Jump to content


Honorary Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Cavehomme

  1. Through a combination of the latest KIS recently installed plus MWB already on one of my laptops a few days ago, the system restore of Windows 10 stopped working. In trying to resolve that, the laptop eventually stopped loading the user login selection and there was no way to remediate, had to go back to a backup from a couple of months ago. I think that the only safe options with MWB are alongside Windows Defender.
  2. Hi Exile, Just to be clear, this map data includes missed PUPs? If so, then it's not entirely representative of real malware gaps and the adequacy of MWB. Yes PUPs can be "potentially unwanted programs" but they are not 'de facto' malicious malware. That said, the MRG Effitas test still shows MWB missing detection of 28% of PUAs/Adware, on top of an 18% miss rate on financial malware and 17% miss rate on ransomware, which is much worse than most other products. That's why I am trying to understand / learn what this map is actually showing, and on what basis is it generating data when the independent tests show that MWB is no longer as effective as it used to be, especially when I used to first use the product. If you need the reference to the test, here it is: https://www.mrg-effitas.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/MRG-Effitas-2018Q1-360-Assessment.pdf Thank you.
  3. I'm running the latest version of Pro, 3.5.1 and I've noticed that the on-demand scan has no longer any such scan options on-demand, just scheduled. Not sure when this option disappeared. I like to do adhoc hyper scans before initiating a banking session for example. When was this adhoc scanning option removed and why? Or is it hidden somewhere?
  4. Exile, I appreciate the prompt response, thanks. MWB is clearly quite effective and picking up omissions from AVs, but as AVs improve and now have several layers, I have to question whether Windows Defender plus MWB Pro is sufficient. For example, looking at the MRG Effitas results, there are some big gaps in both applications, albeit WD has improved massively this past year. In a real-life situation, if some banking trojan should get on to my laptop which neither WD nor MWB detect, then I will be screwed and left penniless as my account is emptied. Some alternative solutions such as Avira, Norton and a couple of others scored much better on the range of tests. Even using something such as a virtual environment like Comodo and Kasperky might be the answer for banking, but those solutions come with the downside of complexity and more compatability issues than what I've experienced with plain and simple WD + MWB Pro. It's the eternal conundrum we all face, which single tool or combination of tools is best to protect the user in specific scenarios. So far I want to keep with WD+MWB but on some PCs I'm using Norton or Comodo or Sophos Home Premium. On one I've even got completely frustrated with Windows 10 issues that I've gone for Linux Mint recently. I had hoped to consolidate all this variety with a simple solution of WD + MWB Pro across all of them, but then saw these SE Labs and MRG reviews, plus there was an abject failure of the MWB Sales department to be able to offer me a good enough pricing deal compared with the other solutions, and now I'm in limbo. I want to get out of this limbo situation asap, your reply has helped, but I need to consider further. Any other suggestions welcome. Thanks.
  5. I would be nice if MWB was sufficient, but it's not, far from it, according to the latest independent test by MRG Effitas and SE Labs. In fact, with such poor results especially with SE Labs, we really have to question the actualp rotection being provided by MWB. The vision is great, the implementation / execution of this vision is getting weaker as each independent test shows. Can we have some informed response from MWB management here as to what is really going on here, because like many others, as a long time user, am getting really concerned about the quality and capability of MWB in fighting malware effectively. By the way, I don't particularly like my label "New Member", having signed up 6 years ago in 2012, and being a user since before then, in 2009 or 2010 almost back at the start of this software.
  6. Yes, I'd suggest it's definitely necessary to also use another AV, in my personal experience having used it since version 1. But it's not only in my own experience, according to the most recent results of the highly respected testing organisation MRG Effitas who focus more on testing for financial malware and AV product resilience against online banking threats, etc. Their latest tests show that Malwarebytes failed to detect 6.2% of malware samples in their generic malware test and failed to detect 10.0% of financial malware. On the ransomware tests Malwarebytes scored a perfect 100% detection, that's great news! On PUAs and Adware detection, an area I have assumed for many years that Malwarebyes was meant to be much better than "traditional" AVs, it failed to detect a huge 22.4% of tested threats! I really do think we need some transparent answers from Marcin on this one, it's what the product has been sold on for many years. Despite that, I do use Malwarebytes Premium, I have 3 licenses, which run in addition to the OS-supplied Windows 10 Defender that's increasingly very effective, as the same MRG results show. Malwarebytes Premium is an important extra layer of security that normally causes zero problems, apart from some recent v3.3 and 3.4 issues. I also find it highly effective in blocking malware sites and "malvertising" links, it's the best tool I've experienced for that. But I would never accept what the marketing department says, and some fans here, that using Malwarebytes entirely on its own is a good idea, it just cannot be, at least not today, and at least not for the average PC user. My personal suggestion for an average PC user who doesn't use TOR / visit the dark web or visit porn sites is to use Windows 10 Defender + Malwarebytes Premium. Also to use the "uBlock Origin" browser addon, nothing more. I personally would not waste time or money and mess up my PCs by using those other security suites out there, I've had too many bad experiences. Here is a link to the MRG test results for those interested in learning more: https://www.mrg-effitas.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/MRG-Effitas-360-Assessment_2017_Q4_wm.pdf I look forward to ongoing improvements in Malwarebytes Premium, especially quality and stability, not just protection capability.
