 10 for whatever reason (usually not malice so much as "Yeah, this basic program is free--and we consider the Windows Store to be the modern incarnation of the German Nazi Party--so don't complain about it not having an uninstall routine in this current release."), but that's pretty rare too.
If I'm looking to uninstall something that's being persistent and I want to rip it out by the roots, I'll use Revo. It's thorough.
while we use imaging all the time at work, we don't casually re-image at the drop of a hat unless there is some really screwball behavior. we use CCleaner all the time mostly just to slightly speed up a machine getting long in the tooth. Even in this day and age, programs don't clean up after themselves well and shit gets left behind that can cause issues.
We don't expect it to fix major issues, but it does help out.
since combofix apparently isn't getting updated for windows 8.1 or 10, i've started looking into alternatives (specifically for a windows 10 box). i thankfully haven't had to deal with any infections as of late, but that means i'm a little bit out of the game. saw a couple of recommended alternatives on bleepingcomputer but the posts were kinda old.
is windows defender to be trusted? i know it has improved over time but i havent checked recent evaluations of it, and i doubt i can convince this individual to reformat.
that's the route i was going. just out of paranoia i like to have the thorough option (combofix). basically windows defender caught something, claims it appropriately dealt with it but i like to be sure
Posts
It is worth consideration--though I do like how, for some people (not necessarily anyone in this thread, but you get the meaning), with any further details, this will turn a Russian national they've never met or prior heard of from 1) inherently suspicious, untrustworthy Eastern European probably in cahoots with the only Russian person they know they name of to 2) innocent martyr and victim of an autocratic government, personally singled out by aforementioned name.
It's sort of like how 3 years ago, when the government issued a scathing critique of Roskosmos (the space agency) that saw a round of firings and recommended dismissals, citing wastefulness and internal and external corruption (endemic problems across multiple areas of governments, sometimes cripplingly so). The comments sections on Engadget (haha, what a shock) were suddenly packed with people crying out that career bureaucrats were being persecuted by a fundamentalist government.
EDIT: Also, I'm very easily amused.
EDIT EDIT: Also, terrible top. It's surprising to hear that Windows Defender has recovered some of its standing in the field--or at least is less likely to be criticized for being overly invasive than a lot of major products.
Yeah. I understand the point of view you're coming from. The Kaspersky situation is a very real "government might be spying on you" situation though because:
1. Kaspersky works very very closely with the Russian government. They're a premier consultant for cybersecurity and are directly involved in tracking and persecuting cyber criminals in Russia. The foreign perspective equivalent would be something like "what if Norton primarily worked directly with the NSA".
2. There are no Russian laws protecting the privacy of American citizens. If Norton or whatever other American company were working with the NSA we'd at least have whatever protections US law grant us.
Re. Windows defender: I don't even know if it's detection rates are any better or not. It's detection rates could literally be zero and it would be better than most av software because Windows has a vested interest in the security of the program and the integrity of the operating system when it's installed. AV software needs a potentially dangerous level of access to your system in order to do its job and if that software has vulnerabilities you're opening yourself up to entire new attack vectors. Things like the ssl cert vulnerabilities I linked in the previous post compromised the integrity of the web browser. Having Kaspersky installed meant that someone could have redirected your bank website to a malicious clone in chrome and you would have been none the wiser. That particular bug was amateur hour material. Nobody who actually has any web security experience would have ever used 32 bit hashes. The fact that this bug is in security software is incredibly worrying.
Defender doesn't have the best detection rates, but it's still in the upper-80s and won't fuck up your system. FWIW, pretty much every browser dev on the planet says to use Defender because it doesn't break their stuff like the others.
Yarovaya law means that “arrangers of information distribution by means of Internet" have to store for 6-12 months all communications, and make them available to authorities.
Regarding Kaspersky, Jonothan Zdziarski was recently talking about it, saying "Unfortunately, can no longer recommend Kaspersky; they MiTM all your network traffic and there doesn’t appear to be any way to turn it off."
However, his tweets about it seem to have disappeared, as he's left Twitter because Trump? There's a cached version of part of it here.
But ever since I switched to Chrome + Adblock Plus, + Google DNS I don't even remember the last time my virus scanner detected anything. I also use Secunia PSI to notify me of anything that is out of date. What I like about Secunia is that it doesn't care about non-security updates, just updates that fix a CVE
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!
