CCleaner 5.45 removed

Topic

New Reply

A couple of days ago, Martin Brinkmann (on ghacks.net) wrote: Don’t install or upgrade to CCleaner 5.45 Piriform/Avast released CCleaner 5.45 recently
[See the full post at: CCleaner 5.45 removed]

15 users thanked author for this post.

walker, SueW, Laptop Boy, PhotM, JohnW, geekdom, Heavenly, HiFlyer, Jan K., woody, Northwest Rick, lmacri, Elly, Schnarph

Reply | Quote

Replies

One stumble forward, two steps back with an apology. If only M$ would follow suit.

 

Reply | Quote

Meh… Microsoft has refined the art of stumbling and won’t deviate an inch.

Reply | Quote

I have no problem with CCleaner 5.4.5 Pro. What’s all the fuss about?
I don’t get ads and AFAIK I am not sending data to Piriform.

Reply | Quote

Wonder why anyone would install this nonsenseware (like any other cleaner/speedup junkware) anyway. This kind of software is utterly useless and prone to do more harm than good.

Reply | Quote

I like some of the Tools in  Ccleaner, especially Startup. I don’t use the Registry cleaner as I don’t trust it to not remove necessary files, and the Cleaner tool you have to be really careful.

I still use v.5.27 5796, prior to their malware infested update last year.  No reason to update since I have a safe, older version that works fine.

Reply | Quote

SysInternals’ AutoRuns is a better choice. More valuable tools from SysInternals can be found at https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/.

Reply | Quote

It gets rid of several “apps” in Windows 10 that aren’t supposed to be removable.  My test Win 10 install (1803) is down to Connect, Cortana, Edge, Mixed Reality Portal, and Windows Defender.  CCleaner got rid of the rest of them (and I would happily get rid of the rest of them if it could, Cortana in particular).

Dell XPS 13/9310, i5-1135G7/16GB, KDE Neon 6.2
XPG Xenia 15, i7-9750H/32GB & GTX1660ti, Kubuntu 24.04
Acer Swift Go 14, i5-1335U/16GB, Kubuntu 24.04 (and Win 11)

Reply | Quote

Be careful. My tweaking and testing has shown that newer and newer versions of Windows tend to become unserviceable if the things “they” don’t want removed are removed anyway.

Don’t get me wrong – I don’t want to just “give in” and let them have everything they want. Their intrusiveness is not any more right now that it ever has been – but if you maintain a serious system that you want to keep being able to update, be careful about what you disable.

Out of curiosity, where are meaningful conversations being had about tweaking and tuning Windows now? Several of the forums I used to frequent have become dormant. I hope it doesn’t mean everyone’s just getting tired of fighting the intrusiveness trend… Sigh.

-Noel

3 users thanked author for this post.

fk5353, HiFlyer, Ascaris

Reply | Quote

Weary of the fight, certainly. In your specific case Noel, you will be one of the last. If I have read you correctly before, your product has a target market of Windows clients.

Of the people who used to post to the forums you read, some may have knelt and given fealty to their new overlord. But many only surrendered the field of battle. They left the Windows environment for other fields with fewer metaphorical rocks, less blood, salt and soot. They found fields where the could beat their swords back into plowshares and become producers again.

Your business model still supports your product. But for these others, the overhead became too much. With nothing on topic left to complain about, they stopped contributing to those forums.

1 user thanked author for this post.

HiFlyer

Reply | Quote

Noel Carboni wrote:

Be careful. My tweaking and testing has shown that newer and newer versions of Windows tend to become unserviceable if the things “they” don’t want removed are removed anyway.

Then unserviceable shall it be!

I understand what you’re saying, and thanks for pointing that out on behalf of people who might not have understood where I am coming from: I wouldn’t use Windows 10 for anything serious, as it is not what I consider a serious operating system (aside, perhaps, from LTSB).  Any Windows 10 I have installed (in a VM or otherwise) is for the purpose of testing or just to satisfy my own curiosity.  It’s all it’s good for, IMO, as long as it’s part of “WaaS.”

That said, though, it seems to be working well so far with all of the “apps” removed via CCleaner except the five I mentioned.  It’s kind of interesting that CCleaner let me remove most things, including Xbox and MS Store, but not those five.  Makes me wonder if they (Piriform/Avast) know something I don’t, like perhaps those are the ones that will break the system if you remove them without Microsoft’s permission.

Of course, if I did intend to use Windows 10 for anything serious, I would back it up first.

Dell XPS 13/9310, i5-1135G7/16GB, KDE Neon 6.2
XPG Xenia 15, i7-9750H/32GB & GTX1660ti, Kubuntu 24.04
Acer Swift Go 14, i5-1335U/16GB, Kubuntu 24.04 (and Win 11)

Reply | Quote

If you want to remove ‘all’ apps the clean and safe way, use the following PowerShell one-liner (open the PowerShell prompt as administrator). Note that this will remove only apps that are removable (not crucial for the OS to function properly). The one-liner will return a bunch of error message that can be ignored safely.

