Questions about Combofix.exe
Posted on 2012-03-16
I have been using combofix for a few years now, and I find that with heavily infected computers, combofix usually does the job better than anything else I have ever used. In fact, I am extremely impressed by combofix and it's success rate. There seem to be all sorts of warnings about using combofix as I hear it's known to crash machines on occasion, but of all the times I have used it I think I only had one computer that ever crashed after running combofix. I am not even sure if combofix was the reason it crashed, but that was quite awhile back and I don't remember the specifics.
Because combofix "feels" like some guy just wrote the software in his garage and published it on the internet as free software (no offense to the creator of combofix or to guys who write software in their garage), I always feel a little leary about running it. But other than that one suspicious time, combofix has always done the job for me. So my question is, if it's possible for someone to write a program like combofix that does such a good job of removing difficult viruses and malware, why in the world hasn't some big company like Symantec (Norton) or McAfee published a tool like this and actually make money off of it? Now, I am VERY happy combofix is free, but somehow running a software package from a "reputable" software company, with the resources that a company like a Symantec or McAfee has, just feels "safer" to me. Now, I really despise Symantec and McAfee and calling them reputable is kind of a joke in my personal opinion. I assume companies like Symantec and McAfee have a very large pool of software engineers who have all sorts of talents. However, having used both Symantec and McAfee anti virus products in the past, I certainly have very little respect for their products.
What I am trying to ask is, why can't big companies with large budgets and probably hundreds of talented engineers make a product 10 times better than combofix? All I see from the "big" name AV distributors is pretty crappy software. Microsoft Security Essentials is free, and is my first choice for lightweight AV solutions. You would think that Microsoft would have enough budget and talent to also create something like combofix, but maybe more user friendly and less "scary" and risky to use.
Is it simply that combofix is so risky to use, that major software manufacturers can't take the risk for fear of lawsuits or something like that if computers crash because of their software?