locked
McAfee SiteAdvisor - Interfering Program??!! Red Status is BAD DECISION RRS feed

  • Question

  •  

    I cannot believe that Onecare now says that McAfee SiteAdvisor is an interfering program.  It is not.  It has been running fine with Onecare for over a year and is Still running fine.

     

    AND there is no way to set Onecare to Ignore the fact that I am running SiteAdvisor?  You are now flagging the fact that I am running another helpful program in the same way as if I had a malicious virus or trojan.

     

    This is simply wrong. 

     

    Is this a Marketing Ploy by Microsoft or What?

     

    You need to immediately fix this issue by either rethinking your flagging of SiteAdvisor as bad, or allowing us to 'ignore this warning' and set status to green.

     

    The fact that my onecare status is now RED FOR NO GOOD REASON is horrible.

     

    This new issue you have introduced into Onecare is a BAD IDEA>

     

    Please fix it.

     

    Friday, February 1, 2008 1:45 PM

Answers

  • Apparently, McAfee Site Advisor has been found to impact system stability and/or performance when running with OneCare. OneCare requires that the IE Phishing filter is turned on and active, so running that and McAfee Site Advisor *has* to be having a negative impact on browsing performance at the very least, but I'm asking for the OneCare team to respond to the new conflict reports that are starting to show up in the forums today.

    I would suggest that you contact support to report your concerns, but I am reporting this concern, too. I believe that OneCare needs to provide details of what programs are deemed to be conflicts and why - perhaps on the main OneCare web site in the FAQ area or perhaps within Instant Help.

    -steve

     

    Friday, February 1, 2008 3:57 PM
    Moderator
  • I'm havig the same problems with Mcafee Site Advisor and Ad-Aware 2007 as everyoe else.

    My temperary fix for Site Advisor was to uninstall Site Advisor install Fire Fox then install Site Advisor in Fire Fox, I haven't installed it to IE7 and up to now no conflicts with OneCare.

    It looks like as long as Site Advisor is not installed on IE7 it works ok, I can still use IE7 without conflicts.

    I'll be using Fire Fox until Microsoft comes up with a perminent  fix  !!

    I haven't found a solution for Ad-Aware yet.


    Wednesday, February 6, 2008 11:34 AM

All replies

  •  

    I received a new update this morning. After restarting my computer windows live one care went to red. I received this message informing me to uninstall McAffee SiteAdvisor.


    OneCare is maintaining your PC and making the following programs unnecessary. Keeping these programs may affect the operation of OneCare and cause severe performance problems for your computer.


    McAffee SiteAdvisor is a program that will inform me of potential harmful sites when I do a search in Internet explorer or Firefox. I do not intend to uninstall this very useful tool. I can live with a red OneCare icon but it is very annoying. Anyone know why OneCare has decided to pick on McAffee SiteAdvisor? What can I do about it?

    Friday, February 1, 2008 3:47 PM
  • I received a new update to Live OneCare this morning and installed without problem.  I was a bit dismayed that the update

    requested that the program McAfee Site Adviser be removed from the computer.  Although not a windows program, I found this free program very helpful when addressing unknown web sites.  It allowed me to choose which web pages were safe to open.  Although OneCare stated that it was protecting my computer, how will it advise me which sites are safe to visit?
    Friday, February 1, 2008 3:51 PM
  • Apparently, McAfee Site Advisor has been found to impact system stability and/or performance when running with OneCare. OneCare requires that the IE Phishing filter is turned on and active, so running that and McAfee Site Advisor *has* to be having a negative impact on browsing performance at the very least, but I'm asking for the OneCare team to respond to the new conflict reports that are starting to show up in the forums today.

    I would suggest that you contact support to report your concerns, but I am reporting this concern, too. I believe that OneCare needs to provide details of what programs are deemed to be conflicts and why - perhaps on the main OneCare web site in the FAQ area or perhaps within Instant Help.

    -steve

     

    Friday, February 1, 2008 3:57 PM
    Moderator
  • Steve, I have OneCare running on four computers, two XP Home, one XP Pro, and a new Vista based desktop.  All four computers were also running McAfee Site Adviser without any problems or conflicts.  I am able to surf the Internet without a slow down, system stability or performance problem.  I do genealogy research and am on the computer everyday, most the day searching web pages.

     

    I would hate to think that Microsoft and OneCare are creating a conflict or compatibility problem just to eliminate another vendor's program.  Site Adviser is a very useful tool in avoiding undesirable web pages that contain harmful links, viruses, spammers and worms. 

     

    I would suggest that OneCare rewrite the program to correct the compatibility problem, rather than ask us to remove a useful Internet tool or at least give us the choice to remove the program.  OneCare should have sent out an advisory to let customers know that there could be a problem.  I would venture to say, that those who were having problems, it was more that Site Adviser causing them.  Trust me, I am a firm believer in OneCare, and there should be a way to resolve this conflict.

    Friday, February 1, 2008 5:09 PM
  • I don't disagree that the warning about conflicting programs that clearly appeared to be working in the past could be handled better. As such, I've expressed my concerns and pointed out this thread and the other for AdAware to the OneCare team.

    -steve

     

    Friday, February 1, 2008 5:35 PM
    Moderator
  • Absolutely AGREE!  Unless there is an ironclad technical reason for this, (seems unlikely since OneCare is NOT providing this functionality) MS has blown it bigtime!  If some suit has made VP for this weird decision, then MS has one too many VPs.

    Either give us an equivalent alternative, or remove this idiotic alert!

    Friday, February 1, 2008 11:13 PM
  • I will let my OneCare stay red.  I do not intend to remove Site Advisor Plus.  I'm sure these "GEEKS" can find a way to make the two programs compatible. Each program serves a different purpose.  I have used Site Advisor Plus for over a year and have found it to be one of the most helpful programs around.  Is there no end to microsoft's greed?  Please post if anyone finds an answer.

     

    Saturday, February 2, 2008 12:18 AM
  • I would suggest that those of you asking here also go ask support for McAfee SiteAdvisor.

     

    In their online Technical Support, FAQs and Search for SiteAdvisor under Install/Uninstall, Removing incompatible third party applications document they include the following in their List of Incompatible Applications, among many others.

     

    Microsoft           Windows Live OneCare

    Microsoft           Windows Defender (Beta 2)

    Microsoft           One Care

     

    I have no idea why SiteAdvisor and OneCare would conflict, but it appears that both the OneCare and SiteAdvisor support structures believe they do.

     

    Since the Internet Explorer 7 Phishing Filter performs a similar, though not exactly the same functionality, this may suffice for some users. I'm again not aware if this is what is creating the supposed conflict or not.

     

    OneCareBear

    Sunday, February 3, 2008 5:29 PM
    Moderator
  • You folks seem to be doing your best to ailienate me as a customer even though I've been with you from the start of Live One Care. First you accidentally cancel my Live One Care subscription while I am on the road and it takes 3 days to get your antivirus protection back, now you tell me I can't keep my favorite programs, Ad Aware and Site Advisor, because it conflicts with your One Care Live.  Well, if it comes down to choosing those programs or Live One Care all I can say is McAffee makes a great antivirus program that does not conflict with Site Advisor or Ad Aware. Wake up Microsoft, you're acting like you have a Monopoly on Anit Virus.  You need to change this fast, or your customers will change you.
    Sunday, February 3, 2008 5:53 PM
  • Count me as one among the people that have been using both OneCare and SiteAdvisor without "issues" for a long time.  I do not appreciate MicroSoft dictating to me that I musr remove ANY program that I want to run.  The phishing filter and SiteAdvisor DO NOT have even close to the same functionality.  If OneCare wants to notify me of a possible issue and give me options (like to ignore) - that is ok.  If OneCare has a no option - delete it, I then have issues.

      I was around from the begining and even tolerated the "not till next release" of the back-up program issues.  Then there was the OS update without permission or even notification.  Microsoft seems to be really determined to dictate and control users by creating "Microsoft only" closed systems.  I am not a Linux or Mac person.  I have been using MS since the DOS days.  IMO what made Microsoft was choices and options.  Seems like times change.