Get-AppxPackage | Foreach {Remove-AppxPackage -package $_.PackageFullName}

If you want to re-install any of those apps at a later time, you can do so like the following example shows for Solitaire:
Get-AppxPackage -AllUsers -Name *solitaire* | Foreach {Add-AppxPackage -DisableDevelopmentMode -Register "$($_.InstallLocation)\AppXManifest.xml"}

Reply | Quote

That doesn’t remove them it just puts them in the disable “pile” for your user.  If you login as another user they will be back.

Reply | Quote

“Nonsenseware” is a bit much. Software usually performs a function. The trick is to determine if the personal cost of running the software meets or exceeds the benefits of running the software.

It is often overlooked, but if you do not wish these personal information gathering platforms to report what you had for breakfast, you can yank their access to the internet by creating a blocking rule in your firewall.

Users have tools at their disposal to help protect their personal data, some are just not informed enough or are too lazy to use them.

3 users thanked author for this post.

rc primak, Northwest Rick, CyGuy

Reply | Quote

CCleaner is nonsenseware because Windows already ships all tools required to get the job done. And for those who believe that deleting orphaned registry keys improves performance… it’s a myth… and even ‘cleaning up’ a million orphaned registry keys won’t improve the performance by a millisecond..

Reply | Quote

Windows also ships with all the tools we need to do full system backups and restores. But I would not touch the user interfaces for these tools with a ten-foot polecat. Sometimes a better interface, with everything well organized and all in one place is worth a bit of a pain and a bother to tame the inevitable freeware telemetry. As long as it can be tamed, that is!

-- rc primak

1 user thanked author for this post.

SueW

Reply | Quote

Once again, I’ll bring up Bleachbit as a FOSS alternative.
https://www.bleachbit.org/

6 users thanked author for this post.

Steve, fk5353, HiFlyer, Jan K., lurks about, Elly

Reply | Quote

I’m starting to consciously choose FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) rather than proprietary… so thank you for the heads up @Zero2dash!

Non-techy Win 10 Pro and Linux Mint experimenter

1 user thanked author for this post.

HiFlyer

Reply | Quote

Also, Bleachbit is multiplatform.

2 users thanked author for this post.

HiFlyer, Elly

Reply | Quote

Bleachbit looks interesting. Yet after reviewing its capabilities, it appears that it doesn’t clean the registry?

I do religiously clean my computer’s registry since a much smaller and clean registry does make Windows perform faster. Yet this is something which shouldn’t be done if you don’t know what you are doing. I will have to dig up my instructions about how to do it properly.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Kirsty, HiFlyer

Reply | Quote

Gone toPlaid, please post the instructions for cleaning up the registry.

Reply | Quote

Try-

https://sourceforge.net/projects/littlecleaner/

For the registry.  From my limited testing it does a pretty good job.

Reply | Quote

Bleachbit was originally made for Linux and then ported to Windows. Bleachbit works great in Linux (with great care, may I add) but, on Windows I have my reservations about it.

For instance, try denying UAC access upon bleachbit 2.0 start and see what happens.

Note: there are no background connections on-line whilst using bleachbit 2.0

Windows - commercial by definition and now function...

Reply | Quote

I looked at BleachBit for Linux (because I am emigrating from Windows to Linux, and I have been accustomed to the earlier, better, versions of CCleaner on Windows).

One thing I didn’t like about BleachBit:  at first glance, it seems that I can delete all cookies or none.  That’s not as fine-grained as I’m accustomed to, and it’s not as fine-grained as I want.  (I want to be able to delete some notoriously bad cookies while keeping everything else; or alternatively to keep some particularly valuable cookies and to delete everything else.  An all-or-nothing deletion tool isn’t fine-grained enough.) Perhaps I haven’t trie hard enough.

Win7 Pro 64-bit SP1 Group W (Group B up to Dec 2017).

Tried Win10 up to 1709;  that installation refused to upgrade to 1803;  Win10 will not see me again.

Linux Mint 18.3 Cinnamon (with Wine).

Reply | Quote

There are other alternatives to CCleaner besides Bleachbit. there’s also Wise Disk Cleaner.

check out the other programs on this Techradar article that could be nice replacements for CCleaner.

2 users thanked author for this post.

cesmart4125, Cybertooth

Reply | Quote

I disabled the monitoring.

I also block all the ‘phone home’ of CC.

Easy.

 

1 user thanked author for this post.

Northwest Rick

Reply | Quote

I did too, and it seemed to work. Unchecked all autoruns entries, like startup & scheduling, which killed the “no exit option” tray icon. But when there is this much fuss made, leading to a mea culpa by the issuer, I cannot be sure there is not more going on here than meets the eye (mine, anyway), so I rolled back to 5.44, preferring to be safe than sorry.

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

Reply | Quote

The first post on the first page of that Piriform forum thread is worth reading. See:

https://forum.piriform.com/topic/52360-changes-in-v545-and-your-feedback/

Paul Piriform (real name unknown) states that no personal data is collected. To quote, “In CCleaner v5.45 we extended existing analytics functionality in the software in order to gain greater insight into how our users interact with the software. This data is completely anonymous…”

The above statement about the data being completely anonymous directly contradicts what is stated in current Privacy Policy on the CCleaner web site. See:

https://www.ccleaner.com/about/privacy-policy

On the above Privacy Policy web page, there are two sections which are worth reading. Click on the “What Happens to Your Personal Data” link and read that. In particular section B about Choice which gives an example with regards to a purchased product. Note that the free version of CCleaner 5.45 removed any Choice from within the product. Yet section B about Choice suggests that it applies to all of their products and not just, for example, to only purchased products.

