Jump to content

jharris1993

Members
  • Content Count

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About jharris1993

  • Rank
    New Member
  1. Didn't I just say that? (wink! wink!) Seriously, what I tried to say is that if script-kiddies can crack the CIA, NSA, army, navy, Google, Amazon, and other sites that should really know what they're doing, the best we can hope for is to armor-up the best we can, try to stay below the radar and pray. I like the concept of behavior-based protection as opposed to using lists that are obsolete even before they're released. My only concern is if the protection program waits for something "suspicious" to happen, isn't it already too late? (Example: There's a guy in your bedroom holding a knife to your throat while his accomplice has his way with your wife - isn't it a bit late to say "Ooh! Something suspicious is happening!")
  2. Thanks! BTW, here's the post that tells the whole story: Years ago I was a distributor for Avira's anti-virus products and they relied heavily on the test results from AV Comparatives. These people do just what the article describes - a sample of already-known, (make that read "stale"), virus threats - is scanned to see what detects what. Though potentially useful, it doesn't tell the whole story. 1. No matter how often you update a signature file, zero-day exploits can still hammer you into the ground. 2. AV Comparatives' test methodology involved setting the AV product's settings to their most paranoid - *NOT* the usual "as installed by default" settings, (which are usually much more relaxed), to prevent the user's machine from slowing to a crawl. So, (IMHO), this does not represent a valid real-world test. 3. I can understand the desire for a tool that can detect *existing* infections, *prior* to the file being run. (i.e. a downloaded image file or archive, etc.) 3. I am concerned about any program that requires something to happen first. In your case you say two things: (a) Malware writers are a very clever bunch of people who are at the cutting edge. (b) Your software requires something suspicious to happen first. The conjunction of these two things implies that malware writers can, and should, detect and defeat this kind of detection. So, I guess the real conclusion is that if a malware writer *REALLY* wants your @$$, there's not much you can do. All you can do is load for bear and hope for the best. Jim "JR"
  3. That was something I had thought might be true. However, so many of these startup animations are just "enforced advertising" with no real use, I thought I'd ask. Thanksfor the quick reply! Jim "JR"
  4. Greetings! I am running Malwarebytes on several Android systems I own and - so far - things are fine. Thank you! Some of my systems, particularly my Samsung Galaxy J1 smartphone and a cheap Chinese tablet, are woefully under powered and have minimal resources available. Though I appreciate the visual image of The Cyborg From Hell guarding my stuff, it takes a long time to finish the display animation. Is it possible to disable the splash screen animation? If so, how? If not, can this be considered in a future version? Thanks for any help you can provide.
  5. Greetings! I am the proud owner of a subscription to the super-duper premium version of Malwarebytes (V 3.5.1, current as of this instant date) My system is a Windows-7 Professional 64 bit version on an HP Envy series EliteBook 8750, maxed out to the gills. Issue: Malwarebytes Premium 3.5.1 will not allow even a right-click scan of a networked folder. I suspect that this is a marketing issue to differentiate their Super-Professional For Businesses with Deep Pockets version. OK, I can accept that. (I used to run a computer business and was a dealer for a competitors AV, and I know how frustrating it can be to compete with the web-version.) However, especially in this day-and-age, not providing the ability to scan a file on a networked device is counter-productive as home-based "Personal Cloud" file servers, backup servers, etc. etc. etc., can be a significant security risk. OK, I can move it to my local machine and scan it there - but why? I already have access to it on my local share. Is it possible - or can this be an enhancement request - to allow file/folder scans of networked drives. It would be acceptable - even desirable - to limit this to manually initiated scans. (I have over 20T of active files on my server - I have absolutely NO DESIRE to waste a week-or-so scanning all 20+T.) What say ye? Jim "JR"
  6. Greetings! I am the proud owner of one of your "paid" premium subscriptions. Looking at the blurbs about your software, it would lead me to believe that it does everything INCLUDING washing the dishes and changing the baby's diaper! Of course, I understand that the marketing types that write this stuff tend to wax eloquent about their products capabilities. All marketing hype aside, to what extent, if at all, is Malwarebytes a "complete" AV/Threat solution? Is it absolutely, really, really, really and truly all I need, or is it more of a "supplement" providing an additional layer of security to a system that should already have an AV program installed. I am not going to think the worse of you folks regardless of what the answer is, however I feel it is important to know exactly what Malwarebytes does, and does not, do. This way I can insure that all the computers in my household are truly and adequately protected. Thanks in advance for all your help! Jim "JR"
×
×
  • 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.