1PW

Hello exile360: On my system with the least resources, I uninstalled COMODO CIS 5.0 and reinstalled with this variation; during the install process, I denied the installation of either flavor of Defense+. This of course resulted in the installation of their free firewall only and mbamservice.exe is then quite normal! How this differs from a default install followed by turning off Defense+, I don't know. Had I left the install process to continue on the default path, I would have seen 80+% CPU usage for mbamservice.exe on this Pentium III E system. For me, this is an acceptable workaround candidate! I'll report my findings in the COMODO forum also. <https://forums.comodo.com/install-setup-configuration-help-cis/cis-50162636-vs-mbam-t62001.0.html> Thank you for your time and trouble.

Update: At the suggestion of thoughtful Comodo forum moderators, I added the %ProgramFiles%\Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware folder as an entry to their "Interprocess Memory Access" exceptions. IMO this entry has made no detectable change on the elevated CPU usage of mbamservice.exe while Comodo's CIS 5.0 is also running. I have offered to purchase a full activation license for MBAM to assist any Comodo staffer in their further research of this problem. I still strongly believe that these two applications can be made to coexist.

Hello noknojon: We may need to consider an approach where the least experienced Full version MBAM user need not engage the services of an expert just to permit their system to run correctly. The default installation of a Full version MBAM 1.46 should not make a system unusable. This is quite the case where a lesser system (Intel Pentium III E (Coppermine) 650MHz, 768Mb) running XP Pro SP3 and Comodo Internet Security 5.0 is spending 80+% CPU Usage on mbamservice.exe on an otherwise idle system. Perhaps without giving adequate thought to this situation, a Comodo forum moderator suggested that MBAM not be used: <https://forums.comodo.com/empty-t62001.0.html;topicseen> We really don't want anyone suggesting the exclusion of MBAM from their systems. My $.02USD

Greetings GT500: I have also made reference to this thread in the Comodo forum. I hope this does not start a finger pointing contest between Comodo & MBAM. These of course are both superior products in their chosen niche. <https://forums.comodo.com/install-setup-configuration-help-cis/cis-50162636-vs-mbam-t62001.0.html> HTH

Please forgive my intrusion on this thread. I believe the operable clue, on the part of the OP, is that the Comodo application is in use. This past Wednesday, September 15th, Comodo's personal firewall, as part of Comodo Internet Security (CIS), was upgraded to version 5.0.162636 from a previous version 4.1.150349. In the case of two of my XP systems (Home & Pro SP3 32bit), I upgraded Comodo from version 4 to 5 and I too see mbamservice.exe CPU Usage, as observed by Process Explorer v12.04, peak to over 40% and sustain a constant 10% or greater on an otherwise idle system. Furthermore, Within Comodo's version 5, switching the Firewall section from "Safe" to "Disable" has only slight usage effect. In fact, disabling "Defense+" also did not significantly ease the CPU Usage of mbamservice.exe either. However, exiting Comodo completely was the only thing that quieted mbamservice.exe to 0% on an otherwise idle system. Both of my XP system's MBAM are the full v1.46 with DTBS version 4645. Again - I apologize for the intrusion.

+1 for MBAM supporting Linux some day. <http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/198686/linux_trojan_raises_malware_concerns.html>

Hello Samuel: I believe this deed is worthy of a separate announcement posting in the "Malwarebytes News" category and that it's assigned to IP address 69.162.79.76 Thank you for this testing procedure.

Hello Fran

Hello Marcus: I really don't enjoy disturbing your complacency Marcus but, IE7 suffers from an unrepairable Window Injection Vulnerability flaw that's deemed moderately critical: <http://secunia.com/advisories/22628/> I would seriously consider employing another browser were I you. HTH

Hello Jerry: Since you posted that you enjoy the MBAM paid version, MBAM has already made an entry in your "Scheduled Tasks". If you're running XP, go to: start > Settings > Control Panel > Scheduled Tasks. Double-click the existing entry: "MBAM Scheduled Tasks for xxxxxxxx" [Where xxxxxxx is the applicable Username.] Left-click the "Schedule" tab. Left-click the "Advanced..." button. Left-click the "Repeat Task" check box. Beneath, enter something reasonable and polite such as 10 hours. Again beneath, select Duration and 24 hours. Left-click the "OK" button. MBAM will now update every 10 hours if your system is up. I extracted much of the above from: <http://support.microsoft.com/kb/308569> and modified it for use here. The procedure is similar in other Windows versions. HTH

Hello Jerry: Perhaps you could investigate running the following as a scheduled Admin batch job: "C:\Program Files\Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware\mbam.exe" /runupdate /minimized So as to not be abusive, you might invoke the batch job to self repeat every eight hours or so. HTH