Then go back to the Privacy Policy web page and in particular, read sections 5 through 11.

Note that Internet Archive Wayback Machine searches reveal that the Privacy Policy was changed sometime between May 19, 2018 and May 26, 2018 to the current Privacy Policy.

Judging from the forum responses, it appears that consumer trust in Avast is going down the drain.

5 users thanked author for this post.

Steve, SueW, rc primak, cesmart4125, Cybertooth

Reply | Quote

I think most users choose the free version of these software titles. So these companies want to earn more then what the few users who actually buy the software bring in. So the end result is collecting data for targeted ads, or selling you data to others for income. Really should not surprise anyone they are doing this. I gave up on free downloads a while ago. Hard to argue a free software should not be doing something to make money, but full disclosure would be nice.

2 users thanked author for this post.

rc primak, Elly

Reply | Quote

Here is a real riot for you all. Compare the Avast (the company) web site’s Privacy Policy to the Avast (CCleaner) web site’s Privacy Policy.

Avast.com Privacy Policy. Note that this document is titled “Avast Privacy Policy”:

https://www.avast.com/en-us/privacy-policy

CCleaner.com Privacy Policy. Note that this document is titled “Avast (CCleaner) Privacy Policy”:

https://www.ccleaner.com/about/privacy-policy

Do you all see the obvious legal issue after comparing the above two privacy policies? Avast (the company) defines a privacy policy for the Company itself, yet separately defines a very different privacy policy for a specific Avast product (CCleaner). Even though Avast purchased Piriform, Avast appears to be treating Piriform as a third party. Furthermore, Avast (the company) admits that they partner and share data with unknown third parties by using the randomly generated GUID for each Avast product software installation. In other words, the unique GUID personally identifies your computer, if not you as well.

In comparison, let’s take a look at Panda Security’s Privacy Policy, which applies not only to the company itself, but also to all of their products. See:

https://www.pandasecurity.com/usa/homeusers/media/legal-notice/

First, notice that Panda’s document is a properly written legal notice which explicitly defines a legal agreement between Panda and the User. Second, go to section V under section 10 and note that Panda explicitly discloses to what third parties (just four third parties) they disclose any personal information to, and that Panda explicitly discloses as Warranties, the security requirements which said four parties must adhere to, in terms of protecting your personal data.

I believe that this post is on topic with regards to the CCleaner 5.45 issues which have upset many users. I used Panda’s Privacy Policy merely as an illustration of a clearly defined Privacy Policy, in comparison to Avast’s contradicting and rather vague Privacy Policies. It would be interesting if others would post links to the Privacy Policies of other AV vendors. Yet doing so would quickly go off-topic from this thread. Thus I suggest that somebody creates a new forum section for such posts.

6 users thanked author for this post.

Steve, SueW, rc primak, Elly, Bill C., cesmart4125

Reply | Quote

Gone to Plaid, your comment is apropos and most informative.

Reply | Quote

WOW! Some serious trench digging there!!!
so it’s war time????
Still what can the little one do? #walkaway? then what?
It seem we are way past 1984…

Still some of the old guards are still holding their fortress strong
and thank goodness for Woody and this site… and many great personality here
You have no idea how history can be changed because of one man’s determination and strength
Thanks da BOSS Woody

back to fishing for better dreams

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

Reply | Quote

They have had some real sketchy things going on with CCleaner. One release someone hacked into it and added malware to it. Now it has questionable data collection going on. This does seem to be the norm with software and apps these days. Collecting data without full disclosure to the end user.

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

Reply | Quote

The hacked version was version 5.33 of CCleaner. The riot is that Avast, a security company, provisioned the new server for Piriform to use, after Avast purchased Piriform. It was this new server which got hacked — not Piriform’s older server which was taken offline when the Avast provisioned server was placed online.

4 users thanked author for this post.

SueW, rc primak, Elly, Cybertooth

Reply | Quote

Useful info – thanks for the heads-up.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Kirsty

Reply | Quote

What on earth were they thinking?

They may have just killed the company.

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

Reply | Quote

They were thinking that if Microsoft does it so can they!!!!

2 users thanked author for this post.

rc primak, Cybertooth

Reply | Quote

I believe I sense a pattern…

First, do something that’s considered on the edge of acceptable. Maybe a bit over the edge.

Then when there’s backlash, say “oops, sorry, we’ll pull back a little”, but not far back.

Then in the future go back over that edge, which has now been softened. Sooner or later people stop noticing.

What I don’t like is that so many companies now must think that becoming predatory and grabbing everything they can from you for profit is their path to success…

Whatever happened to “make a valuable product and the world will beat a path to your door”? Okay, so the engineering to do that is more difficult than just taking advantage of people’s weaknesses. Deal with it!

