AstroSkipper

Regarding SUPERAntiSpyware I forgot to mention two additional facts in my article. First, it was certified by AppEsteem in 2023. Here is a quotation from SUPERAntiSpyware's homepage: And another interesting fact is that SUPERAntiSpyware has been added to VirusTotal's scan engines (I don't know when this exactly happened). I will add these facts to my article later as they may be helpful for potential users in their decision whether to trust this software or not. Especially for those who have never heard of it or never used it before.

As for Kaspersky Virus Removal Tool 2015, you are absolutely right. A potential user has to be very careful. Let's be clearer, this piece of software should be avoided in any case. Kaspersky Virus Removal Tool 2015 is of the really bad kind. To call it spyware would almost be trivialising it. Kaspersky shows its true colours with this tool.

I wouldn't go that far, but .rar files packed in .zip files would make me sit up and take notice.

Most antimalware scanners have problems with multi-packed archives. Personally, I never scan archives. It takes far too long on my old computer. I only scan archives when I unpack them and really need the files they contain. Regarding multi-packed archives I don't like them and usually avoid downloading such files. The method of multiple packaging has always been a strategy for hiding and foisting malware on the user of such files. Download sources that use this strategy are generally dubious.

Yes. I have successfully updated the signatures of my ancient version of Kaspersky on my Inspiron 7500 laptop under WinXP SP3, SSE-only The number of signatures was reduced to 18 million, from 20 million in my previous signature update in early May 2024. Regarding SUPERAntiSpyware this is what the developers stated on their homepage: So much for the number of signatures (or malware threats which the programme protected from) provided by manufacturers.

SUPERAntiSpyware Free and Professional X Edition SuperAntiSpyware analyses Windows systems for malware of all kinds. Both versions, the Free Edition and the Professional X Edition scan the PC for spyware, adware, malware, Trojans, dialers, worms, keyloggers, rootkits and hijackers. According to the developers, the software with an AI-Powered Detection Engine recognizes more than 1 billion malware threats. Unfortunately, real-time protection is only available in the commercial Professional X Edirion. Although it is not listed on the homepage, SUPERAntiSpyware is compatible with Windows XP (and probably with Windows Vista too). Only the more recent installers are no longer compatible with Windows XP, starting with the version 10.0.1256. The definitions database can also be updated offline. Comparison of features: Homepage: https://www.superantispyware.com/ More details about the features of each version can be found on their homepages. Homepage of the Free Edition: https://www.superantispyware.com/free-edition.html Homepage of the Professional X Edition: https://www.superantispyware.com/professional-x-edition.html Version number: 10.0.1266 Date of release: 29.04.2024 System requirements: Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7, Windows 8, Windows 8.1, Windows 10, Windows 11 Version history: https://www.superantispyware.com/producthistory.html?id=SUPERANTISPYWARE Articles, tests and tutorials: https://www.computerbild.de/artikel/cb-Tipps-Software-SuperAntiSpyware-Changelog-Tutorial-und-SuperAntiSpyware-vs.-Malwarebytes-33203535.html https://www.computerbild.de/download/SuperAntiSpyware-Free-Edition-4219359.html (German websites, please use an online translator!) https://www.clevguard.com/spyware-remover/superantispyware-review/ https://www.softpedia.com/get/Internet/Popup-Ad-Spyware-Blockers/SUPERAntiSpyware.shtml Download links: Free Edition (last installer compatible with Windows XP): https://download.filepuma.com/files/spyware-removers/superantispyware/SuperAntiSpyware_v10.0.1254.exe Free Edition (latest installer only compatible with Windows 7 and above): https://secure.superantispyware.com/SUPERAntiSpyware.exe Professional X Edition (last installer compatible with Windows XP): https://download.filepuma.com/files/spyware-removers/superantispyware/SuperAntiSpyware_v10.0.1254.exe Professional X Edition (latest installer only compatible with Windows 7 and above): https://secure.superantispyware.com/SUPERAntiSpywarePro.exe Definitions Database Updater: https://secure.superantispyware.com/SASDEFINITIONS.EXE Definitions Database Information: https://www.superantispyware.com/definitions.html Installation instructions: After installing the version 10.0.1254, you simply have to execute the internal updater to get the most recent version installed. Here is a screenshot of the Free Edition after executing the internal updater under Windows XP: The installer of the Free Edition can also be used to install the Professional X Edition if the user owns a genuine licence code. Screenshots: I have been using SUPERAntiSpyware since 2007, starting with version 3. The last compatible version with Windows 98 and ME was 4.24.1004. Since 2011, I have been in possession of a lifetime licence and have been using it in the Professional Edition ever since. SUPERAntiSpyware Professional has been XP-compatible for many years and actually runs without problems. Only a short period the XP compatibility was broken when it came to the version 10.0.1252 but then immediately restored again. However, the more recent installers are unfortunately no longer compatible with Windows XP, starting with the version 10.0.1256. This means that the actual SUPERAntiSpyware programme runs perfectly under Windows XP , but unfortunately the current programme installers do not. Besides the scanning features, the tab System Tools is very interesting and helpful for repairing PC damages caused by malware. The Free Edition is definitely worth a look and simply costs nothing. So, you can't lose anything. Cheers, AstroSkipper

Confirmed. My article and the list from the second post have been updated.

That's why I listed Avast 2015 as abandoned for months.