       I am just one person with a small consulting business, but I can no longer recommend my clients use OneCare.  My subscription expires in April.  Lucky for me there are a number of alternatives available.




    Sunday, February 3, 2008 6:02 PM
  • OneCareBear,

     

    You do not seem to understand that Site Adviser is an elective Internet tool, where as Live OneCare is our choice of virus and spyware protection software.  We should not have to ask McAfee anything; we are not using their virus protection program, and could care less what programs they have on their list. 

     

    Those of us who use Live OneCare do so because Microsoft wrote it, for Microsoft operating systems.  We believe it to be the most compatible program to use.  There seems to be a number of customers out there who are not having problems with the two programs side by side.  I for one have not had any problems with Live OneCare of any kind; that being because I maintain my computers, do not download programs from non trusted sites, remove unused programs, temp files, scan the hard drives and defrag them regularly.

     

    Those people, who are having the problems I would venture to say again, as in my previous post, do not do so, and more than likely have other conflicting problems.  As customers, we do not want to be put in the middle of your battle for supremacy with McAfee. 

     

    To use Site Adviser should be our choice, not yours!  Your responsibility is to advise us of a possible conflict, the causes, and what symptoms to look for or resolve the conflict issue; NOT take upon yourself to deny us, the consumer the right to choose which programs we will be allowed to use.

     

    If and when, Microsoft purchases Yahoo, will Google be the next program that is no longer compatible?  If you continue down this road with this type of attitude, you can expect more and more consumers going to other vendors.

     

    Sunday, February 3, 2008 6:49 PM
  • Billg,

     

    Seems to me that if both OneCare and McAfee Support indicate there is a conflict, there must be.

     

    I'm not making any judgements about this, all of you are. If you really care, you need to attempt all paths to determine why this is and whether it might be fixed. This would include contacting the company that produces the application being called out.

     

    Steve has already indicated he has requested that someone from the OneCare Team respond to explain the conflict, so what can be done here has occured and will have to wait for that response. Until that happens all we can do is make you aware of everything we've discovered, which is what I did above.

     

    Ranting about such an issue here will get you no where, since these forums are simply volunteer and peer help, not Technical Support.

     

    OneCareBear

     

    Sunday, February 3, 2008 7:06 PM
    Moderator
  • This morning I went to re-install Live OneCare on a laptop that I had reformatted.  When the installation began it checked for updates and presented a choice to me:  Uninstall McAfee Site Advisor and Lavasoft Ad-Aware or installation will not continue.  WIthout any warning or giving me a choice, I was suddenly put in the position of having to uninstall two products I have been using without issues or risk leaving my laptop unprotected.  I did uninstall them, but after the installation and scan is complete for Live OneCare, I will reinstall them. 

     

    The approach and stance of Microsoft is outrageous.  First, Microsoft is assuming I use IE7 with its anti-phishing feature.  I use Firefox.  Second, MS is probably assuming I am using Lavasoft Ad-Aware Pro with the real time feature called Ad-Watch.  I am not.  I am using the free version with no real time applet running.  It is simply a scanner that I pull up from time to time to further clean my system of annoyances like tracking cookies that MS apparently has decided is unimportant.

     

    So MS makes a "one size fits all" decision giving the end user no choice.  Absolutely unacceptable.  I will turn away from MS Live OneCare before I abandon use of these products.  I just checked and all the competitors are now offering 3-user pack competitive products so switching to one of them is certainly attractive.

     

    What's next?  Where will it end?  SpywareBlaster?  RoboForm?   etc.

     

    I also read where MS Live OneCare has a "coming soon" feature where it will decide what start-up programs should be disabled.  I do not know the details or how accurate this information is, but I certainly hope if there is some truth to this, that MS gives the end user the option to disable MS's attempt to disable other programs.

     

    This all adds up to MS crossing the line once again as was recently demonstrated with their decision in stealth fashion to decide for all of us that for our own protection, we could no longer open older archived Office documents.  MS is slowly but surely pushing me to other non-MS applications.  Can Linux be the ultimate switch for me?  Time will surely tell.

    Sunday, February 3, 2008 8:02 PM
  •  

    Judgments / rantings, I don't think anyone has made any judgments or rants.  The whole idea of a forum is to express your views and opinions.  So far our opinion is that OneCare should not have denied us the right to use another vendor's program without an explanation or the choice to continue using it at our own risk. 

     

    You, as a volunteer representative of OneCare or "peer" help should be more sympathetic to those of us who, and I hate this expression, feel disenfranchised.  I have made my feelings know to the Tech Support department, for what good it will do.  You also, like Steve should be letting them know the negative responses you are getting, and not berating consumers for expressing their views. 

     

    If you don’t like writing response or answering questions, I would suggest you do something else!!

    Sunday, February 3, 2008 8:16 PM
  • I can only agree that there should be a better explanation of why, and until that is known I can only state that the reason for the message is unknown, not incorrect.

     

    I have supplied the information I have found available on the McAfee Support Site relating to incompatibility with OneCare, which is no more informative than the OneCare message, though it agrees with it.

     

    I spend my time here trying to find the technical solutions or information that can help people, which in this case is lacking from both organizations. The request for the OneCare Team to respond has already been made so there is nothing we can do but wait.

     

    I still believe that unless someone with the SiteAdvisor program contacts McAfee Support directly about their stated incompatibility, this issue may not be resolved. That's my only opinion at present, since I don't yet have enough information to formulate any others from a technical standpoint.

     

    OneCareBear

    Sunday, February 3, 2008 9:47 PM
    Moderator
  • I also have been using McAfee site advisor and AdAware by lavasoft for over a year with no problems...this needs to be corrected by OneCare.
    Sunday, February 3, 2008 9:59 PM
  •  ya same here i have been google searching for long time now,I sure hope they get this fixed,I even uninstalled Mcaffee and still is red

     

    Sunday, February 3, 2008 10:39 PM
  •  Billg wrote:

     

    Judgments / rantings, I don't think anyone has made any judgments or rants.  The whole idea of a forum is to express your views and opinions.  So far our opinion is that OneCare should not have denied us the right to use another vendor's program without an explanation or the choice to continue using it at our own risk. 

     

    You, as a volunteer representative of OneCare or "peer" help should be more sympathetic to those of us who, and I hate this expression, feel disenfranchised.  I have made my feelings know to the Tech Support department, for what good it will do.  You also, like Steve should be letting them know the negative responses you are getting, and not berating consumers for expressing their views. 

     

    If you don’t like writing response or answering questions, I would suggest you do something else!!

    In defense of OneCareBear, his response is actually quite helpful in pointing out that there are two sides to the story.

    Yes, we, the moderators of this forum are letting our contacts on the OneCare team know that there is an uproar over these two changes.

    As soon as we learn more about the details, we'll post. Hopefully, we can get an official post from the OneCare team about the specifics of the conflicts that both McAfee (for Site Advisor) and Lavasoft (for AdAware) have acknowledged.

     

    And, yes, you should feel free to post your concerns here. We do report the concerns to Microsoft and many of the Program Managers for OneCare read the forums, though they may not reply often.

     

    Reporting your concerns to support is a good path, too. And, reporting your concern to the vendor of the conflicting software is also a good idea as they would have an interest in keeping you as a user of their product, so eliminating the conflict, if possible, from their side would be a good thing to do.

    -steve

    Monday, February 4, 2008 2:23 PM
    Moderator
  • totally totally agree, wants  me to remove McAfee + Adware. Why? All thee have coexisted since I installed Windows Live Onecare  I find that all 3 programs complement one  another What will happen if I don't remove them?

     

    Monday, February 4, 2008 5:22 PM
  • OneCare will remain in red status, but will otherwise work unless whatever conflict that it is warning about causes behavior that can't be explained.

    -steve

     

    Tuesday, February 5, 2008 1:02 AM
    Moderator
  • It seemed like the last update to One Care was when the problem appered on my laptop so i tried to to roll back to an earlier restore point when i did this One Care would not even open so I unrestored to present config. , One Care came back on and seems to be working fine then I noticed that the last update for microsoft (.NET Framework2.0 Service Pack1 KB110806) and (.NET Framework 3.0 Service Pack 1 KB292300) must have been uninstalled when I rolled back because I have the Yellow sheild in the tray ready to install these updates again, but now One Care seems to be Happy with Site advisor now don't know how long this will last but will not install these 2 update for now and will see if it lasts, while i try to find out if I need these updates.