-Noel

10 users thanked author for this post.

Steve, fk5353, SueW, rc primak, Seff, Jan K., Sessh, Bill C., HiFlyer, Elly

Reply | Quote

I’m glad you brought that up because this strategy is used constantly on the public. They push the limits of what people will tolerate until they complain, then they back off a little and wait for things to settle down. Then, they push a little further until people complain and do it all over again and before you know it, you’ve been pushed from California to Connecticut and have no idea how you got there or that anything was happening at all.

Simply put, things are the way they are because people put up with it and allow it to happen. If we don’t put up with it, then this will truly be the end of Avast and people will continue using old versions of CCleaner or switch to an alternative. I’ve never had an issue with CCleaner and clean the registry a few times a year, but all it ever seems to remove are entries “left behind after uninstalling software” and have never had it delete anything it wasn’t supposed to.

Windows 10 is another example of people allowing MS to push them to the point of redefining what is acceptable and what isn’t without most people even knowing it’s happening. At least there is a strong and growing resistance on that front.

I am glad I got rid of Avast AV some time ago, but had to use Revo Uninstaller to pry it off my system and manually delete all Avast registry keys since neither Avast itself or the Removal Tool supplied by Avast could remove it. It never did anything for me except occasionally interfere with something I didn’t want it to. I’m glad it’s gone. I would have never dreamed of running a system without antivirus and now, I can’t imagine going back to using one.

Reply | Quote

Same experience here, but I used Geek Uninstaller in Force Removal mode to clean up the leftovers. What a pain!

-- rc primak

Reply | Quote

Portable 5.45 is docile enough for me.

Reply | Quote

Psst – why such tools like CCleaner are so much popular? Trust by obscurity, because it’s free and promising? After CCleaner v5.45 has been pulled, due to a s***storm related to telemetry features included, I did an investigation, and came about other peculiarities

https://borncity.com/win/2018/08/04/ccleaner-5-45-pulled-and-other-peculiarities/ 

If somebody has ‘headaches’ due to telemetry, he probably should start to think where his true problem will be …

Ex Microsoft Windows (Insider) MVP, Microsoft Answers Community Moderator, Blogger, Book author

https://www.borncity.com/win/

10 users thanked author for this post.

SueW, Microfix, Sessh, Bill C., samak, HiFlyer, Elly, Cybertooth, Noel Carboni, geekdom

Reply | Quote

Note what Gunter says above.

Beyond evaluating it once in a VM a year or two ago to see what was up with it (so that I could comment on it in good conscience), I have never needed nor used CCleaner. I have run Windows systems for decades without reinstallation, without slowdown, and MOST CERTAINLY without any need for “registry cleaning”.

I do understand why folks would like to have a helpful application to help them manage a complex Windows system, and I do understand a desire to keep things tidy. I certainly can’t fault those who choose to rely in CCleaner to help them keep their systems free of unwanted temporary files, etc.

However, consider – especially in light of recent activities – that this is a product that you are granting full privileges to access all your files, and which has now shown a desire to upload information about your system.

If you do choose to use CCleaner (or any “cleaner” product), please think twice before ever choosing to “clean” your registry. It’s just not something that’s generally needed, and doing so can lead to very serious problems.

-Noel

P.S., I used to use Avast software, but I expunged them from my systems about 4 years ago because I really didn’t like the direction they were heading.

P.P.S., Gunter, you have some references to 4.44, 4.45 in your article; you might want to correct the major version to 5.44, 5.45.

5 users thanked author for this post.

JSTechGeek, Microfix, Bill C., Ascaris, gborn

Reply | Quote

@Noel, thx for the 4.xx thing, I corrected that – it’s pretty hot today ;-).

Ex Microsoft Windows (Insider) MVP, Microsoft Answers Community Moderator, Blogger, Book author

https://www.borncity.com/win/

Reply | Quote

I apply a ‘no phone home’ policy to every bit of software, including Windows.

If I need any software to connect to the Internet, I decide when it will, e.g. updating AV or Windows.

 

Reply | Quote

Respectfully, I disagree about not cleaning the Registry for many reasons.

Reply | Quote

Its a tricky issue and hard to ‘prove’ anything…
but I agree…
ever since I found out that a 3rd party AV
which I uninstall and thuoght I scrape clean years back
suddenly show up on the ‘attempt to connect’ the internet
I totally freaked out and then I went quite analistic to find that ‘problem’
and it turns out that there is still some ‘orphan registry’ that seems to be the culprit
No harm done w a good firewall
but without the software and it has been clean uninstall
How can this happen??? Again, we can conveniently blame ‘3rd party’
Yes ‘orphan registery’ are not suppose to do anything. I know. Weird and I cannot explain either.
Yet is M$ – Mac – Linux offical programs any safer?
It’s all down to consumer-user trust on the deeper ananlytical knowledge of the product (and not just the advertisment). Unless we are learn to write the source code for everything.
Now if I want to install any new software or updates, (image everything first just in case)
I make sure I can clean uninstall – CLEAN means CLEAN means NOT even one bit on my system.
So I install, then uninstall, then search for any scraps of orphans.
if its clean, then I install again and use it with peace of mind, knowing I can clean uninstall.
at least the software prorgamer/company respect my rights as a user.

and perhaps that experience is a weird one and one-off.
be safe out there…

back to fishing for better dream

Reply | Quote

Bit of a taboo subject this, and has been discussed in many Askwoody threads.

