Digerati

Okay, I understand. Malwarebytes Premium alone (AKA Basic Security, AKA the Standard plan) is $3.75/month. For an additional $1.25/month, one can have Malwarebytes Premium and VPN with the Security + VPN package (AKA the Plus plan). Thanks for clarifying. Yes, your screen shot is the page I was referring to. I think, to avoid confusion, as I noted above, the description on that page under Security + VPN should say, "Plus plan includes all the features of our Standard plan plus:" IMO, part of the problem, for me anyway, is 3 different names for the same thing. Malwarebytes Premium, Basic Security, and Standard plan all mean the same thing. Any way, I'm clear now. Thanks again.

Sorry - maybe I have not had enough caffeine this morning but that does not make it any more clear. So Security + VPN does NOT include Malwarebytes Premium? This is still confusing. The pricing page clearly says Security + VPN will "protect your device". That suggests it does what the Basic Security package does "AND your privacy with our powerful VPN". The wording on that pricing page needs work to make it totally clear what Security + VPN includes (or does NOT include) for $5/month. If I understand you correctly, if I go for the VPN package, the plan "ONLY" includes High Speed VPN, Anonymous Browsing, and Choose your browsing location - as opposed to "also includes" (as indicated on the pricing page) those features, correct?

I am confused by the pricing plans as seen here. I understand what Basic Security entails for $3.75/month. But what is not clear is what Security + VPN includes. Does that plan include all the features of the Basic Security plan plus VPN for $5/month? Or does that mean for $5 more per month (on top of the $3.75 for $8.75 total) we get both the Basic Security with Security + VPN? "IF" Security + VPN includes all the features of Basic Security then say that!!! You need to either rename the package to "Basic Security + VPN" or, in the description below that option say, Plus plan includes all the features of our Standard plan plus: High Speed VPN Anonymous Browsing Choose your browsing location. Also, "IF" Security + VPN includes the Standard plan features for $5/month, how much does it cost to add the VPN feature to Malwarebytes Premium for those of us who already have lifetime licenses for Malwarebytes Premium?

Thanks for pointing that out.

Title says it. Latest version - select a single report, click Trash can and follow prompt, the report is not deleted. Select the 3 dots and Delete all, and none are deleted. Verified with another user, same problem on her machine with latest version. Ran Support Tool yesterday, didn't fix.

No way will I agree with that. Frankly, that's an old cop-out warning from decades ago. NOBODY closes all open programs before installing and uninstalling things anymore. Yet just about every program (except the Support Tool!) says too - most people don't even know what programs are running with Windows. And regardless, if necessary, one should not assume all already know it will happen. That said, I was wrong above. The prompt to reboot does say to save all your work. My bad there. But there is no option to Reboot later. It is Ok or X and the X forces a reboot. I feel this warning should be posted right when starting the Support Tool - when they still have the option to exit the tool. Ummm, no. I just ran it again and that is not the case. I note only the Advanced option (which is NOT the default option) lets you choose between Repair and Clean. If you stick with the default, the Dashboard option, it only says, my bold underline added, "Click Continue to notify us of your issue and perform a repair of your Malwarebytes product". The tool worked and that's great. And I do appreciate that. But it need to be more informative. That's all I'm saying.

The Support Tool fixed mine too. And for the record, I don't have and never have had Webroot or Comodo on this system. And BTW, not happy with how that Support Tool provides no option to "Reboot Later". All you get is Reboot now. If you click the X to close that prompt box, the system reboots whether you have saved any open docs and "gracefully" exited any open programs, or not. Fortunately, Word had saved a draft of the large document I was working on. And the new Edge restored all my open tabs. And it gives no warning that all our user customizations will be reset back to the out-of-the-box defaults. For example, scheduled scan times, quarantine options, rootkit scan and more are all reset. It is not a "repair" tool as suggested - that is, it does not repair corrupt files or settings. It wipes everything out and starts over. And that's fine - if that information is provided to us up front. At least it saved my License ID and Key so it remembered I was a Premium license owner.