     

    Don't know if this is helpfull in any way but tried to E-mail customer support but they just directed my to billing?

    Tuesday, February 5, 2008 4:32 AM
  • Mike Bo,

     

    You would well advised to delete Site Adviser and install the .net Framework updates.  Here is what they are:

     

    The Microsoft .NET Framework version 2.0 redistributable package installs the .NET Framework runtime and associated files required to run applications developed to target the .NET Framework v2.0.

    The .NET Framework version 2.0 improves scalability and performance of applications with improved caching, application deployment and updating with ClickOnce, support for the broadest array of browsers and devices with ASP.NET 2.0 controls and services. For more information on the .NET Framework 2.0, click here.

     

    The Microsoft .NET Framework 3.0 is the new managed code programming model for Windows®. It combines the power of the .NET Framework version 2.0 with new technologies for building applications that have visually compelling user experiences, seamless communication across technology boundaries, and the ability to support a wide range of business processes. These new technologies are Windows Presentation Foundation, Windows Communication Foundation, Windows Workflow Foundation, and Windows CardSpace. The .NET Framework 3.0 is included as part of the Windows Vista™ operating system; you can install it or uninstall it using Windows Features Control Panel. This redistributable package is for Windows XP and Windows Server 2003.

    These updates are runtime files that are consider important updates.

     

    Let the OneCare engineers see if they can find a work around the Site Adviser problem; I hope enough of us have expressed our displeasure so they will resolve the issue.  These two updates may lay at the heart of the problem.  I had not experience any problems, but only installed these updates yesterday, after removing Site Adviser. 

     

    Billg

    Tuesday, February 5, 2008 3:54 PM
  • I found OneCare and Site Advisor worked perfectly satisfactorily with each other.  Now OneCare has made an update that causes a red symbol if Site Advisor is installed.  I smell a rat.  Seems like Microsoft are trying to hinder a competitive product.  They have already been criticized and fined by European Authorities for this sort of activity but apparently this makes no impact on the mighty Microsoft.  Perhaps instead of uninstalling Site Advisor, we'll uninstall OneCare.

    Tuesday, February 5, 2008 11:49 PM
  • I've merged your post into the thread where this topic is being discussed at length.

    -steve

     

    Wednesday, February 6, 2008 1:21 AM
    Moderator
  • I'm havig the same problems with Mcafee Site Advisor and Ad-Aware 2007 as everyoe else.

    My temperary fix for Site Advisor was to uninstall Site Advisor install Fire Fox then install Site Advisor in Fire Fox, I haven't installed it to IE7 and up to now no conflicts with OneCare.

    It looks like as long as Site Advisor is not installed on IE7 it works ok, I can still use IE7 without conflicts.

    I'll be using Fire Fox until Microsoft comes up with a perminent  fix  !!

    I haven't found a solution for Ad-Aware yet.


    Wednesday, February 6, 2008 11:34 AM
  •  

    To me this is the perfect solution for now. Thanks for posting. I would also like to thank the moderators for their excellent suggestions.
    Thursday, February 7, 2008 5:34 AM
  • Just to add to my last post.

    I had opened a dispute about this problem with the OneCare Tech team and yesterday I received a phone call from one of their reprisentitives, the dispute has been closed as "not resolved" and the details and my opinions are being passed over to the programme development team.

    I told him I wasn't happy that I was being dictated to as to which programmes i could use on my own computers.

    Thursday, February 7, 2008 8:42 AM
  •  merefolly wrote:
    Just to add to my last post.

    I had opened a dispute about this problem with the OneCare Tech team and yesterday I received a phone call from one of their reprisentitives, the dispute has been closed as "not resolved" and the details and my opinions are being passed over to the programme development team.

    I told him I wasn't happy that I was being dictated to as to which programmes i could use on my own computers.

    I, too, want to thank you for both your post with the workaround for those who wish to continue to use Site Advisor, and for opening the case with Support. We've communicated the feedback we're seeing in the forum, but getting this information to Microsoft via the forum and Support adds pressure for an explanation of the reasons for the change and the warnings.

    -steve

    Thursday, February 7, 2008 1:00 PM
    Moderator
  •  Stephen Boots wrote:


    I, too, want to thank you for both your post with the workaround for those who wish to continue to use Site Advisor, and for opening the case with Support. We've communicated the feedback we're seeing in the forum, but getting this information to Microsoft via the forum and Support adds pressure for an explanation of the reasons for the change and the warnings.

    -steve



    Hello Steve,

    There's something I find crazy about all this, I also have Advanced Windows Care 2 on one of my computers and Live OneCare is happy to have that running in the background, if anything I would have thought it would have flagged that up and not Site Advisor !!

    The sad thing about it is I was more than happy with Live OneCare until this happened, this has spoilt for me what was a very good security suite.

    Jo
    Thursday, February 7, 2008 1:44 PM
  • I have encountered the same problem.  I've been a OnceCare subscriber since 8-19-07, and just recently my status went from green to red.  I too was prompted to uninstall McAcee Site Advisor.  So now what?  Isn't McAfee's site advisor totally safe?  I've used it from the start, and it HAS helped with keeping adware and other harmful programs off my computer.  I too would be most grateful if OneCare could offer its subscribers such a program to distinguish the good sites from the bad.

    Friday, February 8, 2008 5:39 PM
  • It actually does - the phishing filter in IE.

    However, we are still waiting for an official response from Microsoft about the compatibility issues identified that cause the warning from OneCare.

    -steve

     

    Friday, February 8, 2008 6:50 PM
    Moderator
  • I found that if you simply disable Site Advisor in IE7 and reboot the uninstall advisory will go away. 

    LavaSoft 2007 will have to be uninstalled in order to eliminate the advisory for it though.
    Friday, February 8, 2008 7:01 PM
  • Hi,

     

    I found a study about the anti-phishing filters.

     

    This study was run by the company 3Sharp ( http://www.generation-nt.com/divers/click.php?id=6904&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.3sharp.com%2Fprojects%2Fantiphishing%2Fgone-phishing.pdf)

     

    Here are the results :

     

    Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 Beta 3 : 172 points/200

    Netcraft : 168 points
    Google toolbar for Firefox : 106 points

    eBay : 92 points

    EarthLink Scamblocker : 76 points

    GeoTrust TrustWatch : 67 points
    Netscape 8.1 : 56 points

    McAfee SiteAdvisor : 3 points....

     

    As you can notice, McAcfee SiteAdvisor is by far the latest from this study with only 3 points... So, I would not trust this application and I would by far trust the antiphishing filter from Internet Explorer 7...

     

    Have a nice day !

     

    Ben


     

     

     

     

     

     

    Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:13 AM
  • Regarding the study by 3Sharp as previously mentioned by BENBXL:

     

    I read the report, and I found three significant sentences in it [emphasis mine]:

     

    "Microsoft hired 3Sharp LLC to test the Microsoft Phishing Filter, a new security feature and service incorporated in Internet Explorer 7 Beta 3, against seven other currently available browser-based anti-phishing technologies."

     

    "Note that some of these products were updated during the test

    cycle or shortly afterwards; for example, EarthLink released a new version of their toolbar in early July. Due to the nature of the test, and to preserve the consistency of testing, once we began testing in May 2006 we could not slipstream technology versions into the testing process."

     

    So the testing was done between May 2006 and June 2006 (it mentions this in an aside regarding the testing of the Google Toolbar with Mozilla Firefox 1.5.0.4).  It also states that

     

    "Mozilla recently released a beta of Firefox v2 that incorporates some of this technology directly into the browser..."

     

    which concides with that timeframe.

     

    This report was prepared, not by an "independent" testing firm, but by one whose business is nearly 100% Microsoft product-related, as it admits in Section 2 of the report ("About 3Sharp").  It also admits that it was testing the Beta 3 version of Internet Explorer 7 (7.0.5450.3) against a very early release of McAfee Site Advisor (1.5.0.0 build 3083) which was installed in Internet Explorer 6.0.  The other products tested were also very early public releases.