I use CCleaner to Check/ Scan for registry redundancies due to old program installers not removing everything associated with a program and leaving behind dead keys. I back up the redundant registry key/s first within Regedit, then I use Regedit to remove them manually. These are usually within HKLM and HKCU but, I don’t use CCleaner or any other utility to make changes to my system’s registry.

Never had a registry problem using this method and regedit from WinXP to W8.1

Windows - commercial by definition and now function...

1 user thanked author for this post.

JCCWsusser

Reply | Quote

(Slightly OT) @gborn, in one paragraph on your borncity.com post you mention Defraggler in passing, with the comment in parentheses “also such a Windows killer”. Would you explain what you mean? I have Defraggler on a couple of my systems and have used it without problems, but I will uninstall it if it is not safe to use.

Thank you!

 

Keep Running Windows 7 Safely for Years to Come  
Make Windows 10 look and work like Windows 7

Reply | Quote

Yeah, same question was asked from a German reader. A couple of years ago I wrote an Insider and Super-Tricks book about Windows 7  (I guess, but maybe it was Vista) in German. One idea was, to recommend tools for defragmentation within the book. I tested a couple of free tools – one was Defraggler.

Surprisingly I ended with a super fast test system, after using Defraggler (but I have to mention, that between using Defraggler and the super fast system was a clean install of Windows, because Defraggler ruined my system, so I wasn’t able to fix it anymore).

During the test I found also, that none of the 3rd party defragmentation tools did a good job – most came out as snake oil. There are two German blog posts dealing with that Defrag thing – see my German comment here, where I linked the two blog posts.

BTW: Use https://www.deepl.com to translate my German text

And if I may trust my memories, I’ve had a couple of cases during my time as MS answers community moderator, where Defraggler has been the root cause for major issues. But maybe it’s wrong memories or fake news ;-).

Ex Microsoft Windows (Insider) MVP, Microsoft Answers Community Moderator, Blogger, Book author

https://www.borncity.com/win/

6 users thanked author for this post.

SueW, rc primak, Microfix, geekdom, Elly, Cybertooth

Reply | Quote

? says:

thank you, gborn!

what about disconnecting from the internet when running CCleaner? after the monthly microsoft updates (when feasable) i stop the nic, bits, crypto, windows update, then run diskcleanup\DISM then ccleaner and finish off with PrivaZer…

Reply | Quote

It’s simply a question of trust. Would you install a software from North Korea? No? Why you use a software from a company, that sign it’s software with a digital certificate, but tries to hide it’s company location? Till now, I haven’t found any sense in such a behavior. That’s all I can say.

Ex Microsoft Windows (Insider) MVP, Microsoft Answers Community Moderator, Blogger, Book author

https://www.borncity.com/win/

3 users thanked author for this post.

Microfix, Bill C., Elly

Reply | Quote

? says:
Dank, Herr Borne, Ihre Computerkenntnisse und Erfahrungen werden sehr geschätzt…

MVP EDIT: Google Translate: Thanks, Mr. Borne, your computer skills and experience are greatly appreciated…

1 user thanked author for this post.

Microfix

Reply | Quote

Gunter, based on your blog post I check the CCleaner.com website from here in the U.S. and found that there is a link on their page “About”>”Offices” that lists their address in the U.K. There are links to Google Maps which shows the 110 High Holborn address as what appears to be a significant office building rather than a small house up for sale. Just a heads up. You may want to recheck things.

Win10 Pro x64 22H2, Win10 Home 22H2, Linux Mint + a cat with 'tortitude'.

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

Reply | Quote

Well 110 High Holborn is one office location, where probably some developers resides, others resides on other places.

Relevant is for me to build trust: a) a clear imprint on the web page (I didn’t found such a thing) and where the letterbox address for the company owner is. And that’s the building I mentioned.

Addendum: Since my post, I received some reader feedback. Currently I’m aware of 3 different addresses for Piriform (one letterbox address), scattered over it’s web site (or in GB business registers). It took serveral people some time, to find out something, that should be clearly visible in a sites header or footer via a About us or Contact us link (in Germany it’s absolutely mandatory for business sites, and has been heavily sanctioned by courts).

2nd, have you checked the GoDaddy record of ccleaner.com site. Why they are attempting to hide the ownwer? Maybe there is a simple explanation, I didn’t found one.

In my opinion there are too many things that smell. So I just ask questions … each user have to jugdge itself.

Ex Microsoft Windows (Insider) MVP, Microsoft Answers Community Moderator, Blogger, Book author

https://www.borncity.com/win/

6 users thanked author for this post.

Microfix, Steve S., geekdom, HiFlyer, Bill C., Elly

Reply | Quote

Hooray and Kudos for gborn research. If it smells like sh**, don’t step in it, just go around.

