Spyware, viruses, & security : New SpySweeper With AntiVirus-5.2.3.2120

SpySweeper 5.2.3.2120 Disappointing

Participating in the beta version of SS 5.2, I was cautiously optimistic that Webroot had a worthwhile advancement. Since one should NOT have more than one real-time A/V active and since I already have an A/V suite I like, that component was disabled (but not on-demand A/V scanning). (Remember: the same principle of not running more than one real-time A/V scanner also applies for anti-spyware and firewall software.) My SS subscription was extended by a month for testing the beta, Webroot said in the announcement.

I contacted Webroot through their Beta Reporting to learn the specs of the Sophos A/V engine they are using: did it scan e-mail (incoming or bi-directionally); would it scan all files and folders, including compressed; would it monitor IM, for example - and to clarify that I did indeed need to pay an additional amount for virus definition updates, but did not receive a reply. I did, however, notice a slight additional 'hit' to the CPU over SS 5.0.7.1608.

When SS 5.2.3.2120 was released on 23 Oct, I downloaded and installed it. Immediately, I experienced a system slowdown. When opening other programs, loading time was noticeably increased. Opening a new page in I.E. 7.0, or clicking on active links on a page (and in e-mail) resulted in a wait-time of 15 to 30 seconds before the page would open and fully load; CPU use would remain at or near 100%, as measured by the Task Manager. (My computer is a Dell Inspiron 8200, P-4M, Win XP Pro SP2 with all updates, on broadband.)

Calling Webroot's tech assistance revealed that, indeed, the Sophos A/V did not scan e-mail (nor IM); there was no information available on files and folders, nor any feedback [yet] about system slow-downs. I plan to contact them again by telephone this week. In the meantime, I un-installed SS 5.2.3.2120 and re-installed SS 5.0.7.1608.

I would agree with an earlier comment that perhaps Webroot would be better advised to offer separate programs for each specific function, which could be integrated under a common Control Console. That would allow consumers to chose individual security components and - in theory, at least - make each component smaller and less of a resource hog. (As always, compatibility issues will become a factor.)

To conclude, I am not particularly enamored of the direction Webroot seem to be heading.