CA purhases PestPatrol 1

[MasterRacker]

http://www.theregister.com/2004/08/17/ca_snags_pestpatrol/

Jeff
The future is already here - it's just not widely distributed yet...

 

[2ffat]

We are currently evaluating PestPatrol. It remains to be seen how CA will deal with it, whether CA will keep it a seperate product or roll it into one of their other products.


James P. Cottingham
-----------------------------------------
^{To determine how long it will take to write and debug a program, take your best estimate, multiply that by two, add one, and convert to the next higher units.}

 

[bfralia]

I've had experience with quite a few great products that CA bought over the years - all the way back into mainframe days.

They buy then they CA then it goes to crap! Their service gives new meaning to meaningless.

 

[cmeagan656]

bfralia:

How true. We purchased eTrust InocuateIT v6.0(antivirus) from them a three years ago. At the time it was the only one that allowed central management of all clients and servers and the Exchange Option was the only one at the time that allowed you to block specific attachments. Also, the old InocuLan product (before it was purchase by CA) worked really well.

We had nothing but problems the first 6 months and you had to pay $95 US each time you opened an incident. Oh, you could use their free email support, but it would take at least a week to get a reply, if you got one at all.

What really bugged me was that they rolled out version 7.0 and it contained the same bugs that were in version 6.0 plus some new ones. After testing 7.0 on a client and workstation we rolled back to 6.0 and are still there.

CA's sales reps kept phoning me telling me my upgrade protection was about to expire and offering to renew it at a good price (double that of the reseller I originally purchase the product through).

If we hadn't already invested so much time and money into eTrust InoculateIT we'd go with another solution. We've got it running pretty smoothly now so we're staying with it but when the drop the signature updates for 6.0 we'll be going to another solution.

Cheers.

 

[Xemus]

Interesting to see that CA is trying to become top dog in the malware market. Looks like Microsoft is giving them pretty heavy backing too (at least until MS releases its own antivirus product, which will probably be within the next two years).
I wasn't real impressed with their AV, although I've never been really impressed with Pest Patrol, but it should be interesting to see where they take it.

http://www.closedsocket.com

 

[MasterRacker]

Here's a little more info:

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1636392,00.asp

I've been telling people for a couple of years that IMHO spyware/adware was a bigger problem than viruses. Whether CA does a good job or not, at least someone high profile is taking an interest in the problem.


Jeff
The future is already here - it's just not widely distributed yet...

 

[bfralia]

MasterRacker - I haven't seen it for a couple of years but I have over the last six months or so, seen a dramatic increase in spyware. I've had several computers that more or less became useless until I cleaned them. One had 637 spyware items on it according to adaware.

Virus attacks come in spurts while spyware is a constant daily hassle. Right now, McAfee VSE 7.1 will detect spyware but isn't set to block it until the new version 8.0i comes out at any moment...Assuming it gets through beta.

I believe all the A/V companies are really getting into the spyware business.

 

[ftechguy]

From article:

One of the things that caught CA's eye about [Pestpatrol's] offerings was their capability to remove spyware once it has detected it on a user's PC.

and that's a feature of note?!?

 

[MasterRacker]

To some degree it is. The spyware/adware issue is stickier than viruses. Actually removing adware open you up to legal attacks from some of the advertising companies who can clam that their tracking bugs were installed by the end-user opting in in the first place. This is one of the reasons the AV people have been staying out of this one.

Another is that the mechanisms by which some of these pests operate are quite different from normal viruses and worms. Removal of some of the browser helper objects can actually break the user's network completely.

It wasn't until the advent of BHO's and some of the nastier malwares such as Cool Web Search became actively destructive that the AV communitity started noticing. A lot of end-users don't know the difference between spyware and viruses and don't care - they just want their machine fixed and protected. From the AV vendors perspective, the risk of suits from advertisers is now outweighed by the risk of consumers thinking their porduct is faulty because it didn't protect their machine.


Jeff
The future is already here - it's just not widely distributed yet...

 

[2ffat]

I read an interesting article about why some AV companies are reluctant to remove Spyware (

http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2004/081604spyware.html).

The question arises, "What if the EULA of the software specifies that info is being passed along. What are the legalities of removing the software?"

James P. Cottingham
-----------------------------------------
^{To determine how long it will take to write and debug a program, take your best estimate, multiply that by two, add one, and convert to the next higher units.}

 

[MasterRacker]

Exactly the problem I was alluding to. When you look at the open attacks the CWS writers have waged against spywareinfo.org and some of these BHOs that bringa system to its knees though, the AV people are now ready to risk active removal.


Jeff
The future is already here - it's just not widely distributed yet...

 

[ftechguy]

Good points, MasterRacker. Regarding the legal risks for the AV companies, I do recall that Mcafee now detects adware/spyware as "potentially unwanted" programs/files and doesn't remove them automatically like it does it with viruses. The user has to actually click and choose to get rid of them.
Well just the way the internet is becoming..