remember
-
Posts
22 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Posts posted by remember
-
-
59 minutes ago, Aura said:
It isn't really a joke. You'll notice that pretty much every Trusted Advisor, Expert, etc. here understand why Malwarebytes isn't an Antivirus.
Hi Aura,
Do you remember "Mamutu" from Emsisoft? (behavior blocker) . What about PC Tools ThreatFire?
From their description:
" Unlike antivirus software that uses virus detection database for online or offline scanning, a behavioral-based detection tool uses a set of rules to identify suspicious or malicious activity in Windows. The default action by a behavioral-based detection anti-malware program is to prompt the user for action while it halts a process or file."
It seems like every five years or so, the signature-less antimalware is in vogue; even though each and every attempt to use it instead of a classic AV failed.
Now, let's be honest: HIPS and Behavior blockers are not new concepts discovered by MBAM; you have solid players on the market with years of experience and yet none of them would claim that a signature-less solution is a viable one; but all of them would incorporate either HIPS or Behavior blockers in their programs .
To build a solid antimalware solution requires more than putting together a Malicious Website Blocking (which is at least questionable, look of the amount of FP on forum) an Anti-Exploit and an Anti-Ransomware (beta).
What about a typical virus which is not an exploit or a ransomware item?
-
19 hours ago, exile360 said:
This also means that properly testing our protection is very different from the methods used by many organizations when testing AVs because most of them tend to rely on flat file scans of dormant executables sitting in a folder on the desktop
Dear exile360,
Thank you for your detailed and defensive explanation. As I said before , MBAM would refuse to participate in any testing , claiming that is somehow different, and you just confirmed that.
Have you recently seen the latest versions of major AV's providers? ALL OF THEM have Malicious Website Blocking, Anti-Exploit and Anti-Ransomware. Yet , most of them have huge signature database , updated hourly, sometime more that 800MB!!! And they are in business for more than 15 years....
Of course the new MBAM 3.0 can claim to be alpha and omega, the only thing you need on your PC and at the same time to refuse to be tested, if this is the desired business model.
Unfortunately, the educated users cannot be fooled so easily.
Just my opinion....
-
6 hours ago, exile360 said:
Quite correct, Malwarebytes 3.0 is not an actual antivirus and we have never claimed that it was.
OK, which part from Marcin's posting would suggest that Malwarebytes 3.0 is not an antivirus????
"With the launch of Malwarebytes 3.0, we are confident that you can finally replace your traditional antivirus"
So, replace it with what? With a pdf. reader? No! With a firewall No! With Malwarebytes 3.0 which is supposed to protect you as AN ANTIVIRUS!
If it looks like a duck and quack like a duck, it is a duck.
-
I doubt that you ever see MBAM in AV Comparatives test;
Because MBAM 3.0 works differently than a traditional AV, this would be the excuse not to participate, the same like Webroot.
-
7 hours ago, Aura said:
Malwarebytes 3.0 still cannot be considered a fully fledged Antivirus products as it doesn't have some of features most Antivirus have to be considered one.
see here:
"With the launch of Malwarebytes 3.0, we are confident that you can finally replace your traditional antivirus, thanks to our innovative and layered approach to preventing malware infections using a healthy combination of proactive and signature-less technologies"
Marcin
-
has anything to do with:
Malwarebytes Raises $50 Million Investment from Fidelity
https://press.malwarebytes.com/2016/01/21/malwarebytes-raises-50-million-investment-from-fidelity/
did they put pressure on you to prematurely release a fully flagged antivirus?
-
6 hours ago, hopper15 said:
Avast and Malwarebytes have always complement each other well. I've been using the two together the past 4 years and I haven't had one issue.
MBAM 3.0 is a totally different animal.
-
Hi Aura,
Ok, I understand now "It means that Malwarebytes will be set to register in the Action Center "
But, just registering in the Action center doesn't mean is compatible with some other AV's (Avast!, as per OP); means just that: it is registered in the Action Center.
-
Hi Aura,
4 hours ago, Aura said:In fact by default Malwarebytes 3.0 installs in compatible mode alongside Defender, MSE or third-party antivirus products.
What exactly do you mean by " Malwarebytes 3.0 installs in compatible mode alongside Defender"??
What is "compatible mode" and how do I install a software to be compatible with another software???
-
On 5/19/2016 at 11:51 PM, Firefox said:
Hello and Welcome!
We will need a little more info before we can suggest fixes.
Are you running the Premium version?
Asking questions......
Could this happen with MBAM free version?????????????
No!!
So, why do you ask?
-
37 minutes ago, Firefox said:
Same concept, you are paying for ONE policy, you keep paying it even though you may or may not get into an accident. You keep paying for a whole year, if you don't have any claims, they you (as well as I) feel that our money went nowhere. But its a security, we pay for it just in case something happens.
Same concept for Malwarebytes, if you have it installed as Premium you have it there in case something tries to get through.
