Grateful Malwarebytes is Backing up AVG 2013

[rose1054]

Have been running AVG 2012 and now AVG 2013 and Malwarebytes for three years now. Have always thought of AVG being primary and Malwarebytes being secondary. No more. Trojan FAKEMS got past AVG2013 but fortunately Malwarebytes caught it and quarantined it. When I chatted with AVG support they advised me they do not recommend running two security systems together. I said its a good thing I do or right now I would be infected. Ironically I just read a review of AVG2013 from CNET and it wasn't that great. I think its time to look for something better. Thanks Malwarebytes !

[exile360]

Greetings

Thanks for posting your comments, they are appreciated. The situation you describe is exactly why we're here and why we still believe that an antivirus alone is not enough to protect a system from all threats. Our focus has always been and continues to be on areas where antivirus software typically doesn't do well, including the latest 0-hour infections.

Thank you for choosing to make Malwarebytes Anti-Malware part of your protection for your PC.

[mattd73uk]

So what's going on? This post regarding the same thing:

http://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=127826

says the report is a false positive, and the moderator seems to confirm and saying it'll be fixed. Whereas above you suggest it's a correct identification.

I too have had Malwarebytes identify this trojan. So is it a false positive or not?

[daledoc1]

hi, maatd73uk:

Until exile360 returns, it appears that his reply to the OP here was a "general" reply about the rationale behind running MBAM PRO to protect against the sort of threats often missed by standard anti-virus programs?

In any event, it appears that you have posted an identical query in another OP's topic over in the False Positives section of the forum?

Since that area of the forum is where possible False Positives are submitted for evaluation, it probably would be best to await an official reply from sUBs over in THAT topic: http://forums.malwar...howtopic=127826

In the interim, please be sure you have the most current MBAM database (currently v2013.06.16.02).

To minimize confusion, there's no need to cross-post in multiple areas of the forum with the same question.

Thanks VERY much for your patience and understanding,

daledoc1

[exile360]

So what's going on? This post regarding the same thing:

http://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=127826

says the report is a false positive, and the moderator seems to confirm and saying it'll be fixed. Whereas above you suggest it's a correct identification.

I too have had Malwarebytes identify this trojan. So is it a false positive or not?

If the Research team says it's a false positive, then it is. When I responded to the original poster I did not realize that it was one.

Also, as I posted here, it all depends on what file was detected, as not every file hit by this definition was necessarily a false positive.

[shadowwar]

These were two different detections i believe. Trojan.FakeMS and Trojan.Fakems.TT which was the fp

Trojan.FakeMS covers a whole group of fake microsoft files.

[rose1054]

Just so there is no misunderstanding there was no false positive as I was not running any sort of scan with either Malwarebytes or AVG 2013. This was a true hit of the Trojan FakeMS that was NOT intercepted by AVG 2013 but was successfully intercepted and quarantined by Malwarebytes.