Reply | Quote

I appreciate your efforts and blog. I used to use Avast years ago but found them becoming less and less user friendly – whether through incompetence or intent, I don’t know. CCleaner is quickly following suit. I hope they truly turn a corner this time, respect their users and become transparent. Not holding my breath, though.

Win10 Pro x64 22H2, Win10 Home 22H2, Linux Mint + a cat with 'tortitude'.

2 users thanked author for this post.

rc primak, Microfix

Reply | Quote

Psst – why such tools like CCleaner are so much popular?

If Microsoft would have built a better user interface for Disk Cleanup, I bet neither CCleaner nor Defraggler would ever have gained traction. But when we are stuck with a Windows XP style interface and three screens to get to the advanced cleanup options, I can easily understand how many folks, myself included, fell into the trap of third-party freeware dependency.

Now we are faced with either going back to Microsoft’s arcane interface, or else struggling to tame third party companies who have found no better way to make a profit than to engage in sneaky and unethical spying practices. It’s called monetizing the user, and it stinks, no matter who’s doing it. But there is no other proven business model which allows a for-profit company to offer software for free.

-- rc primak

4 users thanked author for this post.

Steve, SueW, CADesertRat, Microfix

Reply | Quote

Methodology I have used for ANY 3rd party utility over the years:
1. Find and use a portable version if available.
(check with TotalVirus pre-download then scan with AV & M-Bytes once downloaded)
2. Run/ Install on system off line
3. Do a custom install carefully (checking tick boxes) also checking portable settings.
4. Check for background phone home/ connections using network monitoring tools.
5. Check autoruns and edit ini files to suit my needs and create firewall rule-sets.
6. Export firewall rules for off line backup.

My 6trix haven’t failed me yet.

Edit Note: All my portable apps are in one folder whereby nothing changes within that folder (even offline backups) so all our windows devices can share the same firewall rule-sets (W7 and W8.1 separate) .The beauty of this is a simple drag and drop of folder with import of firewall rule-sets when a new installation is required..job done.

Windows - commercial by definition and now function...

3 users thanked author for this post.

JSTechGeek, SueW, Bill C.

Reply | Quote

Absolutely the best rules for any new software. Visitors should save this list and refer to it often.

My only addition that I add is to do “About Us” research on the publisher or company like Mr. Born has done. I usually do that, but as I learned with this CCleaner episode, I had not been doing it routinely and missed the changes. Different companies equal different policies and corporate morals.

That is why I deleted my LinkedIn account when MS bought it. Different corporate morality (or amorality). If there had been no GWX, I probably would have kept it active (I do know the deletion was a closing the barn door after the horses have left effort.)

Reply | Quote

rc primak wrote:

If Microsoft would have built a better user interface for Disk Cleanup, I bet neither CCleaner nor Defraggler would ever have gained traction. But when we are stuck with a Windows XP style interface and three screens to get to the advanced cleanup options, I can easily understand how many folks, myself included, fell into the trap of third-party freeware dependency.

Now we are faced with either going back to Microsoft’s arcane interface, or else …

On Windows 10; Settings, System, Storage, Free up space now is simple, reasonably fast and fairly efficient. I use it on different computers nearly every day to good effect, often reclaiming 10 or 20 GB disk space in a few minutes. (Windows Update Cleanup takes a bit longer, but deleting Windows.old can be quite quick.) You don’t have to be stuck with an arcane interface if you don’t stick with an obsolete operating system.

Reply | Quote

I use ADwcleaner

Reply | Quote

It’s nice to know that feedback can make a difference, while they go back to their drawing boards, trying to keep their customers happier.

Yeah, nice. But why did they in the first place trying to implement data collecting in a way that I can only see as sneaky, devious, un-ethical, dishonest, etc. etc.?

Be honest, sincere and upfront, give us the choice of supporting your efforts. By trying to cheat your customers, you for sure will loose street credit…

Been a big fan for years, but stopped updating around the time of the “malware edition”. This latest revalation may stop me completely.

Thanks to those suggesting alternative cleaners! Will go have a look.

The company plans to release a fact sheet that outlines which data it collects, its purpose, and how it is processed.

Good idea.

And is indeed a requirement to be in compliance with GDPR… not just for piriform, but for each and every data storing company.

4 users thanked author for this post.

CADesertRat, rc primak, BobbyB, samak

Reply | Quote

anonymous wrote:

? says: thank you, gborn! what about disconnecting from the internet when running CCleaner? after the monthly microsoft updates (when feasable) i stop the nic, bits, crypto, windows update, then run diskcleanup\DISM then ccleaner and finish off with PrivaZer…

Why not simply block it?

Reply | Quote

? says:

…just habit, i suppose, simply flick the nic switch and get quiet and look at what has gone on since i last looked and avoids the lookie lou problems. my mse sends a full report anyway during the weekly quick scan. spynet demands to be enabled in order to have real time protection…

Reply | Quote

This is so sad. I have used Ccleaner for over 10 years. I commented months ago on Ccleaner not being a “registry cleaner” but a general file cleaner with a registry cleaner added years later. I was using version 1.x long ago. We used it on many peoples PCs and on our own work PCs for years. I used it to remove malware or spyware since it has options to uninstall programs, and can delete registry startup keys rather than just disable like the MS startup list does.