Don't forget that Panda is cloud-based and not a real offline scanner! The main definitions and the scan engine are located in the cloud. Therefore, it actually needs an internet connection to work as designed.

Confirmed. My article and the list from the second post have been updated.

Furthermore, I checked RogueKiller Anti-Malware. This programme also requires a CPU with at least SSE2 instruction set. Accordingly, I will edit my main article in terms of hardware requirements.

I also checked eScanAV Anti-Virus Toolkit (MWAV) 22.0.60 on an old machine with an Athlon XP 3200+ SSE-only CPU. It failed and therefore, an SSE2 CPU at least is unfortunately necessary. Accordingly, I edited my main article in terms of hardware requirements.

@Multibooter Here are the hardware requirements for eSan Anti-Virus 11: This information can be found in their user guide which is no longer available. However, I found a link via the Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20160801015535/http://download1.mwti.net/marketing/New_Artworks/eScan11/UserGuide/PDF/eScan_AV_User_Guide.zip As you can see, a Pentium II 200 MHz is the minimum hardware requirement, and this one has no SSE2 instruction set but MMX only, at least as far as I know. That means eSan Anti-Virus 11 should actually run on your old system.

You seem to have checked older versions of eScanAV. Does it mean that the version eScanAV Anti-Virus Toolkit (MWAV) 22.0.60, which I presented in my article, doesn't work on your SSE-only system?

Update notification! RogueKiller Anti-Malware has been updated to version 15.17.4 on 26.06.2024. It is still listed to be compatible with Windows XP. Accordingly, I will update my article as soon as I can confirm its XP-compatibility. Cheers, AstroSkipper

Update notification! Malware Hunter has been updated on 17.06.2024 and is now available in version 1.185.0.807. It is still listed to be compatible with Windows XP. Accordingly, I will update my article as soon as I can confirm its XP-compatibility. Cheers, AstroSkipper

Of course, Avast Antivirus 2015 is able to work offline, But that's not the point. It was never intended to work offline only. Apart from that, the number of signatures is not a measure of the quality of an antimalware programme. Who knows what Kaspersky classifies as malicious? And to be honest, it doesn't really matter. Because one can't trust a spyware programme anyway.

Avast Antivirus 2015 has been definitely EOS for many years and EOL since November of 2023. Sorry for the bad news! Here are some official links: https://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=324295.0 https://blog.avast.com/virus-definition-updates-eol And here are my posts about EOL of Avast Antivirus 2015: https://msfn.org/board/topic/184730-antimalware-firewall-and-other-security-programs-for-windows-xp-working-in-2023-and-hopefully-beyond/?do=findComment&comment=1252230 https://msfn.org/board/topic/184730-antimalware-firewall-and-other-security-programs-for-windows-xp-working-in-2023-and-hopefully-beyond/?do=findComment&comment=1256268

@Multibooter And if eScanAV 22.x does not run with your SSE only CPU, you can try the previous version eScanAV 14.x which is still available on their homepage. But one thing is clear. The air for systems with an SSE only CPU is now very thin, especially when it comes to antimalware programmes that still receive the latest virus definitions.

As I already stated, Avast Antivirus 2015 is actually not an offline programme. And there are no more new definition updates since November of 2023. For example, eScanAV Anti-Virus Toolkit (MWAV) still receive current definition updates. Did you try it on your SSE only computer? In the case of eScanAV Anti-Virus Toolkit (MWAV), the definition updates can even be downloaded for offline use on a weekly base.

Yep! I had a lot of trouble with Avast. And it is much too bloated. On the other hand, its detection rate is quite good. BTW, one can clearly see that the internet is quite forgetful, as in the case of avast! Premier 2015 10.4.2233. It is therefore always a good idea to establish an own download archive as, e.g, I have been doing this from the very first.

@Multibooter Avast Antivirus is not a pure offline scanner. You should use a real offline scanner as, for example, eScanAV Anti-Virus Toolkit (MWAV) if it works on systems with an SSE only CPU.

The BSI's job is not to recommend antivirus programmes , but to warn of security risks and dangers , as in the Kaspersky case. So, I can only say:

Thank you for your test results and for trying to shed some more light on the Kaspersky issue! TBH, your test observations are not really surprising. I have to totally agree to a part of your statements as Kaspersky of course contains and hides Russian spyware which I already wrote many months ago. And that's why the BSE in Germany recommended to remove existing Kaspersky installations and to avoid this software years ago. However, I cannot agree at all with some of your other statements or assessments. The categorisation of Western and non-Western antivirus software is simply inadequate and does not accurately reflect reality. The terms Western and Eastern need to be considered in a more differentiated way. Lumping American and European software together is completely wrong, just like Russian and Japanese software. As I have already made clear in several posts, there are clear laws regarding data protection and security in the EU, for example, and especially in Germany. And this is also monitored. However, due to the NSA's thirst for knowledge and influence, I also have considerable reservations about American security software. Besides Russian "security" software the same applies to Chinese ones. In dictatorships and other non-democratically run countries, there is no data protection and security. If a German or other core European manufacturer were to incorporate spyware into a security programme, it would be the downfall of this company, as this would violate both European and national laws. And one thing is clear. This would come to light quite quickly and would have bitter consequences.

When I said "same modules from one production series", I actually meant modules manufactured directly one after the other with consecutive serial numbers. That is best.