     

    Thus, this report is fatally flawed with regards to today's products, and it seems to have been deliberately contracted by Microsoft to show Internet Explorer 7 and its newly embedded anti-phishing filter in the best possible light, just before the other products mentioned had a chance to release their own, improved versions.

     

     

    This brings to mind three favorite quotations:

     

    "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics."

    - Benjamin Disraeli

     

    "Figures don't lie, but liars figure."

    - Samuel Clemens (aka Mark Twain)

     

    "Most people use statistics the way a drunk uses a lamp post,

    more for support than enlightenment."

    - Samuel Clemens (aka Mark Twain)

     

    --
    Greg Kirkpatrick
    Microsoft Small Business Specialist
    MCP, MCTS-Vista, MCITP-Vista

    Wednesday, February 13, 2008 1:22 PM
  • Greg, in all fairness, Ben linked to the report. Yes, it is old. But I would not go so far as calling it lies. It is a study and glancing at that study, the disclosures about the testing limitations were made.

    -steve

    Wednesday, February 13, 2008 1:59 PM
    Moderator
  • Stephen, I did not say the report was lying, though it's understandable that you could infer that from the Disraeli and Twain quotations ending my post.

     

    What I did say was that it was "fatally flawed" due to its timing, as IE7's competitors were known to be ready for immiment release of updated products, and prepared by a company whose business was nearly 100% Microsoft-product related, not an "independent" firm by any means.  Had Microsoft hired a reputable anti-malware testing firm, I might have given it more weight.  Of course, no reputable testing firm would have handled the test this way.

     

    PC Magazine (among other print tech magazine) is known for this kind of "review" -- one which tests some favorite (heavy-advertiser) new product against old versions of competitors' products.  Their evaluations (in those instances) are no more useful than this report.

     

    My expose of the testing limitations from this report in this forum is to disway the casual reader from assumptions that BENBXL would have us make, namely that IE7's anti-phishing filter is far-and-away the best product today based on this report.

     

    As such, I dismiss this July 2006 report as valueless in July 2006, let alone in Februrary 2008.

    --
    Greg Kirkpatrick
    Microsoft Small Business Specialist
    MCP, MCTS-Vista, MCITP-Vista

     

    Wednesday, February 13, 2008 2:22 PM
  • Yes, I inferred it based on the quotes. :-)

     

    And, you won't get any disagreement from me regarding PC Magazine, despite the fact that I remain a subscriber...

    -steve

     

    Wednesday, February 13, 2008 3:22 PM
    Moderator
  •  

    Gentleman,

     

    I am afraid this thread has taken a wrong course!  The original posting was the dissatisfaction of OneCare subscribers not being allowed to choose for themselves which programs they would use on their own computers, and for Microsoft to try and resolve the compatibility problem, not which program was best to filter out phishing.

     

    In this day of hackers and fools trying to steal identities, or using means gather data or use your email address to send Spam, every tool available to the consumer is necessary.

     

    Rather than a gotcha attitude, maybe a coming of the minds to work together, to find a way to close down the Spammers and hackers is what is needed.

     

    Billg

    Wednesday, February 13, 2008 4:44 PM
  • Solution to this issue:

     

    1) Uninstall Mcafee Site advisor.

    2) Uninstall Windows Live Onecare using the cleanup tool.

    3) Reinstall Windows Live Onecare and then subscribe.

    4) Reinstall Mcafee Site advisor.

    This works :-)

    I've tried it, why dont u guy give it a try.

     

    The reason for this issue is microsoft  has added new apps as part of the latest upgrade which caused McAfee site advisor to be detected as conflict. The upgrade was released on 31/01 and the version is 2.0.2500.22 
    This along with few other apps like Adware 2007, AVG 7.5 that were added in the upgrade has not gone too well.

    Wednesday, February 13, 2008 4:54 PM
  • While this may work now, Sunny, I think that the discussion still centers on the fact that Microsoft needs to provide more information about the compatibility issue identified for each of the programs detected.

    -steve

     

    Wednesday, February 13, 2008 5:50 PM
    Moderator
  • I have been using MS Live OneCare and McAfee SiteAdvisor for some time on both IE and Firefox with no problems.  A couple of day's ago, Microsoft performed an update and now OneCare is showing Red and advising that I remove SiteAdvisor.

     

    Is it OK to continue to ignore the Red warning flag or is it a genuine problem that I need to deal with?

     

    Thanks for your help.

     

    Carl

     

    Saturday, February 16, 2008 2:00 AM
  • I just performed an uninstall Site Advisor from the OneCare menu.  OneCare went from red to green. 

     

    I went to McAfee website and installed Site Advisor for Firefox.  OneCare stays green.  Site Advisor works fine on Firefox browser with no Windows conflict.

     

    Easy temporary solution. 

     

    Thanks merefolly!

     

    Saturday, February 16, 2008 2:49 AM
  • I have Norton Internet Security, with which I've been very pleased for 2+ years, as my default.  OneCare 'pops up' several times a day to tell me my PC is in the RED zone, at serious risk and to uninstall Norton. When I've tried to use OneCare, i.e. to get MS Updates, there's either an error resulting in a shutdown, OR a need to install ActiveX Controls, which I've done dozens of times, and it never works.  Therefore I haven't been able to update MS since I got this new PC in mid-January.  I hate to think of the hours I've wasted trying to clear up the messes I get involved with because of OneCare's threats.  What good is it?!  What will happen if I remove/uninstall the OneCare program?  Will my PC burst into flames?  Seriously, I'm tired of all the interruptions and I believe OneCare is using scare tactics to get me to continue using it.

     

    Tuesday, February 19, 2008 5:11 AM
  •  nannageek wrote:
    I have Norton Internet Security, with which I've been very pleased for 2+ years, as my default.  OneCare 'pops up' several times a day to tell me my PC is in the RED zone, at serious risk and to uninstall Norton. When I've tried to use OneCare, i.e. to get MS Updates, there's either an error resulting in a shutdown, OR a need to install ActiveX Controls, which I've done dozens of times, and it never works.  Therefore I haven't been able to update MS since I got this new PC in mid-January.  I hate to think of the hours I've wasted trying to clear up the messes I get involved with because of OneCare's threats.  What good is it?!  What will happen if I remove/uninstall the OneCare program?  Will my PC burst into flames?  Seriously, I'm tired of all the interruptions and I believe OneCare is using scare tactics to get me to continue using it.

     

    You cannot use Norton Internet Security and Windows Live OneCare on the same machine at the same time. If you want to use the former, you need to remove OneCare. If you want to use OneCare, you need to remove NIS. They are conflicting programs that can cause system performance problems and other possible issues. One that you are experiencing right now is your problems with updates.

    If you choose not to believe me, contact Norton support who should tell you the same thing.

    -steve

    Tuesday, February 19, 2008 12:20 PM
    Moderator
  • Well I see that I'm not alone with Red Status in Live One Care caused by McAffee Siteadvisor, I had unintentionaly installed siteadvisor for IE7 on my laptop for my One Care Circle, I wanted to install on Firefox Browser, and wanted on both browsers. My solution was to remove my laptop computer from the OneCareCircle on my Hub PC after uninstalling SiteAdvisor from laptop and rebooting which gave me a green button again. I then removed laptop from Hub PC, then went to laptop to add PC to One Care Circle, following instructions to add laptop to OneCare and registering LiveOneCare ID was able to restore green button on all OneCareCircle PC's. I agree with the many posts in this forum, It is frustating why Siteadvisor should be in conflict with IE7 & OneCare, I have used Siteadvisor frequently in Firefox and find it a helpful tool when visiting websites and feel comfortable knowing sites have been reviewed by other users and proved sites worthiness. Hope this post helps everyone that needs it.
    Friday, February 22, 2008 4:11 AM
  • I like many others was initially put off by a red icon in One Care flagging a program I found useful. I too failed to see what the conflict is and felt frustrated, wondered about Microsoft's motives, etc.