Same problem here. System tray app is running. Right-click on system tray icon shows all 4 functions are "On". MBAMService is running. Select Open Malwarebytes (or Check for Updates) and mouse icon spins, goes away, then nothing - Malwarebytes does not open. Double-click System tray icon and same results, Malwarebytes does not open. Rebooting does not resolve problem. Same problem noted by at 3 other very experienced Malwarebytes users on another site. All using W10. Problems seen on PCs and laptops. @Petebo - I did not see this 30 days ago but I quickly add I rarely open Malwarebytes. So I may have just not noticed until today.

There's a big difference between what you "think" and what several countries already have actual, verified evidence of what Kaspersky did and what the Russian government did and is still doing. But that's for a different discussion.

Best known? Ummm, not hardly. And best known does not equal best or even suggest good quality. And frankly, I would not let Kaspersky near any of my systems. The product may be good but the company cannot be trusted.

I think he is saying he want some button for users to click to disable WD.

Why should that be the default? IMO, that makes no sense. No one should ever disable Windows Defender UNLESS they choose to install an alternative anti-malware solution - just as you did. And when users do that, Windows Defender automatically and gracefully steps aside, just as it did with you.

Great. Glad that worked. And note you don't have to make any other changes, unless you just want to. WD in its default settings works perfectly well for the vast majority of users. And when used along with Malwarebytes, you can be even more confident you are protected. Of course this assumes you keep Windows current, and are not "click-happy" on unsolicited links, downloads, attachments and popups - necessary precautions regardless which security software you use.

Windows Defender is a great complementary program to use with Malwarebytes. It is real easy to get both running together. Just open the Malwarebytes main control panel and click on Settings. From the Applications tab, scroll down to the Windows Action Center section and tick "Never register Malwarebytes in the Windows Action Center". That will tell Windows Defender to keep running. I believe Windows Defender will automatically start right then, but if not, you may have to reboot. But then you should be good to go.

You should uncheck that Public Network box if you never take your computer out of your home.

I am having the same issue (Web Protection turned off) on 3 different systems in the last two days. All Windows 10 64-bit, two Pro one Home. All with Windows Defender. Malwarebytes version 3.3.1.2183 Component package version: 1.0.262 Update package version 1.0.3798 This is not just affecting Malwarebytes. Since these issues started, my browser (Pale Moon) has locked up several times, Task Manager did not open properly, then entire desktop locked, forcing me to reboot to clear. Since exiting Malwarebytes, I have had no other issues. Computer and browser is working perfectly.

I am having the same problem - 3 different machines in the last two days. I do NOT have Avast installed. 3.3.1 premium

It is scary enough you are still running XP. More scary you are only at SP2. And scarier still XP's firewall is disabled since it was enabled by default starting with XP SP2. Even though the Windows Firewall way back in XP was a rudimentary inbound-only firewall, it was much much better than using no firewall at all. XP SP2 came out in 2004. SP3 was released in 2008 and that was the last major update for XP. All support for XP ended in 2014. This means Microsoft stopped fixing bugs and most importantly stopped developing security patches and updates 4 years ago. The bottom line is there is no way you can set up effective, reliable and dependable security on this system, even if you did update to SP3 and re-enable your firewall. But the bigger problem is not just that you and your computer are exposed to security threats. The bigger problem is bad guys are actively seeking out XP systems to compromise then turn into weapons to attack the rest of us! They actively seek out XP systems to infect and use them to distribute their malware and spam, and to draft into their "bot armies" to use in DDoS attacks to attack institutions and organizations. These bad guys are very clever! They insert this cleverly written malicious software on vulnerable computers, then remotely use that computer to attack the rest of us, but in such a way you, as the computer's user, don't even know your computer is infected or involved in conducting such attacks. Much of this malware is cleverly designed to be as unobtrusive as possible so users don't notice any performance issues at all. In this way, the bad guys can use your one machine to attacks 100s and 1000s of other machines - without you being aware anything malicious is going on. More and more security vendors and other software providers have ended development and support for XP, or will soon. Google Chrome ended support awhile ago. Mozilla ended mainstream support for XP last year and all Firefox supports ends in June. I totally understand the resistance to upgrade when something still runs like it always did. That is especially true when it comes to electronics - as it often just refuses to die. But there is a difference between still running and still meeting our needs. The computing environment has changed. It is no longer good enough for our computers to just keep running. They must also evolve so they can continue to protect us from today's "current" and tomorrow's future security threats. XP can't do that. You may not be infected today, but there is no way to ensure you won't be tomorrow. But there are alternatives, even for those on tight budgets. Linux is free and a very capable alternative that runs on just about any computer. It can still be secured even on legacy (old and obsolete) hardware. Used/refurbished computers can be had very inexpensively. For example, for just $150, you can get a refurbished laptop that comes with the latest and most secure version of Windows. There are dozens of other models under $200. All come at least a 90 warranty with affordable service plans for additional 2 years. They have dozens of affordable desktop options too. These computers may not be the quickest but they most likely will run circles around your current XP system while at the same time, keeping you and the rest of us secure. And since they come with Windows 10, they will continue to evolve to stay secure and to meet future threats too. Your only other option to ensure you and others on the Internet remain safe is to disconnect that computer from the Internet. But then you lose your connections to the world. Sorry, but that's just the painful truth. It is time to replace that computer.

