Jump to content


Honorary Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Durew

  • Rank
    True Member

Profile Information

  • Location
  • Interests
    Computer security, human biology and some other things.

Recent Profile Visitors

2,605 profile views
  1. So far I've had MWB running with Symantec EndpointProtect and Emsisoft AntiMalware without problems (do set exceptions). So I politely disagree with your statement. That said, many here consider MBAM+Windows Defender to be sufficient.
  2. Hi Oaklandr, Malwarebytes is blocking acces to a site it deems dangerous. That's all. But if you think you are infected, please visit this topic explains how to get that checked out. Regards, Durew
  3. Hi wsvdyk, I'm glad to hear it all worked out for you. Regards, Durew
  4. Durew


    @IvanIvanovich thanks for your reply. That sucks. I had a bit brighter outlook on your situation: lots of clients who were grateful that you helped them, not constant yelling. I hope that you will be able to enjoy the fun parts of your work again soon. I'd rather stay in engineering than move to politics. I can only say that I did see the promise more narrow than you did and expected that something would slip through regardless of procedures. (Since I don't have the literal source and stuff I can't say who is right and it sounds way to much like finding out would include acting like politicians and lawyers.) Especially when you push updates as often as MB. But I do now better understand your point of view. When you take the promise broader than I did they did break their promise as it was an update that wrecked stuff on a big scale. A bad definition update in the time that version 1.75 was the most recent, I intended to say. But that detail aside, I don't recall at the moment what control 1.75 offered that 3.3.1 doesn't. Could you mention some examples of control the 1.75 version offered that the 3.3.1 version does not? Or is this more a 'relative to other AV software' perspective, where, compared to other AV-software at their respective times, Malwarebytes offers less control? That surprises me as I never ran into this problem. I guess I was lucky or my situations were just differed in some crucial detail. Maybe @celee can help improve this. Three weeks of mailing back and forth for something that sounds as a quite trivial task sounds like a real pain whilst it shouldn't be. Celee might ask for times, dates, ticket number etc. to allow her to find the problem in her systems. Though I personally believe that 1.75 is inferior to 3.3.1 in an absolute sense I do worry about how they match up with other these days and suspect they used to be further ahead of the curve in the old days. Sadly, I've been unable to find a lot 'recent-ish' reliable tests of MB 3.3. I didn't expect a description that is so detailed that it would be reasonable to ask a salary for it, but maybe they will pay you to help out https://jobs.malwarebytes.com/ they are looking for some people in quality assessment and it would seem they could use some help there. It seems the export function is a bit more important to people than I thought (found the feature request topic) and as I know at least some AV's offer it I agree it should be added, perhaps should have been. I still have trouble understanding what control you have lost and what control you are looking for. I fully agree that having good control over AV-software is important but, at the moment I don't really see what control would be more required. At the moment I'm stuck at a 'warn me when this specific protection layer is turned off', setting that could be added. Could you elaborate on what control you are missing? (When I compare with Emsisoft I found it had a bit more options but only because it had different features.) Regards, Durew
  5. Durew


    Sounds like you made some great income that day. I do hope they find a way to prevent it from happening again, its nature seems to be different from last time. Don't give the staff nightmares again. ;-P Truth be told, malwarebytes hasn't tried to remove genuine windows files form my PC. So it seems that promise was kept. The occasional false positive does occur but at a similar rate as other AV-software and I like the reporting system of MB. Even the latest big issue didn't remove anything from my PC and the problem was mitigated with exiting malwarebytes. Making the 'big issue' nothing more than 'inconvenient' to me but startling to those less well versed in computers. The new version does look less intimidating and I agree that that is a bummer. But luckily I got a lot more settings to mess around with now. BTW wasn't it version 1.75 that bricked all those computers? (Not sure, was before my time) True. I personally don't really need those features but there is a feature request forum... They actually look there and quite some suggestions have been implemented. Are we still talking about the home version? (I assumed this as this is the sub-forum for home users) I never had to contact support for license issue after a reinstall. I'd advise to vent with a long list of feature request in the appropriate sub-forum. The looks that should prevent those less well versed in computers from running away screaming in fear, can be somewhat dissuading. But beneath the layers of pretty their is more control than ever before (IMHO). The 'back to basics' is a bit vague to me. My first instinct would be to translate it to "go back to when you just did file-dectection", a method that we know is insufficient these days thus this is unlikely what you mean. (But you can still use just the file detection if you want to.) Could you elaborate in what path Malwarebytes should follow in your opinion?
  6. Hi wsvdyk, https://forums.malwarebytes.com/topic/219996-important-web-blocking-ram-usage-issue/ is the link CristianCP tried to give you. No need to google. Please let us know if you run into any further problems. Regards, Durew
  7. Though my interest in the motivation behind the actions of other is genuine, I feel like closing this thread may be for the best before it gets too ugly. No mods are currently online so I can only ask everyone to keep their emotions in check. @AdvancedSetup@daledoc1 This topic may need some modding
  8. Yes, a bit. I have enough stuff in house (flashlights, candles, camping cooking gear) to mitigate the damage to a day without power would be very annoying than anything else. This is why hospitals have emergency generators.
  9. But don't company owner also know that every piece of software they run on their PC may contain faults and that if machines are that critical they need to take measures to mitigate the effect. I'm thinking of delayed updates, backup-systems, being able to revert any system-changes quickly (via disk-imaging for example). I understand that MB messed up in making the mistake (these are bound to happen whomever you buy software from) but I when I read of these 'I lost tons of money' stories all I read I never hear about how their fall-back plan failed. In addition must topics in the malwarebytes for business section are quite calm, to the point where it seems that they did have policies to cover this foreseeable eventuality. Now I do not own a business and as such I hope you (@ParaoiaBoy) could explain to me why such critical machines did not have proper emergency protocols to mitigate the damage? tl;dr: IMHO knowing av-software of any company may screw over your computer one day is reasonable as no flawless software exists. Thus not taking mitigating policies when it comes to such critical machines is negligence. Why do business owners take the risk? Regards, Durew
  10. That was someone else. Although both need to check the EULA before making claims. Bruce does claim to use the enterprise version of MBAM so I hope the mods will move this thread to the right forum. (Or just close it.)
  11. Since you are obviously representing a company, why are you not at the subforum for malwarebytes end-point protection? I think they are better at helping with business related problems. (As you mentioned you are using the enterprise version.) Regards, Durew
  12. start computer force malwarebytes to update (don't let it whine about 'current', force it to check, thrid icon from the left next to "scanstatus"). Reboot.
  13. The last update fixed it for me
  14. O, maybe a nice subject for the next blog post.
  15. It is definitely annoying. Glad it is fixed now. Kudo's to dev's for being so quick with fixing it!

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.