Jump to content

Does Spybot SD Work on Win98 ?


JorgeA

Recommended Posts

IMHO, it's a fallacy in S&D in that it loads all of the definitions into memory before the scan. If you install without the updates, it loads up more-or-less ok but as soon as the defs are updated, you get bit. Found this out with a PC I was refurbishing with 128mb. Had to use it in Safe Mode to minimize memory usage. I had made a post on the forum as to the as-stated "minimum memory requirements" in the specs, but never got a response. It would be nice if it was redesigned to use on-the-fly file-access for the defs. Lots of anti-vir (etc. eg Symantec) load up the memory and/or the registry (same difference re: memory).

Slow but does complete in Safe Mode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


With a fresh install of SpybotS&D 1.6

and the latest definitions (April 7th)

on a 366 Celeron with 128MB RAM

1.5 GB free on a 3GB hard drive

Windows 98 First Edition 4.10.1998

Nothing running but Spybot, Explorer, Systray

Swapfile managed by Windows

Time to open: 6 min

Time to scan: 3 hr, 5 min

Scan ended normally with a green checkmark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO, it's a fallacy in S&D in that it loads all of the definitions into memory before the scan. If you install without the updates, it loads up more-or-less ok but as soon as the defs are updated, you get bit. Found this out with a PC I was refurbishing with 128mb. Had to use it in Safe Mode to minimize memory usage. I had made a post on the forum as to the as-stated "minimum memory requirements" in the specs, but never got a response. It would be nice if it was redesigned to use on-the-fly file-access for the defs. Lots of anti-vir (etc. eg Symantec) load up the memory and/or the registry (same difference re: memory).

Slow but does complete in Safe Mode.

submix8c,

My Win98 PC won't finish a Spybot scan even in Safe Mode. Keep getting that same Invalid Page Fault.

I agree with you, though, that the program could be designed better.

--JorgeA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spybot loads its definitions into memory prior to scanning. Most of the definition lists are trojans, which may duplicate your anti-virus software scans and thus can be safely eliminated. Eliminate these and other non-spyware lists from the Spybot SD scan, and Spybot should have substantially less memory requirement and thus run just fine. (To do this, open Spybot, select "Settings", then select "File Sets", then uncheck the boxes relating to trojans and "Possibly UnPopular Software" and other lower priority lists, if needed).

Note, by cutting back the file sets in this way, I have successfully run Spybot on a Pentium II era computer, and in reasonable time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With a fresh install of SpybotS&D 1.6

and the latest definitions (April 7th)

on a 366 Celeron with 128MB RAM

1.5 GB free on a 3GB hard drive

Windows 98 First Edition 4.10.1998

Nothing running but Spybot, Explorer, Systray

Swapfile managed by Windows

Time to open: 6 min

Time to scan: 3 hr, 5 min

Scan ended normally with a green checkmark

georg,

Spybot behaves much the same on my computer -- about 7-8 minutes to load, then between 2 and 3 hours to scan. (3:15 the last time, but some times it's taken 8 hours)

The main difference is that the program actually finishes the process on yours, while on mine it crashes at the very end.

--JorgeA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest wsxedcrfv

I haven't run spybot SD on my system for a while, so I updated it with current definitions and then ran it. It took 31 minutes to run (CPU = P4 2.6 ghz, 64 GB hard drive that's 95% full).

One thing it found that has me puzzled: It identified this registry entry:

HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000}

It's associating that entry with some malware known as "CommonName", and some web searches also link that CLSID with CommonName / ToolbarCNBabe. Is it normal to have a CLSID with all zero's like that?

In the registry tree under that CLSID I have this:

HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000}\Implemented Categories\{7DD95801-9882-11CF-9FA9-00AA006C42C4}

The item 7DD95801-9882-11CF-9FA9-00AA006C42C4 actually appears twice. No keys or key-values associated with either of them. When I search the registry for 7DD95801-9882-11CF-9FA9-00AA006C42C4, I find it turns up in a lot of places, but I don't see any DLL's or other files associated with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JorgeA -

I don't believe SSD is the problem, nor Win 98, nor your system configuration.

If the memory modules are good, then my understanding of page fault is that another process is stealing that memory location, so that when SSD goes back to it, the data it expects to find is no longer there. If that is true, the problem lies not with SSD, but with another running process that does not play well with SSD.