Wow, sure did not expect this. Clearly - otherwise you might actually understand the gist of my complaint instead of deciding to join the thread, not to contribute anything of value, but for the sole purpose of criticizing another poster. As I said in my opening post, my second post and several times thereafter, the problem and source of my frustration is Malwarebytes telling me I am "Current" and there are "No updates are available" when that is totally not true. In fact, Malwarebytes has officially announced the new updates and made the updates freely available to the public, but the application still reports no updates are available. I never, as in NEVER EVER complained or suggested Malwarebytes should roll out updates to everyone immediately. So not only don't you understand the issue, you make stuff up in the process.

Your explanations make sense. Thanks. I generally am more patient these days, but waiting weeks seems too long - plus this seems to be a recurring issue. Thus my frustration.

I hear you. I am just finding it hard to understand why the upgrades are good enough for new users trying out the program, but not good enough for existing users. You say it is stopped for in-app upgrades but many are offered the upgrade automatically through the app. Letting it trickle out like this just seems odd to me. And again, we are talking weeks, not days. I understand that completely too - as I myself stated above. I still beta test for Microsoft (with many beta testers) and Firetrust (with few testers) so this is not foreign to me. Plus I fully understand that virtually every single one of the 1.5 billion Windows computers out there becomes a unique system with minutes after the first boot as users configure their networking, user accounts, desktops, security, installed apps, etc. So I know it is a challenge.

I agree but that is not the point or case here. That suggests 3.2 and 3.2.2 are so flawed they should not be offered to the public at all! They are not so flawed - that I am aware of. If they were faulty, it would be irresponsible for Malwarebytes to provide it on their download page - which they did with 3.2 and are doing now with 3.2.2. Instead, they should have been pulled and the last known good release put in their place. But they didn't pull them. So why am not being offered the latest updates weeks later? Glad to hear that, but then I wonder why the many install issues dcollins mentioned weren't discovered. ??? Not enough testers? Testers not reporting problems?