Assuming the worst, I guess you'd need to treat a Kaspersky uninstall as you would any other deeply entrenched malware and reinstall. I guess?
WoWtcg and general gaming podcast
WoWtcg and gaming website
It's a choice of one of three security products - Webroot, Kaspersky, or Trend Micro. I wish MBAM was included, but maybe one day.
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/news/450411761/More-than-200-vulnerabilities-found-in-Trend-Micro-security-products
Running periodic on-demand scans with MBAM's free version is still a really good idea.
Avast seem to be once a boot/day. Not too bad.
But it also flags some file from Chromium source files (I'm like 87% sure it's a false positive) and I can't work out how to add exclusions before giving up. I should get back to that.
Oh yeah. I never recommend it, though there was a time I would recommend it for Macs because the OSX version of Webroot is a shitshow.
Might be because there's a fair bit of malware that will install infected versions of Chromium, so Avast is "man, fuck Chromium."
Basically, this means I'm relatively safe from hostile scripts originating from ad networks.
I'm still boned if any first party hostile scripts show up and aren't caught by other defenses.
This combination is still impressively irritating to configure on some websites however.
If those antivirus companies would just get off their asses and solve the halting problem...!
Yeah...
I mean, there are some calls that should be blocked or such (hello file I/O). But that all falls under sandboxing.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
Firefox won't refresh the visuals of a page until I switch tabs and go back while running in Sandboxie.
Sandboxie didn't update, so what did Firefox go and do?
Actually the built in windows firewall is not terrible. I wouldn't worry about using it.
Firewalls for most general use are a pretty hard to mess up technology. Block all incoming connections unless a program specifically asks to open it.
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
Yeah, you're going to have a hard time beating a firewall integrated into the OS written by the OS makers. It's like asking if you shouldn't use iptables (or nf_tables or whatever they're calling it now) in Linux.
Well to be fair the version in Windows XP was pretty terrible.
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
You guys should know by now that all nefarious scripts twirl their mustaches while they do their work. #boycottmustaches
====
Also, this works rather well on some "paywall" sites and I don't see any maliciousness in it (I got it from Reddit, so grains of salt...):
If you have a popup that won't go away, RClick -> Inspect Element (I think Reveal Codes works too). Scroll down to the offending line, RClick -> Delete Node.
Awesome. I've used BitDefender for a few years, but they're expensive, and I'm not convinced that they provide added security given my habits. I'd rather ditch it and save $$ if possible.
Just in case it helps anyone else:
This seems to have happened before and you need to set Firefoxes own sandbox setting to 0 in about:config. Which I assume turns it off, but if it's in Sanboxie's already I'm OK with that if it lets me see pages without switching tabs first.
Hardly a necessity, but I like it just for its cleaning/uninstalling abilities. Not sure if its reputation's what it used to be.
We use it almost daily on all sorts of machines, mostly to remove temp files and assorted other cruft that Windows should clean up itself but somehow never quite manages to. Barely ever use the registry tool though and that mostly for the sake of completeness.
In the right circumstances it's an excellent tool that will save you hours of manual work to do the same job and also make you look like a miracle worker if the only thing wrong was a gazillion temp files messing with their Outlook.
Nintendo Network ID: AzraelRose
DropBox invite link - get 500MB extra free.
Occasionally the uninstall tool is helpful for something that won't uninstall properly through Windows 10 for whatever reason (usually not malice so much as "Yeah, this basic program is free--and we consider the Windows Store to be the modern incarnation of the German Nazi Party--so don't complain about it not having an uninstall routine in this current release."), but that's pretty rare too.
If I'm looking to uninstall something that's being persistent and I want to rip it out by the roots, I'll use Revo. It's thorough.
We don't expect it to fix major issues, but it does help out.
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!
is windows defender to be trusted? i know it has improved over time but i havent checked recent evaluations of it, and i doubt i can convince this individual to reformat.
WoWtcg and general gaming podcast
WoWtcg and gaming website
Run mbam once in a while I guess?
that's the route i was going. just out of paranoia i like to have the thorough option (combofix). basically windows defender caught something, claims it appropriately dealt with it but i like to be sure
WoWtcg and general gaming podcast
WoWtcg and gaming website