I will not go above version 5.29 or 5.30, pre avast. I loved Ccleaner but will not ever upgrade it. I guess I will have to go back to making my own .bat (.cmd) files again.

Symantec ruined Norton, Avast ruined Ccleaner.  I can only hope that the periform person starts another product like Ccleaner with a different name.

Reply | Quote

the last pre-avast version of CCleaner was v5.32, which I have installed on an old PC with no internet connection. it runs faster than with the recent versions of CCleaner.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Steve

Reply | Quote

I’ve had good luck with Wise Disk Cleaner.  However, after reading GonetoPlaid’s comments, I’m going to read over their privacy policy again.  I’m also going to consider using something other than AVAST free and may go back to using MBAM and MSE.

Reply | Quote

Avast certainly has a “magic touch” when it comes to messing things up. I avoid them now. Hopefully things will even out with ccleaner as I do find it useful. If not I will find an alternative – maybe bleachbit. I used Eraser years ago and liked some aspects of it and tried McAfee Shredder but didn’t like it. Now if windows file delete actually deleted files rather than hiding them…

It’s a bad week for addons/updates overall – Lastpass for Firefox is mucked up at the moment.

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

Reply | Quote

anonymous wrote:

? says: …just habit, i suppose, simply flick the nic switch and get quiet and look at what has gone on since i last looked and avoids the lookie lou problems. my mse sends a full report anyway during the weekly quick scan. spynet demands to be enabled in order to have real time protection…

OK, but I wonder how that is better than simply making a firewall rule to prevent the app phoning home in the first place?

Reply | Quote

? says:

alkhall, thank you for your question and sorry for the reply delay. i was feindishly hacking away at yet another ubuntu incarnation. i guess i don’t like to play with the advanced firewall as much as other stuff. for me a flick ‘o the switch does the trick. i run all my tools from a usb because i don’t like anything (third party) installed on windows because it is way too much for me to keep track of. i run everything stripped down as far as it will go and still run. right now i’m running  2 xp pro’s, 4 win7 pro’s, 1 ubuntu 14.04, 2 ubuntu 16.04.s (1 full install, 1 persistent), and 2 18.04 unity (1 persistent, 1 full install). the ubuntu’s came in when it became crystal clear that things were changing drastically in Redmond and my days of toying around in window’s are numbered what with all the problems and the looming EOL flags flapping in the breeze. Also, from what i’ve seen of winx it is not for me in it’s current state of (dis)affairs. so, i agree with you that proper computing etiquette requires proper methods, however; in my case i rather enjoy ripping my toys apart and then putting them back together better (in my opinion) than they come from the digit factory. i must again say how blessed i am to have woody’s lounge, blue mushrooms, the pro loungers, and stellar guest stars who put win patching and everything else right here within easy reach…

Reply | Quote

I am going to wait a month or so, then evaluate my use of CCleaner. I can get by with nothing more than Glary Utilities. (Be aware, Glary also has telemetry, and you can’t easily disable their Windows Startup Tray item.) But it has been nice to have a one-stop shop for Windows cleanup.

Bleachbit is great for Linux, but it is not tailored to the needs of a Windows environment. The same thing can be said of ClamWin, a derivative of ClamAV. Works well on Linux, but not so well suited for Windows. Note also that ClamWin is behind in its development compared with ClamAV for Linux. I don’t know whether this makes and functional difference, but the developers have seen fit to include a warning in ClamWin saying its engine is out of date.

So open-source software which works on open-source OSes may not be as well suited for use on a closed-source OS like Windows.

-- rc primak

2 users thanked author for this post.

SueW, Elly

Reply | Quote

GoneToPlaid wrote:

Respectfully, I disagree about not cleaning the Registry for many reasons.

I’ve used the Registry cleaner part of CCleaner for many years without a problem – from Windows XP thru Vista, 7 and now 10.

I recall some years back a thread on another forum where one of the moderators was a computer tech who serviced computers for many customers (still does, I believe).

He had a PC from a client to fix (can’t remember what the exact problem was but it was software related) and he was about to format the hard drive and reinstall Windows after trying everything he knew to fix the problem to no avail.

As a last resort, he decided to try the Registry cleaning function of CCleaner (he’d never used it before but someone else on the forum suggested it) and he was quite surprised (and delighted, no doubt) to find that this fixed the problem with this particular PC.

Now, I know that was just one instance of a registry cleaner solving a problem but it was interesting to see that it could fix a computer problem where the only other option left appeared to be a format and reinstall of Windows (which would, of course, have taken a lot more time for the tech to do and cost the customer a lot more money).

Reply | Quote

EP wrote:

The last pre-avast version of CCleaner was v5.32, which I have installed on an old PC with no internet connection. it runs faster than with the recent versions of CCleaner.

This is the version I have.

I run it after I disconnect from the Internet (Hey, at the abode, I’m still on v.92, so it goes without saying.).

If people are still reticent about the difference between the ‘free‘ version and the professional version – well – there are ways to unlock the professional version without having to submit personal financial data.