We are really talking several different issues here - some developmental, others clearly on the management side. I am actually okay with "bugs" because "stuff happens". And the more complex the program, the greater the potential for bugs sneaking in. What I am not okay with is known bugs and broken/incomplete features that have taken months to address. The program reporting various protection features were turned off was a big problem that should have been caught in in-house beta. If not in-house, then in open and/or public beta. When it comes to in-house beta testing, it should be all hands on deck - that's over 170 employees on a lot more computers than that. The various incomplete features (like the "More Information" and "Get more information" buttons not working) should have been fixed BEFORE the program was even sent to in-house beta. But somebody decided to rush it out the door before the holidays. Even now, while a nit-noid issue, why is it "More Information" on one page and "Get more information" on another page? Note the inconsistencies in the upper and lower case letters used. These dot the i's and cross the t's little details reveal a lack of attention to the details and those are things that detract from the over all excellence of the program. Install issues should be found during beta but what happens so often in beta is testers manually install (often uninstalling old versions first). But that's not proper testing because that is not how normal users do it. So problems go unnoticed. I just checked my notebook and admittedly, it only gets powered up 2 or 3 times a week. But I note it is still on 3.0.6 and when I tell it to look for updates, it says there are none. And this problem is just now being addressed in 3.2.2 - a full 9 months after 3.x was released. And actually the problem (the program staying current in a timely fashion) is only partially addressed as the fix only addresses manually checking for application updates. I note today on this computer (which is on 6 - 8 hours every day, 7 days a week) it tells me "No updates are available". I don't accept that do to metering. Having to wait weeks for the program itself to alert us to new application updates is just unacceptable. Again, I do appreciate what you guys in the forums are doing. And I do have great respect for everyone at Malwarebytes. I guess part of the problem is MBAM (2.x) was such a great program, it established a reputation hard (too hard?) to live up to. And the "appearance" is, standards have dropped. That probably is NOT fair. But no one said life is fair. Any way, I have 3.2.2 on my secondary/test system and hopefully will see the "Install Application Updates" works as reported. But in reality, what I really hope to see is the program automatically alerts me to a new application update first - instead of having to wait weeks before being offered the update (assuming I "eventually" will get it).

Let me start by saying I suspect you, dcollins, are stuck between a rock and hard place - that is, you are stuck defending Malwarebytes while having to deal with upset, sometimes irrational users, but often with legitimate complaints. I have worked tech support for many years. I feel your pain. So just wanted you to know I appreciate the position you are in, and the support you give to us upset, sometimes irrational users. ***** [Rant on] I guess I just have a different concept of how software development should work (as a hardware guy, one of my "other hats" for 10 years at a major software development company was as an alpha and beta tester). It just seems like there is not enough "in-house" beta testing going on since 3.0 first came out. I mean 3.0 was pushed out before the holidays last year and it clearly was not even finished - evidenced by all the features (like "?" buttons) that did not work. I accept and fully understand that in-house beta testing cannot foresee every possible scenario that may be encountered out in the field. But that's what external or "out-sourced" beta testers are for. Surely those problems were noticed but the program was pushed out anyway. Again, I accept and understand that even with extensive out-sourced beta testing, some bugs will get through. But is just seems like, instead of thorough pre-release beta testing, regular end-users (us consumers) are being relied on to beta test too. It should not be that way. The disappointment really stems from the fact these are lingering problems. That is, it "seems" like the update release issues have not really improved and here it is almost 10 months since 3.0 was released. You likely have access to the analytics so maybe from your side, they have gotten a lot better. But not from our side. It just "appears" many of the same problems either keep happening over and over, or they just are not being addressed. And appearances count for a lot. I said it before but it is worth repeating; Malwarebytes is a great program. I still use, support and recommend it to friends, family and clients. Perhaps that's why it stings so much to see and experience these recurring issues. My reputation with my clients is on the line here too. Again, if 3.2.2 really addresses the issue of the program claiming "No updates are available" then that will be great. But that's just on the manual side. I am not confident consumers will not still be waiting days, perhaps weeks for the program to "eventually" report automatically that an update is available. I agree with bru, that sort of unacceptable delay cannot all be due to metering. I will "hurry up and wait" to see if my 3.1.2 eventually reports a program update is available. And after 24 years in the military, I am a certified master at "hurry up an wait". But my patience is wearing thin. [Rant off]

That's great. Thanks for stepping in Devin. I really hope it works as suggested. If it does, that will end a lot of anguish. Manually updating to 3.2.2 works for me because I know my way around computers. But many of my senior (or more senior than me) clients don't. So I often end up going to visit and, "Oh by the way, while I'm here, let me make sure everything is updated." Some have asked me why it was out-of-date, or worse, if they had done something wrong. So how long should users of 3.1.2 be expected to wait until the program alerts them to such program updates? Like I said, some, like me with my main computer, are still waiting after 2 weeks for 3.2 and now we seem to be at 3.2.2.