  7. Ah, OK, thanks for clarifying. I'll leave both WIn 10 AE and MWB AE in default settings and confident that MWB is both filling in the gaps as well as respecting any potential overlaps / conflicts. I've noe gone through another whole day today without any further conflicts - it's looking good and fingers crossed, keep up the great work Arthi and guys. This is exactly what I need, the underlying security of the OS manufacturer with MWB filling the gaps as well as hovering overhead like a hawk waiting to swoop down and attack if anything tries to circumnavigate Windows security.
  8. Thanks Exile. Re your first point, I'd personally say that security is primarily the remit of the OS producer. A market has been created due to MS' failure to do it properly. Now that in the past few years MS have got their act together much better, there is less need for full alternatives, rather complimentary products that add a layer or two. Adding those layers needs to be done extremely carefully and in recognition that the OS should have first call / priority. That's why I've now moved away from internet security suites to Defender but also recognise that MWB is the ideal choice to sit on top of Defender. That leads on to the scond point....MWB pro was the ideal choice for me until in recent months I've suffered unexplained and frustrating lock ups on default settings of both WD and MWB Pro, with the exception being MWB files and processes being exempted from WD. I've been using MWB Pro since at least 8 years and the past few months have been the most frustrating. Two of my three licenses, on different PCs, have not been used because of this stability / conflict issue, so it's a major problem for me. I'm not prepared to allow MWB to completely take over security from WD. The third license is on and off, I keep hoping for resolution. The past couple of days have been stable, so perhaps an improvement has been implemented, fingers crossed.
  9. Thanks for the insight. I'm puzzled though about your comment "most of them are turned off by default". The default settings of Windows 10 AE are that 4 of the 5 settings are ON not off (screenshot attachd). Are we comparing / talking about the same thing please? Thanks.
  10. I don't think that the OP question has been answered, I have the same question. Considering Windows 10 OS has it's own anti-exploit functions, and since I prefer to leave them on, since that is the default for the OS, does that mean MWB AE functions within MWB Pro should be disabled to avoid duplication and conflicts, or is the AE module designed to complement Win 10 AE functions? Put another way, the OS designer has multiple layers of security which should all be switched on as per the default. Anything MWB or any other vendor should, in my view, be additional lavers and not REPLACING or intefering with the OS. Before version 3 it was clear that MWB was in this complimentary category, but now since V3 it's competing with the OS and I've had several lock-ups on default settings of both Win 10 and MWB Pro. By de-activiating Pro or removing MWB completely solves the problem. I'd prefer to leave MWB Pro on, I've excluded it's various recommended files and processes from Win 10 Defender, but still get issues from time to time. Anyway, my ultimate question is the same as the OP, is the AE module of MWB working in competion with, or complimentary to Wind 10 AE? Thanks.
  11. It's back. The only way of controlling this appears to be turning off all realtime protection on MWB. This is happening on 3 different Windows 10 systems. I doubt that I can be alone in experiencing this. It happens when WD is the main AV and MWB as secondary, and deliberately not registering in the Action Centre because of the well-known issues a couple of months ago. The issue might be with W10 FCU but MWB need to make their product completely compatible with the OS without the user having to tweak, exempt, work-around etc. In order to get adequate all-round protection I've had to revert to using a previous license of Norton IS unfortunately, but at least it is very stable, in fact absolutely no issues.
  12. After about 8 hours of usage there have been no problems so far, but it's too early to tell since this is an intermittent issue. I guess my question for AE and "EMET" should more precisely be - is MWB designed to work with the Windows 10 exploit protection fully enabled whilst it's own AE functions are also fully enabled? Should W10 exploit protection be switched off or does MWB know it's enabled and acts accordingly? There seems to be considerable scope for overlap and hence potential conflicts. Is there a recommended setting, officially or through user experience on the forum that you might be aware of ? Thanks.
  13. I re-installed today with a fresh download and it's showing 262. Both AE and EMET are enabled on default settings, is this the recommended setting or should one of them be fully or partially disabled? WD is my main AV and MWB is set not to register in WAC. Thanks.
  14. Fascinating. However, the issue, at least for me and as a Windows user since DOS days, only occurs since the recent FCU AND with MWB on premium protection. Therefore I suspect it's something to do with MWB AE conflict with EMET. Over and above that there is clearly an issue which you describe eloquently and fully, and which may or may not be related. In practical terms a typical user can't really follow your advice unlike an advanced user. The onus has to be on MWB and ultimately Microsoft to fix the problem. Or, like you, migrate to a Mac, which I am seriously contemplating (or Linux) due to way too many issues and time-wasting with Windows over the years. I don't see Windows 10 improving things, quite the opposite, problems are being compounded. Seeing similar problems with Office 2016, weird conflicts that no-one seems to be able to solve, not even MS despite their massive hike in telemetric data.