You did not get it!
What I am advocating is NOT to install and run (an pay) multiple security solutions, when one of them has high level of performance , 100% in AV test in the last year.
You will accomplish NOTHING adding another security solution (MBAM) on top of this one, other than running in conflicts , more or less visible.
MBAM was designed for a niche market, to cover zero days in the past, where most of AV's performed poorly. Now you have AV's with 100% detection on zero days (see AV Test) so running an yearly subscription for MBAM is a waste of money and PC resources (high RAM).
Hence the desire to transform MBAM 3.0 in a fully flagged antivirus.
-
On 12/1/2016 at 9:50 AM, Firefox said:
With that in mind...
How much do you pay for your car insurance or home insurance? Are you willing to continue to pay that just in case something happens? Its basically the same concept, you are paying for the security of having it just in case something happens.
I pay for ONE comprehensive insurance policy ONLY ; I do not pay for multiple policies ,just in case one will not cover something.
-
22 hours ago, Toller said:
Just last month MBAM caught something. I don't know if it slipped by BD or what, but it caught something. Okay, it was the first thing in 5 years, but still it was something.
Are you willing to pay $25/year for an antimalware which will catch "something" once every 5 years?
That "something" should be in your quarantine, send it to Virus Total and see how "malicious" it was.
-
Hi garioch7,
Emsisoft has a detection rate of 93.7%.
I used MBAM premium and an antivirus for years, on multiple PC's (to be more specific , 3 pc's) . In several years I NEVER got a detection from MBAM , regardless of the style of browsing.
Some PC's are not even in my house, and when I have a chance to check the MBAM's quarantine, is.......empty.
Running an AV and MBAM Premium is a strategy of the past; that's why they try to transform, miraculously, MBAM from an antimalware to an antivirus.
I tend to agree with BD: "always you should only have one security solution"
-
Hi,
Bitdefender has constantly 100% detection rate in AV Comparatives and in AV Test.
What do you expect to achieve running MBAM in real time with an AV with 100% detection???? (other than running into trouble)
-
"In fact, I'm pretty sure it does offer that protection..."
"Pretty sure" is nice, unfortunately, no , doesn't offer outbound protection.
-
34 minutes ago, Aura said:
PC Tools products have been discontinued years ago and aren't supported anymore, so I wouldn't install it.
Also, starting in Windows 7, the Windows Firewall is actually quite good if you manage it properly. Personally, I don't see the need of installing a third party firewall. Here, I suggest that you read this post by quietman.
Typically, a firewall needs updates to solve incompatibilities; even though PC Tools Firewall Plus has been discontinued, the latest version (7.0.0.123) works good on Win 7/64 and is compatible with all AV's I tried so far; I would say PC Tools Firewall Plus is the best user friendly firewall on the market .
Windows Firewall doesn't offer protection for outbound connections; in fact will allow ALL outbound connections, so has ZERO value from a security point of view.
A Firewall is a must in any layered security approach.
-
First thing first: Defender is not an firewall.
A good free firewall is PC Tools Firewall Plus (only version7.0.0.123), just google and you will find it.
Before install it, disable windows firewall.
-
3 minutes ago, Adam_is_safe_from_viruses said:
Yesterday i bought premium version of malwarebytes and Today i updated version to 3.0.2 and messenge poped up saying: Your premium licence has ended.
Also this new version uses 93,5% of RAM so my computer is now poopyspeed.
Scaning is 6 or 7 hours long- for real.
So please, do something about it.
-Adam
Nothing can be done at this time; V3.0 is a beta version, so is very likely to have problems for months.
Install the latest stable non beta, and stay with it.
-
43 minutes ago, Porthos said:
Malware has evolved over the years. Rootkits,Ransomware,Browser/Program exploits. Malwarebytes is just adapting to the new challenges. MBAM is STILL designed to run alongside your preferred AV.
"Rootkits,Ransomware,Browser/Program exploits" should have been addressed by the main AV, which MBAM was supposed to complement.
Rather than "evolution" I would say is "competition" : with so many AV performing at 100% in tests (including zero days) there is no need to run (and pay) for additional software.
The trick is, once MBAM 3.0 is declared a fully flagged antivirus , will have to participate in AV test / AV comparatives; up to this point MBAM had a valid excuse: was not an AV.
Time will tell.
-
Hi,
7 years ago I stated that is not feasible for MBAM to be just an additional layer of defense and the best would be to transform it in a fully flagged antivirus!
The idea was vigorously denied , by Marcin and some other users / moderators.
Today MBAM3.0 is being announced with big fanfare!
Why version 3 has been released so soon?
in Malwarebytes for Windows Support Forum
Posted
OK, what I want is somebody to explain to me how MBAM3.0 is the only security solution I need for my PC, as long as it targets only a limited array of file formats, doesn't perform repairs, definition older than 3 months old are not retained, etc.
I have the feeling that I am being fooled....