Important links you can use, without the monetization pitch = https://pqrs-ltd.xyz/bookmark4.html

Reply | Quote

I had an interesting occurrence today.  After reading this blog a few days ago; I used Revo to un-install my current version of CCleaner; and to remove it’s “Scheduled Tasks”; and then; I installed an “old” version CCleaner – vers. 4.17.  OK – so I’m a softy; I like CCleaner.

Today; I let my AVAST antivirus update it’s “program” to 18.6 (I don’t let that happen without my permission – and today seemed like a good day.)  As I watched the reboot (from the AVAST upgrade) – I saw a UAC prompt (User Account Control) for CCleaner – which I OK’d (I’d use CCleaner some time before the AVAST update and simply thought that it was restarting as an existing program … part of the re-boot caused by AVAST).

Well, did I learn something !!!!!   Either the AVAST program update or the old version of CCleaner had installed the newest version of CCleaner; complete with its three Scheduled Tasks; one of which allows unlimited, silent updates of CCleaner.  Since AVAST now owns CCleaner; do they also have the right to upgrade it when you update your Anti-Virus program ???  One of those Scheduled Tasks is a bypass of UAC which is acceptable for a “trusted” program; but it appears that CCleaner can no longer be “trusted”.  I would never have seen any of this, but that my “uninstall” had remove the “UAC bypass” task and my install of the older CCleaner 4.17 didn’t create a new UAC bypass … so – I saw the new CCleaner start up on the reboot; and went investigating.

So, be careful; its a tricky world out there.

3 users thanked author for this post.

columbia2011, Elly, Kirsty

Reply | Quote

BSC, I too like CCleaner and have stopped at version 5.29 and will not go higher. I saw that Ccleaner was phoning home even with the updates turned off. this was mentioned to them and the support guy did not have a reason why it did that. So keep Ccleaner in your firewall as blocked unless you do want it to phone home.

Another item to mention is AVG is now owned by Avast and AVG since August 14th has not been able to get antivirus updates. The AVG support is totally stumped, even though all the users are telling them why the error messages are showing up for them. It is sad that the support of AVG now Avast is so lacking and inept.
https://support.avg.com/answers?id=9060N000000g8IfQAI

Also the new AVG is not allowing offline updating of the AV program. You can only update the definitions by the internet.
https://support.avg.com/answers?id=906b0000000Dyz0AAC

What about computers that are not on the net, but are used daily and need antivirus for flash drives, CD’s, etc.?

1 user thanked author for this post.

Elly

Reply | Quote

Thank you @BusinessSellCanada for the heads up! I have recently read of updates to CCleaner installing Avast without knowledge (no warning or check boxes to uncheck). I know someone personally that this happened to. It now seems that updating Avast may install the newest version of CCleaner without knowledge. What is the answer? Never allow any of your software to update? Download new versions and monitor closely for checkboxes? Tricky world indeed.

Reply | Quote

Avast has been getting obnoxious over the last few years. I had Avast 7 on a Windows 7 system and let it “upgrade” to versions 8 and then 9. They had such a ridiculous interface, with cartoonish characters and infantile names for functions. Plus, they hid a ton of elements, no doubt in the name of “simplifying” the UI. Whereas Avast 7 showed you a progress bar with a bunch of informative real-time indicators, the current version shows you simply a percentage done.

I have kept Avast 7 Free on a couple of XP machines and have refused to “upgrade” them because of this moronization of the UI. But as their license periods approached expiration, I discovered that–for the first time–they cannot be renewed no matter how many times you click through the cycle of renewal dialog boxes.

Oh, and despite them being on the ancient version 7, in recent months (following its purchase by Avast) CCleaner suddenly popped up in the notification area, even though I had not installed it on those machines. Somehow, not only did CCleaner manage to get installed, but it was  also added to the automatic Startup items and I had to go into MSCONFIG to undo that setting.

Keep Running Windows 7 Safely for Years to Come  
Make Windows 10 look and work like Windows 7

3 users thanked author for this post.

Bill C., Noel Carboni, Elly

Reply | Quote

Not so much on Windows XP; but on higher Windows versions; the CCleaner’s install also adds 3 tasks to your Task Scheduler.  One bypasses the UAC prompt when CCleaner runs (so you can’t see it starting); and one of the other ones runs an automatic CCleaner version update program (so that they can force feed you with future updates to do anything that they want).  To stop all of this deception from happening; you need to disable or remove these three scheduled tasks.  It’s not just the autorun shown in MSCONFIG that is the problem.

 

 

1 user thanked author for this post.

Cybertooth

Reply | Quote

If you use the portable version, at least as of v5.44, it does NOT contain the updater.exe file. Even so I decided to disable (by deletion of the task) the UAC suppression task to ensure that I knew if CCleaner ever decided to run without my permission.

When I uninstalled the version 5.45, I made sure that hte registry was cleansed of CCleaner items before I copied the Portable Verion to my HDD. I do not want Avast anything, and I do not want a phone home version of CCleaner. The “free” Avast AV was the most nagging program I ever used.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Cybertooth

Reply | Quote