  15. I'm still getting the issues of Windows start button freezing, unresponsive applications, that I reported above, that's with AE disabled as well. The only remedy has been to either uninstall MWB or de-register the license, so it's clearly a MWB issue with active protection conflicting with the most recent version of Windows. I have 3 licenses and it's occuring on freshly re-stored Windows 10 devices too.
  16. Now running MWB in real-time with AE disabled, but with "EMET" now re-enabled on default settings, it's been stable for the past few hours, so Start button and other freezing issues (except the long-standing Office 2016 freezes which are an entirely separate matter altogether). It appears that the conflict is therefore with MWB AE and I saw in another post that this is being looked at by the devs. My point is that FCU has been known about for months and such a severe incompatibility and lock-ups should not be happening, this is too fundamental. Perhaps I was a bit harsh earlier, there's a lot of positives about this product, but I hope they focus more effort on testing. The way forward is definitely to have WD enabled plus a product like MWB hovering overhead like a hawk, ready to swoop down and deal with anything that slips through, in preference to any of those other security suites out there. Just hope MWB can keep getting it right.
  17. Now experiencing even worse issues, parts of the Windows 10 desktop locking up, Start button inoperable. This is AFTER disabling exploit protection on WD. Clearly MWB exploit protection is not compatible with W10 FCU (even with EMET switched off). What kind of testing did you guys do to miss this? This is in addition to the problem of incorrect registration by MWB in the Windows 10 security settings, but it could be vice-versa. Anyway, the only way to fix this one is to uninstall and reinstall MWB again...but then the AE / EMET issues freeze the PC. What a pile! The only way MWB can stay on the PC is if it is deregistered and stops being real-time, merely on-demand, the problems seem to go away. Why do I have 3 paid private licenses of this product and was on the verge of approving a request for thousands of business licenses from my IT department? My business would be in meltdown at the moment if these same problems were replicated across it! You guys need to re-focus on testing, quality control and stability.
  18. I have the same issue this morning, MWP Pro was showing as the primary AV rather than as secondary real-time. This is not what I want, but I guess that's why MWB staff are not saying anything about this issue, they are probably very happy, FCU now places their software at a higher priority than WD, even if that creates a risk to the user. Update: I deactivated MWB Pro and then re-activated it. Now it's treating WD correctly as primary AV. There remains a serious potential issue for users though, of running 2 anti-exploit systems is going to cause problems, unless MWB Pro is designed to give priority to the AE funcionality in WD. It could be considered negligent of MWB not have issued an advisory on whether MWB AE should be enabled or not after FCU is installed. They've had months to do so, but it seems from what people are saying here, users are being left on their own to decide. It's not OK to wait until there might be an issue and then try various scenarios, this is a core design issue, we need to know what the design parameters are for running MWB Pro alongside WD in FCU considering the nee EMET functions are now included. If I have missed any such guidelines, someone please post them, thank you.
  19. I've been a paid user since 2010 and this one still drives me nuts... Selecting between 1-15 seconds duration in increments of 1 second is silly. No-one will think, "oh, shall I choose 6 or 7 seconds?" Also, 15 seconds is nowhere near enough when you are busy and suddenly it's gone before you can read it. Do what others do, where any user-chosen value say up to 999 seconds, or if field length is an issue, 99 seconds. Or just have a drop down selection with, for example: 3, 5, 10, 15, 30, 60, 75, 90.
  20. But it's a true comment! A users' primary concern should really be the highest level of security, not if you like the GUI or not. I also do not like the new GUI, the designers follow the latest fashion if even if it's rubbish, it's designed for children who use their fingers for everything, not keyboards and mice, Despite my feeling for the poor GUI, I still upgraded to the latest version because of the best security. Think about it, you are using software today which is designed for threats 4 years ago!!!
  21. It's more than a couple of minutes and I am still getting this false positive when trying to access my Google Administrator account using Chrome. Kindly let us know when the fix has been posted, I have already updated the update database.
  22. Are these exclusions added as file exemptions in Windows Defender or process exemptions? If file, then is it not enough to simply add the exclusion at folder level? Thanks for clarifying.
  23. Wow, there are some unfriendly mods / posters here, why so? I too would like to know / propose that MBAE is offered, at least for a while, on a lifetime license, in a similar way to MBAM was until it reached v2. There are lots of reasons why they may wnat to consider doing that, especially for a new product until it gains sufficient traction. Another reason is that a lifetime license could be offered to just home users, for example those who don't feel "right" about not paying anything for using very useful software so they want to pay for their appreciation of the product whilst not being able to afford an ongoing professional license payment. And yes, I agree that this is the right place to post such a request since this thread is entitled "Is there any plans for selling lifetime licenses anytime?"
  24. That's very clear and very helpful, thanks. It gives me a lot of confidence in using the product realtime now.
Back to top
  • Create New...

Important Information

This site uses cookies - We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.