Look at Start > Programs > Accessories > System Tools > System Information

Expand Hardware Resources and look at what is loaded into memory.

Then expand Software Environment and look at 16 & 32 bit modules, Running Tasks and Startup Programs.

You can also try the SSD tool. On the main screen be sure Mode (upper left) is Advanced, then expand Tools (lower left), be sure Process List is checked, then choose it from the list at the left.

Look carefully at anything that is not by Microsoft or Safer Networking Ltd.

Good luck, georg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@wsxedcrfv - Probably some "hang-over" entries left from another scanner which deleted "something" using their own brand of "known malware database". Many vendors delete what they recognize but sometimes not all is "listed". Wouldn't hurt to allow S&D to remove "what it sees".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good advice from georg, et al. I recommend you also rule out memory and other hardware issues as a possible cause of your problems by running various diagnostic tools like Memtest86, Windows Memory Diagnostic, etc. Spybot runs fine on my Win98 systems although quite slowly as others have mentioned. On my slowest system (mobile Celeron 700mHz, 192MB RAM), it usually takes about 5-7 mins to load and around 1.5 hrs to scan my 6GB Win98 partition. I've never encountered any page fault or other errors, although after the last definitions update Spybot locked up after initial loading and eventually stopped responding in Task Manager for some reason (on all of my systems). It subsequently worked fine after reloading again.

Edited by Prozactive
Link to comment
Share on other sites

wsxedcrfv -

The following link gives a pretty good report on this toolbar/malware:

http://www.threatexpert.com/report.aspx?md5=16990df48b26fd5d2ea7b80fa9dcdcd0

SSD isn't the only one that thinks it's a threat. You can google some of these also.

The following threats are known to be associated with the file "cnbabe.dll":

Adware.CommonName [PC Tools]

Adware-CommonName [McAfee]

not-a-virus:AdWare.Win32.CommonName.c [Kaspersky Lab]

not-a-virus:AdWare.Win32.CommonName.f [Kaspersky Lab]

Adware.CommonName [symantec]

BrowserModifier:Win32/CommonName [Microsoft]

Adware.CommonName.R [PC Tools]

Adware-CommonName.dll [McAfee]

Mal/Generic-A [sophos]

not-a-virus:AdWare.Win32.CommonName.k [Kaspersky Lab] 1

Troj/Babeie-A [sophos]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On my Windows Me Pc--with 667 processor and 128 mb,

I had "all" recent updates for Search and Destroy;

and after waiting 45 minutes for it to start, I just could not take it any more and

uninstalled it.

I then re-installed it, but did not chose the update as it is being installed feature.

It opened in only about 3 minutes after this fresh install.

Then I went on line and installed only the maleware updates, and the def/dat files,

leaving out all the hijack, dialers, trojans etc. Also no IE protection or tea timer stuff.

It opened in about 6 to 7 minutes, and finished scanning in a little less than one hour.

It found two instances of "double-click" and I was able to terminate the program the usual way---not having to use Ctrl/Alt/Delete---as is the case in my 98se machines.

What is odd, is that with "all" the updates installed (except IE protection and Tea Timer) on my 133-64mb Win 98se PC--it still opened in about twenty or so minutes! Yet on this faster Me PC--forty five minutes and no thing happening was just too much to take.

Seems like their are a lot of variables at work here--!

It's rather sad, that I cannot use all the updates they provide (on this PC), considering how the AV progs are stopping support for 9x. It looks like Search and Destroy is trying to fulfill a sort of Anti-Virus type role too---being able to find things other than just the usual spy-ware. So for all the features of it's bloat (good bloat) to be used---one should up the memory as much as possible.

Of course whenever I use it, I shut all other progs off. But even then, 45 minutes and nothing is too much for even someone as patient as me to take.

All people having trouble with it should not give up though---for the effort to get it working right is well worth it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JorgeA -

I don't believe SSD is the problem, nor Win 98, nor your system configuration.

If the memory modules are good, then my understanding of page fault is that another process is stealing that memory location, so that when SSD goes back to it, the data it expects to find is no longer there. If that is true, the problem lies not with SSD, but with another running process that does not play well with SSD.

Look at Start > Programs > Accessories > System Tools > System Information

Expand Hardware Resources and look at what is loaded into memory.

Then expand Software Environment and look at 16 & 32 bit modules, Running Tasks and Startup Programs.