     

    Having given this issue some more thought I've come to the following conclusions for what it is worth to anyone reading this and I hope someone from the Microsoft team or who can forward this feedback to them.

     

    First of all, there is some redundancy here in that One Care does enable and support the IE7 Phishing filter which right there eliminates the phishing risk factor. Additionally, One Care is designed to intercept on the fly web sites attempting to install so-called "drive by" malware. Since One Care does realtime scanning it is already protecting the user from whatever they might encounter on the Web regardless of there they go. So in fairness, while it does not give the displays of user feedback about web sites and info about spam email, etc. there is no need actually for it. I have come to feel that reading all that is a time waster. This feedback while nifty looking and even somewhat interesting perhaps is of questionable value frankly in everyday computing. Why? Because nobody spams you anything unless you give them your email address and if they want that from you then of course they plan to e-mail you. Therefore, how useful is that info really? Not very I would say. Feedback about sites that might infect if you download from them? How useful is that info? It is based purely on historical feedback and does not and cannot tell you if that same historical info reflects the right here and now if you go somewhere. Even a famous and trusted site could have an unexpected issue and Site Advisor would not help you there immediately but realtime scanning, phishing filtering, etc. would.

     

    Lastly and most significantly, while McAfee's Site Advisor is a nifty looking and interesting program it is in fact yet another program loading when you load Internet Explorer and therefore does use more system resources and with its site checking together of course do impact browser and surfing performance. How much? I don't know. I also don't care. Less is generally better when it comes to system utility software. I believe that this is a design goal of One Care and one which they overall are very successful with. Personally while I am an expert computer user who has been using them for as long as they have existed on desktops and who has worked in development also I do not want to waste my valuable time fooling around with security on my PC. That is why I pay for software to do it for me and the simpler the better as long as the coverage is comprehensive. One Care delivers here.

     

    My verdict? I was wasting time and system resources even using Site Advisor and multiple other security applications but then it was installed before I upgraded to a One Care installation.

     

    It is virtually impossible to please everyone all of the time but I would argue the One Care development team works hard to provide an elegant, user friendly and completely comprehensive security solution in One Care. I like that because it lets me fire up my PC and do something besides fool with my PC. Yes, I certainly know how but do I want to waste my time on that? Heck no.

     

    Given the outcry here however there is a lesson to be learned for the One Care developers I think. For any and all programs flagged as being in conflict with One Care at the minimum provide clear details as to why this decision was made. For example in this case tell users if there is a specific conflict or not, if it is redundant (they did say that I believe) and lastly permit the user to flag the program as OK or not after giving them information to make an informed decision. If a program will break One Care, create a security issue or for some other reason absolutely cannot be allowed when One Care is running as it would create a serious problem then its fine to refuse to allow it once you tell the user exactly why that is. Then you won't have this sort of outcry here although the other company may get feedback about making their software compatible. I think better communication and permitting user choice where possible would go a long way to improved customer satisfaction for an issue like this.

     

    When One Care disables a competitor this is highly important to eliminate any question of propriety also.

    Saturday, February 23, 2008 3:29 AM
  • Windows Live One Care wants me to uninstall McAfee Security Center in general but, when I attempt to do so...using the button provided by WLOC, the uninstall is unsuccessful. On the same panel as the button is a nebulous warning that "Legacy Programs must be removed first" or something to that effect -- with no clue as to which programs are the "legacy" ones -- I would assume the McAfee, since it was there first but...again, WLOC offers no additional assistance, goes through the uninstall motions, but does not, in fact, uninstall, the  McAfee. I might not mind using just WLOC to do the bulk of protection of my machine -- McAfee irritated me with one of the more recent Security Center "upgrades" which effectively buried useful settings way down in the interface so that it is difficult to get to anything if you were to want to turn something off, temporarily (protecting me from me, I presume) -- but I am unable to even give WLOC a chance to BE the solo flier here.

     

    Any suggestions? Thanks!

    Saturday, February 23, 2008 3:37 PM
  • banyan1,

     

    I think you will have to un-install OneCare, then do a complete un-install of McAfee Security Center, then re-install OneCare.  In the installation instructions for OneCare it states to remove all virus and spyware program prior to downloading OneCare. 

     

    Saturday, February 23, 2008 5:24 PM
  •  banyan1 wrote:

    Windows Live One Care wants me to uninstall McAfee Security Center in general but, when I attempt to do so...using the button provided by WLOC, the uninstall is unsuccessful.

     

    http://service.mcafee.com/FAQDocument.aspx?id=107083&lc=1033
    Description

    Running the McAfee Consumer Product Removal tool (MCPR.exe) removes all 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008 versions of McAfee consumer products.

     

    Note: This tool (previously named MCPR2.EXE) is not compatible with Microsoft Windows 98 or ME.

    Saturday, February 23, 2008 6:17 PM
  •  DirtyHarry50 wrote:

    First of all, there is some redundancy here in that One Care does enable and support the IE7 Phishing filter which right there eliminates the phishing risk factor. Additionally, One Care is designed to intercept on the fly web sites attempting to install so-called "drive by" malware. Since One Care does realtime scanning it is already protecting the user from whatever they might encounter on the Web regardless of there they go. So in fairness, while it does not give the displays of user feedback about web sites and info about spam email, etc. there is no need actually for it.

    That is your opinion.  My opinion is that information is valuable, and IE's anti-phishing filter does not give the same amount of information as the McAfee Site Advisor.  I also do not necessarily trust Microsoft (or McAfee, or any single company) to correctly advise me on all Internet use.  If I have to have 16GB of ram and 4 dual-core processors to handle the overhead, I will do so, as I intend to have more advice, not less.  At the moment, my dual-core processor and 4GB ram is sufficient for my needs.

     

     DirtyHarry50 wrote:

    Lastly and most significantly, while McAfee's Site Advisor is a nifty looking and interesting program it is in fact yet another program loading when you load Internet Explorer and therefore does use more system resources and with its site checking together of course do impact browser and surfing performance. How much? I don't know. I also don't care. Less is generally better when it comes to system utility software....

    When One Care disables a competitor this is highly important to eliminate any question of propriety also.

    This assumes that the Internet Explorer's anti-phishing filter is turned on, which is not required to run WLOC, though it will whine if it is not.  As mentioned, I don't agree that less is generally better when it comes to system utility software -- I have several file managers, anti-spyware programs, and antivirus programs.  Each has its own use, and as long as I set them up properly, there does not need to be a conflict.  Are you going to tell me that Norton System Works is useless?  WLOC complained about it being installed, despite the fact that the Antivirus and Firewall components were not installed.  This goes way beyond "alerting for conflict" and encroaches on deliberate anticompetitiveness.

     

    As of yesterday, I have removed WLOC from all my computers.  It was due for renewal on 01 Feb 2008, and I deliberately turned off the auto-renewal long ago.  I wanted the reminders so I would reevaluate the antivirus choices I have made. 

     

    Based on Microsoft's lack of response to these issues (it has been over 3 weeks), I will no longer endorse the WLOC product.  Inasmuch as this is the frontpiece for the Windows Live products, it puts the entire line in jeopardy, in my opinion.  I do not endorse products that won't play nice with others.  If Microsoft Word ever starts complaining about WordPerfect being installed on my computer, Word will be removed also.


    --
    Greg Kirkpatrick
    Microsoft Small Business Specialist
    MCP, MCTS-Vista, MCITP-Vista

    Saturday, February 23, 2008 6:45 PM
  • Gentlemen if you wish to continue to use WLOC and Site Advisor simply disable the site advisor in IE7 and reboot.  The red will go away.  If you use Firefox Site advisor will cause no problems with WLOC.
    Saturday, February 23, 2008 10:33 PM
  •  banyan1 wrote:

    Windows Live One Care wants me to uninstall McAfee Security Center in general but, when I attempt to do so...using the button provided by WLOC, the uninstall is unsuccessful. On the same panel as the button is a nebulous warning that "Legacy Programs must be removed first" or something to that effect -- with no clue as to which programs are the "legacy" ones -- I would assume the McAfee, since it was there first but...again, WLOC offers no additional assistance, goes through the uninstall motions, but does not, in fact, uninstall, the  McAfee. I might not mind using just WLOC to do the bulk of protection of my machine -- McAfee irritated me with one of the more recent Security Center "upgrades" which effectively buried useful settings way down in the interface so that it is difficult to get to anything if you were to want to turn something off, temporarily (protecting me from me, I presume) -- but I am unable to even give WLOC a chance to BE the solo flier here.

     

    Any suggestions? Thanks!

     

    Here is how to fix that problem. I had McAfee prior to my One Care install however I installed it entirely before attempting to install One Care. Go visit the McAfee web support site and do a search on uninstall. Get their own removal utility and then follow the directions to properly use it which comes down to use Add/Remove to uninstall, reboot, run their removal utility, reboot again, McAfee should at that point be entirely gone, all of it, from your computer. They and Symantec (Norton) both offer such utilities on their support pages because the uninstallers they ship with do a poor and incomplete job of removal such that they leave parts of themselves scattered all over the place.

     

    In the case of Norton for example, even with the Personal Firewall removed, One Care noticed parts were still on my machine and would not install until I got rid of them. This was how prior to install, test and removal of McAfee I became aware of such vendor provided removal utilities for security suites.

     

    So go grab that, run it and try again to install and it should help.

    Sunday, February 24, 2008 12:23 AM
  •  GregKirkpatrick wrote:

     DirtyHarry50 wrote:

    First of all, there is some redundancy here in that One Care does enable and support the IE7 Phishing filter which right there eliminates the phishing risk factor. Additionally, One Care is designed to intercept on the fly web sites attempting to install so-called "drive by" malware. Since One Care does realtime scanning it is already protecting the user from whatever they might encounter on the Web regardless of there they go. So in fairness, while it does not give the displays of user feedback about web sites and info about spam email, etc. there is no need actually for it.

    That is your opinion.  My opinion is that information is valuable, and IE's anti-phishing filter does not give the same amount of information as the McAfee Site Advisor.  I also do not necessarily trust Microsoft (or McAfee, or any single company) to correctly advise me on all Internet use.  If I have to have 16GB of ram and 4 dual-core processors to handle the overhead, I will do so, as I intend to have more advice, not less.  At the moment, my dual-core processor and 4GB ram is sufficient for my needs.

     

     DirtyHarry50 wrote:

    Lastly and most significantly, while McAfee's Site Advisor is a nifty looking and interesting program it is in fact yet another program loading when you load Internet Explorer and therefore does use more system resources and with its site checking together of course do impact browser and surfing performance. How much? I don't know. I also don't care. Less is generally better when it comes to system utility software....

    When One Care disables a competitor this is highly important to eliminate any question of propriety also.

    This assumes that the Internet Explorer's anti-phishing filter is turned on, which is not required to run WLOC, though it will whine if it is not.  As mentioned, I don't agree that less is generally better when it comes to system utility software -- I have several file managers, anti-spyware programs, and antivirus programs.  Each has its own use, and as long as I set them up properly, there does not need to be a conflict.  Are you going to tell me that Norton System Works is useless?  WLOC complained about it being installed, despite the fact that the Antivirus and Firewall components were not installed.  This goes way beyond "alerting for conflict" and encroaches on deliberate anticompetitiveness.

     

    As of yesterday, I have removed WLOC from all my computers.  It was due for renewal on 01 Feb 2008, and I deliberately turned off the auto-renewal long ago.  I wanted the reminders so I would reevaluate the antivirus choices I have made. 

     

    Based on Microsoft's lack of response to these issues (it has been over 3 weeks), I will no longer endorse the WLOC product.  Inasmuch as this is the frontpiece for the Windows Live products, it puts the entire line in jeopardy, in my opinion.  I do not endorse products that won't play nice with others.  If Microsoft Word ever starts complaining about WordPerfect being installed on my computer, Word will be removed also.


    --
    Greg Kirkpatrick
    Microsoft Small Business Specialist
    MCP, MCTS-Vista, MCITP-Vista

     

    I appreciate your differing opinion and respect your right to choice here but my opinion remains different than yours. I like less is more design personally as long as it works and in my experience thus far, it works. I would agree the System Works product issue goes beyond what I was saying in that it provides a lot of utility not present in One Care. Similarly the only other system utility I run happens to be System Mechanic 7.5 for reasons similar to your choice of Norton I'm sure. One Care does not complain about System Mechanic fortunately which even in the base product that I own incorporates a simple Antispyware scanner that I personally don't bother to use. But it is there and apparently One Care doesn't care which is good.

     

    If One Care was complaining about System Mechanic I would take issue with that as you do over Norton. Clearly the flagging of false positivies compatibility-wise needs improvement and as I mentioned, an user override where reasonable.

     

    I see by your sig that you are a business professional and as such I wonder are you talking about business or home use here? I do not see One Care as a business level security solution personally not that this impacts the discussion at hand a lot. The whole design seems to be geared towards simplicity on purpose and for many home users that is a big plus. Keeping in mind the target market here are unlikely to be users of your sophistication I would continue to argue that the trade-offs made here overall represeent best choices in a realm where pleasing all PC users across the board is utterly impossible.

     

    Sunday, February 24, 2008 12:32 AM
  •  

    Norton identifies SiteAdvisor as Crimeware because it mentions that the program phones home with information.  Whether this is right or wrong doesn't really matter as software companies choose whether or not to let competitor's software run alongside theirs.

     

    I liked SiteAdvisor too but I like OneCare more.  

    Sunday, February 24, 2008 1:44 AM
  •  DirtyHarry50 wrote:
     

    Here is how to fix that problem. I had McAfee prior to my One Care install however I installed it entirely before attempting to install One Care. Go visit the McAfee web support site and do a search on uninstall. Get their own removal utility and then follow the directions to properly use it which comes down to use Add/Remove to uninstall, reboot, run their removal utility, reboot again, McAfee should at that point be entirely gone, all of it, from your computer. They and Symantec (Norton) both offer such utilities on their support pages because the uninstallers they ship with do a poor and incomplete job of removal such that they leave parts of themselves scattered all over the place.

     

    In the case of Norton for example, even with the Personal Firewall removed, One Care noticed parts were still on my machine and would not install until I got rid of them. This was how prior to install, test and removal of McAfee I became aware of such vendor provided removal utilities for security suites.

     

    So go grab that, run it and try again to install and it should help.

     

    I, too, had McAfee installed prior to coming back to WLOC.  I had been noticing that sometimes my desktop (hub) would report that either the laptop malware protection or firewall would be off (sometimes both).  I reinstalled the desktop OC but the problem persisted.

     

    A couple of days ago I was on my laptop and noticed something strange.  I have a gadget in my sidebar that reports the top 5 processes in usage.  I saw a process called Mcupdate.exe appear in the window.  You will probably recognize that this is the update process for McAfee that somehow survived the uninstall.  So I got the McAfee removal tool, MCPR.exe, and ran it.  Since then my hub has been correctly reporting my laptop's status.

     

    So the moral of the story is that when you uninstall a security solution, look to see if a removal tool is also offered and use it after you uninstall the program via Add/Remove.

    Sunday, February 24, 2008 5:39 AM
  •  DirtyHarry50 wrote:

    I see by your sig that you are a business professional and as such I wonder are you talking about business or home use here? I do not see One Care as a business level security solution personally not that this impacts the discussion at hand a lot. The whole design seems to be geared towards simplicity on purpose and for many home users that is a big plus. Keeping in mind the target market here are unlikely to be users of your sophistication I would continue to argue that the trade-offs made here overall represeent best choices in a realm where pleasing all PC users across the board is utterly impossible.

     

    Yes, I am a business professional.  However, I do not draw a distinction between home and business use, since there are millions of people who run home-based businesses, including myself. 

     

    Yes, WLOC does seem geared towards unsophisticated users.  That does not excuse Microsoft for taking a anticompetitive stance.  A simplified product does not need to run up red flags just because other software is installed.  Ignorable warnings would be irritating, but acceptable.