You can also try the SSD tool. On the main screen be sure Mode (upper left) is Advanced, then expand Tools (lower left), be sure Process List is checked, then choose it from the list at the left.

Look carefully at anything that is not by Microsoft or Safer Networking Ltd.

Good luck, georg

Hi georg,

Thanks very much for the tips. I'm trying to follow them -- this is deeper than I've ever dug into any of my computers!

I opened up the Process List under SSD. Everything that's there appears to be something that's supposed to be there.

If I understand the purpose of your suggestions, I should be looking for memory conflicts, where processes or hardware are competing for the same RAM turf. Do I have that right?

If that's the case, then I can say that I've gone through the hardware portion under System Information, and am slowly making my way through the software part. In terms of hardware, all I could find was the following:

xF4100000 - xF4100FFF ATI Rage Pro AGP 2X

xF4100000 - xF45FFFFF Intel 82443BX Pentium® II Processor to AGP controller

Those are the only two components that seem to be working in the same memory range.

But these are the originals that came with the computer 11 years ago, so if that's the problem then I suppose it's been a problem since the beginning. However, Spybot did run fine for about five years (2003-2008), only developing its problem since sometime in the spring or summer 2008.

Would I be correct in ruling out a hardware conflict?

In terms of software, the only 32-bit modules that even have 2008 dates (the year the problem started) are from Norton Internet Security. Two points about that: they are from January 2008 (months before the problem started), and I've been running NIS on that computer since before I ever heard of Spybot.

(Note: I've tried running a Spybot scan with all the Norton features disabled, but it doesn't help.)

Would it help to upload a screenshot of the "invalid page fault" details?

Thanks again for your help.

--JorgeA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JorgeA - Nice to hear from you. I was thinking this thread had gone dead. After a lot of googling and reading tips from others who complained that SSD is slow now on older systems, I didn't find any with the page fault issue.

relef's suggestion to uncheck file sets did not markedly improve load times on my W98FE system.

cyberformer's comments about Windows Me match my experience. Load time is even slower.

A test of some other tips worsened load time, but amazingly did cut the scan time from 3 hrs 5 min to one hour, 5 min!

It apparently takes a lot of processor cycles to keep refreshing the SSD screen. On a system with an older processor and integrated graphics, it helps to minimize all windows, including the Spybot window. That's a little awkward because you can't keep track of progress without looking. Nothing pops up at the end to tell you it's done. I also limited the number of visible icons to six, and changed the priority setting to "Time Critical (blocks everything else)"

Advanced Mode > Settings (lower left) > Settings again from the list > Follow down the tree to Scan Priority

I'm thinking the "blocks everything else" might help in your situation. I'm assuming your ATI Rage Pro AGP 2X video is integrated on the motherboard, so the minimized window would help there. Be advised with the Scan Priority set that high, restoring the window to check progress is a very sluggish affair.

My conclusion is that SSD is more processor dependent than memory dependent, and therefore there may not be anything that can be done about the load times.

To answer your specific questions, and comment upon your last post:

Even if you have used the same programs for years, it may be that the steadily increasing size of the SSD program and updates is creating memory management issues. A lot of software was written when systems were sold with 32MB. I've put 500MB in some of these systems, and it appears to work, but the manual often says the system is limited to 256mb. It's not just the "12 year old operating system", but also the 12 year old chipset technology.

I'm not objective about Norton Internet Security. I share the common prejudice that the older versions of Norton are resource hogs, and don't play well with other software.

Perhaps someone here can make a judgement on the screenshot where the page fault occurred. Not me. I was really expecting there would be some small monitoring or utility program that came with your printer that would turn out to be the culprit. Computers are complicated and there could be a hardware conflict or fault, but I'm the type to just swap it out and try another, not a real diagnostician.

It won't cost you anything to clean up the desktop, set the Scan Priority to "Time Critical", start SSD and then minimize the window. If it works for you as it did for me, you'll know the results in about an hour. - georg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest wsxedcrfv

SSD isn't the only one that thinks it's a threat. You can google some of these also.

The following threats are known to be associated with the file "cnbabe.dll":

I don't have cnbabe.dll on my system.

I need to know what specifically I should have in my registry *under* this key:

HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000}

In order to actually have this so-called malware on my system.

And I'd like to know if there is any condition where having such a CLSID (with all zero's) is valid or legit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...