    --
    Greg Kirkpatrick
    Microsoft Small Business Specialist
    MCP, MCTS-Vista, MCITP-Vista

    Sunday, February 24, 2008 11:26 AM
  •  

    I do draw that distinction and I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree there. For every home based business user there are many more non-business users in the home market and the MAJORITY of home users are NOT running a business at home and they are who this product was intended for I believe. If you are running a business, no matter where you are running it, I would question trusting mission critical data to a 50 dollar home security suite frankly regardless of who makes it. It comes back to one size cannot fit all here I think and so one size attempts to best fit the majority of the target market. In that case, I give this product good marks.

     

    As for "anticompetitive stance" you have to recognize that is an assumption that you cannot substantiate as fact. I do not blame you for wondering all things considered but you cannot assume that and know you are correct. You can at best simply guess that may be true. Guessing something maybe true does not equal that something being a fact. Therefore I do not think anyone outside the development team is any position to make judgements there nor proclaim Microsoft is being deliberately anticompetitive in how they code One Care if they cannot prove such assertions.

     

    It's more likely that in designing the product to be trouble free they just flag everything to guarantee it is. This leaves open the possibility the product can be further improved in future releases to begin recognizing certain other programs as legitimate even if arguably redundant and inform then allow the user to choose. Hopefully we'll see that down the road and people who like Site Advisor can use it without issues.

     

    It has not come up yet but there is even the possibility that there is some issue with these two running together that has not been communicated. I tend to doubt that personally given what Site Advisor does but I cannot say I know that.

     

    In the grand scheme of life though I just can't get worked up over losing Site Advisor because as I said before it does not tell me anything beyond historical info which means it can never tell me about right now this very second at a given location on the Internet. You have to know as well as I do that Site Advisor can NEVER guarantee me that a given site is 100 percent safe and so I would ask you, what good is it then? Why bother? Why waste my system resouces and bandwidth on it? Seriously. What for? Again I will say sure the info is interesting initially but of what real value is it? How does this save me from anything? The whole point of One Care is I don't have to care. So I don't need red flags on my pages and I don't need to read balloon tool tips telling me how many emails a given site sent in a month, etc. Reading that flufff is a waste of my valuable time. I do not care about it and with One Care running I do not need to care about it.

     

    Maybe I take this view because I generally tend to visit trusted sites and do what I consider to be surf responsibly. Most of the worst sites are easily avoided and it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out what sites those are. For those of us who elect to skip the free wallpapers, downloads from sites we never heard or before, free smileys, *** sites, porn sites, file sharing sites, etc. there is far less possibility of coming upon bad sites anyway and if I do come upon one, even a trusted place that is attacked, that is why I run One Care so I don't need to waste my time worrying about that. I want to use my computer, not tinker with it constantly and read irrelevant info aside of what I was actually searching for to begin with.

    Monday, February 25, 2008 2:16 AM
  • I like McAfee Site Advisor and was reluctant to uninstall it when OneCare flagged all 3 of my computers at risk when it detected McAfee Site Advisor on all 3.  In fact, I only uninstalled it on two of my computers, then installed the Foxfire McAfee Site Advisor add-on and restricted my browser use to Foxfire on those two computers.  Not exactly a hardship.

     

    I left the 3rd computer as is since the primary user likes IE7 and did not want to make the switch to Foxfire.  And for about a week, perhaps longer, the OneCare icon remained red.

     

    On February 26th, I noticed that the red OneCare icon on this computer had now turned green.  I took a look at the WINSS registry settings under HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\WinSS\{BE8A0298-03E9-4A47-B885-971A7F71D2FA} and found that the value had been changed to NoConflictingApp.

     

    Thinking that somehow OneCare had lifted the restriction on McAfee Site Advisor, I elected to re-install McAfee Site Advisor on what used to be the OneCare hub machine.  I re-booted and noticed that the previously green OneCare icon quickly turned to red.  OneCare advised me to uninstall McAfee Site Advisor.

     

    So, why was McAfee Site Advisor not a restricted app on one machine, yet a flagged conflicting app on another XP PRO/SP2.

     

    A little further investigation reveals that on the machine with the green OneCare icon, the registry entry for the McAfee Site Advisor service, SAService.exe, had been deleted.  Further, the McAfee SiteAdv.exe was no longer started at Startup.  I was able to obtain a green icon on the machine with the red icon by deleting the service entry from the registry using the services command, sc delete.  I also removed SiteAdv.exe from the startup list though I don’t think that this is necessary.  It will load when you start IE7.

     

    I don’t advise doing the above.  I don’t know what process effected the changes on the first machine.   It was done without my knowledge or permission.  If you still have a red icon, I would be patient.  It will probably disappear.

    Thursday, February 28, 2008 6:48 PM
  • hey just dont use ie 7,use ie 6 instead the problem is solved

    Saturday, March 1, 2008 8:50 AM
  • Would someone with McAfee SiteAdvisor installed please check the executable files(s) for the application to see if they are digitally signed, especially the SaService.exe file?

     

    To determine this, right click the file and look for a 'Digital Signatures' tab, which should indicate McAfee Corp. or something similar as the Name of signer.

     

    For those with some PCs that conflict and others that don't, check one of each if possible.

     

    OneCareBear

    Sunday, March 2, 2008 5:41 AM
    Moderator
  •  OneCareBear wrote:

    Would someone with McAfee SiteAdvisor installed please check the executable files(s) for the application to see if they are digitally signed, especially the SaService.exe file?

     

    To determine this, right click the file and look for a 'Digital Signatures' tab, which should indicate McAfee Corp. or something similar as the Name of signer.

     

    For those with some PCs that conflict and others that don't, check one of each if possible.

     

    OneCareBear

     

    SiteAdv.exe on my computer has a digital signature dated August 24, 2007.  SaService.exe has a digital signature dated December 4, 2007.  While the reinstalled Windows Live OneCare (15-day trial version) did not complain about Site Advisor, I was forced to turn off the IE Phishing filter, as performance issues plague my IE 7 now.  I am not sure that they are related to Site Advisor, as there are many other reasons for the problems.  At the moment, however, my OneCare and Site Advisor are living together comfortably.  Of course, my OneCare is already red, as I am close to the expiration of the 15-day trial, but no mention of Site Advisor or SpywareBlaster, or Ad-Aware 2007, for that matter.

     

    Note that Ad-Aware 2007 (Ad-Aware.exe and Aawservice.exe) are NOT digitally signed.

     

    I would be interested to hear from someone who has a non-expiring subscription to OneCare, to see whether having digitally-signed installs of Site Advisor and SpywareBlaster makes a difference.

    --
    Greg Kirkpatrick
    Microsoft Small Business Specialist
    MCP, MCTS-Vista, MCITP-Vista

    Sunday, March 2, 2008 6:51 AM
  • I have the Internet Explorer version of Site Advisor installed on two of my three computers.  The SiteAdv.exe and SAService.exe on both are digitally signed.  I have green OneCare icons on both of those computers.  On one of them, I was able to force a change from red to green by deleting the SiteAdvisor Service (SAService) entry from the service registry.  If you run msconfig on either computer, you will not find the SiteAdvisor Service listed under services, nor will you find it if you run services.msc.  On the other computer, I noted that the red icon had turned to green without any intervention on my part.  It had remained red for more than a week, then mysteriously turned green.

     

    When you install Site Advisor for Internet Explorer, a service is added by McAfee which launches SAService.exe.  McAfee identifies this module as providing low level services to Site Advisor.  If you prevent it from launching, then OneCare will not detect the presence of Site Advisor.

     

    Here are a few small excerpts from Logs.log, a OneCare installation log,  The excerpts were generated on 1/22/2008 during the update of OneCare to 2.0.2500.14.

     

    [2008-01-22 19:18:32.500 -08:00] [3640-3672] [UNK] [ocsetupappque.cpp:3408 CApplicationQue:Big SmileownloadManifest()] Manifest URL:  https://instinfo.onecare.live.com/InstallXML/latest/x86/xp/en-us/Default/install.xml

    [2008-01-22 19:18:32.500 -08:00] [3640-3672] [UNK] [ocsetupappque.cpp:3409 CApplicationQue:Big SmileownloadManifest()] Downloaded manifest: <Install Version="2.0.2500.14" Proc="x86" OS="xp" Mkt="en-us" Brand="Default">
    <Actions>
    <InstallActions>
    <Step Name="1. FetchAndInstall Components">

    .

    Live\GTOneCare&quot; REBOOT=&quot;ReallySuppress&quot;" RelativeURL="" />
    <Feature Name="Upgrade" Version="2.0.2500.14" Cab="Upgrade.cab" Checksum="278820480" Size="1414384" File="WinssUpg.exe" FileSize="58408" FileChecksum="2213419014" RelativeURL="x86/xp/en-us" />
    </Features>

    The first conflicting app is DotNet2.0Beta
    <ConflictingApps>
    <App Name="DotNet2.0Beta" uninstallkey="Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 Beta 2" Restart="true" Synchronized="true" priority="0" version="2.0">
    <DriverChecks />
    <ServiceChecks />
    <RegistryChecks />
    <FileChecks />
    </App>

    Here Is the conflicting app entry for Ad-Aware

    <App Name="Ad-Aware 2007" uninstallkey="Ad-Aware 2007" uninstallkeyname="{DED53B0B-B67C-4244-AE6A-D6FD3C28D1EF}" Restart="false" Synchronized="false" priority="1" version="7.0" ProcessToWatch="">
    <DriverChecks />
    <ServiceChecks>
    <ServiceCheck Name="aawservice" />
    </ServiceChecks>
    <RegistryChecks>
    <RegistryCheck root="HKLM" key="Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall\{DED53B0B-B67C-4244-AE6A-D6FD3C28D1EF}" />
    </RegistryChecks>
    <FileChecks />
    </App>

    Here is the conflicting app entry for McAfee SiteAdvisor

    <App Name="McAfee SiteAdvisor" uninstallkey="McAfee SiteAdvisor" uninstallkeyname="McAfee SiteAdvisor" Restart="false" Synchronized="false" priority="1" version="2.5" ProcessToWatch=""> <DriverChecks />
    <ServiceChecks>
    <ServiceCheck Name="SiteAdvisor Service" />
    </ServiceChecks>
    <RegistryChecks>
    <RegistryCheck root="HKLM" key="Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall\McAfee SiteAdvisor" />
    </RegistryChecks>
    <FileChecks />
    </App>

     

    The list of conflicting apps is quite long.  I believe this table of conflicting app data is used by Winss to diagnose conflicting apps and also used to trigger the uninstall action if you choose to uninstall the conflicting app.

     

    I don’t believe it makes any difference whether the service executable is digitally signed or not.   If OneCare detects the presence of the named service, the diagnosis is positive.

     

    Monday, March 3, 2008 4:32 AM
  • Apparently, it does make a difference if it is digitally signed.

     

    Tonight, I had a Windows XP Home machine to rebuild.  I installed all the relevant Windows Updates.  Then I installed, in this order: Internet Explorer 7, Javacool SpywareBlaster 4.0, Spybot Search & Destroy 1.5.2, McAfee Site Advisor (free), Lavasoft Ad-Aware 2007 (1/25/08, free), and finally Windows Live OneCare (90-day trial). 

     

    During installation, OneCare reported Ad-Aware, and only Ad-Aware, as a conflicting program, and insisted that I click to allow OneCare to remove it, or click Cancel (which I knew from past experience would result in OneCare reversing its own installation).  I did neither, clicking Start / Turn Off Computer / Restart (actually, I used the keyboard equivalents: CTRL-ESC U R).

     

    When the computer restarted, Windows Live OneCare was installed and opened, and it showed up green for a few seconds, before finding Ad-Aware again and putting up the red beacon with the View List button to remove it.  McAfee Site Advisor, Javacool SpywareBlaster 4.0, and Spybot Search & Destroy 1.5.2 were not on the list.

     

    I don't like the way Microsoft went about it, but I'm not running things (nor am I likely to in the future).  I'm satisfied that two of the three programs I saw "in conflict" a month ago are no longer on the conflict list. 

     

    I don't see the need for Lavasoft to have something running "as a service" constantly, if it is not used until the GUI program is manually run (in the free version), and Lavasoft could rewrite Ad-Aware so that the service started and stopped with the (free) GUI program if that's needed.   I'm OK with the red beacon for now.

    --
    Greg Kirkpatrick
    Microsoft Small Business Specialist
    MCP, MCTS-Vista, MCITP-Vista

    Monday, March 3, 2008 6:01 AM
  • Greg: Thanks for checking into this and for your comments. I understand why Lavasoft is using a service and running it at all times, but there are other issues here that concern me more. See my response to oldcodger1 below.

     

    oldcodger1: Though you've found the logs of the installation system that detects the existence of Ad-Aware on a PC, this doesn't necessarily mean that this is the reason it is detected as conflicting. The method for detection may simply relate to the requirements for detection and removal, as you also mentioned.

     

    My real concern with Ad-Aware is that according to Greg and yourself, it doesn't appear to have a digital signature. This alone may not seem enough for an application to be flagged as conflicting, but it's really an indication of a much deeeper issue. If a developer isn't performing such a standardized method of identifying their code, then what other best practices aren't they following?

     

    Unfortunately, when Microsoft entered the security software field directly they did it in part for this very reason, best practices and just plain good security practices often weren't being performed by some security developers. This was in part due to competition and competing ideas, but when Microsoft as a whole supports a standard like the digital signing of code then it behooves developers, especially those producing security related applications to follow them.

     

    So everyone can understand, a digital signature helps by both identifying the source (author, organization) that created a piece of code and helps verify the integrity of that code by verifying it has not been modified. This not only makes rouge code easier to identify, it even reduces the chance of it modifying a known good program and helps security software identify it properly either way. Microsoft recommends this for all executable code, not just security applications.

     

    Again, this alone may not be the [only] reason for calling another program in 'conflict', but due to its importance, it's enough in my book.

     

    OneCareBear

    Monday, March 3, 2008 5:12 PM
    Moderator
  • Greg: Since you were able to install McAfee SiteAdvisor, Internet Explorer Edition, without Windows Live OneCare flagging it as a conflicting app, I decided to re-install Site Advisor on my remaining platform, the one with only the Foxfire SiteAdvisor extension installed.


    I downloaded saSetup.exe, ran the SiteAdvisor installation, verified that SAService.exe was digitally signed, that SiteAdvisor Service was running, and then re-booted.  Up to that time, the OneCare icon was green.  Following re-boot, the OneCare icon initially came up green, then turned to red after a few seconds, notifying me that there was an action to take.  Uninstall McAfee Site Advisor.


    I then used services.msc, stopped SiteAdvisor Service, disabled it, then opened up a command window and used sc to delete the SiteAdvisor Service.  I re-booted and guess what.  The OneCare icon came up green and stayed green.


    I am running Version 2.0.2500.22.  The Virus & Spyware definition version is 1.29.7263.0.  The Firewall Policy Version is 1.2.30.118.   Windows Live OneCare advises that OneCare is current.


    I can only guess that the OneCare version that you installed accepts McAfee SiteAdvisor as installed and no longer identifies it as a conflicting app.  The fact that SAService.exe is digitally signed makes no difference on my machines. 

    I have checked the McAfee SiteAdvisor Web site and see that they advise ignoring the OneCare warning.  They also say they are working with Microsoft to develop a solution.


    OneCareBear: I posted excerpts from the log only to show that OneCare listed McAfee SiteAdvisor as a potential conflicting app.  I make no pretense to understanding what criteria OneCare uses to diagnose a conflicting app.  I came to the conclusion that OneCare would stop flagging McAfee SiteAdvisor if I deleted the service registry entry for SiteAdvisor Service after the OneCare icon on one machine mysteriously turned green, even though McAfee SiteAdvisor for IE had not been removed.  I assume that sometime in the future, OneCare will roll out updates to the tables or logic so that I can do a clean install of McAfee SiteAdvisor and not have to delete the registry entry for SiteAdvisor Service.


    I am somewhat concerned that some process did take it upon itself to delete the service registry entry for McAfee SAService Service.  I suspect that the process was initiated by OneCare, yet I see no log entry that documents that action nor was I ever advised that the action was taken.

    Monday, March 3, 2008 8:24 PM