Jump to content

Malwarebytes v.2 Free - I Do Not Like It


Recommended Posts

I've been relying on Malwarebytes as on demand scanner for three years and it has helped removed a few nasties during that time.

 

But literally overnight it has been rendered almost unuseable simply because I have been forced to update to v.2 from v.1.75. I did an, as recommended, full uninstall and then reinstalled v.1.75 but if I want the data base updates, which of course I do, then it updates the whole program again. There's apparently no going back. :(

 

Why do I dislike v.2? Principally because the new "Threat" scan speed, particularly for on demand scans of individual files ie. downloads is now about three times as slow. This is or rather was the main point of having it for me, a quick and easy scan just to check there's been nothing let through by my AV.

 

Depending on size v.1.75 would do most stuff in under a minute. With v.2 I've just had to wait over 3 minutes for the pre-scan operation checks on a e-mail <200KB attachment. The file itself was checked in just a few seconds.

 

I thought this might be a one off so I checked other small files or that the scan speed might be improved by leaving the program running but unfortunately apparently not.

 

The only thing that is improved is the fact you don't have to close Malwarebytes now to be be able to use the right mouse click context menu option as an on demand scanner on different files you want to scan individually.

 

I dread to think how long the full system scan I do at least once a month will now take.

 

The scan also seems to be taking up more resources, another reason not to keep it running.  Together with the annoying self-promotional antimated banner ads it means I can't do anything else whilst a scan is running. Admittedly my P4 based system is old but there was no problem like this with v1.75 doing the same tasks.

 

If there is any setting change or something else I can do speed things up I'd be delighted to hear about it. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi:
 
Sorry you are unhappy with version 2.0.

I will try to address some of your issues with the new version first:
 
Context menu scanning: is disabled by default in version 2.0. Just open the GUI > settings > click the "Yes" for "Explorer Context Menu Entry". Done. :)
 
Scan times: The new scanning engine is much more powerful, so scans with version 2.0 may take a bit longer than with version 1.x -- that is normal and nothing to worry about.  Disabling both rootkit and archive scanning can shorten scan times a bit, if you wish.
Having said that there are many, many factors that determine scan times.
 

Time taken to scan is due to a many factors, some which can be dealt with and others not as easily.
These include:

Size of disk
Disk type
Disk speed
Disk caching
CPU speed
Controller type and speed
Operating System used
Amount of files (including temp files!)
Amount of folders
Amount of archived files such as zip, rar, sfx, etc. (if this is enabled)
Rootkit scan or not (if this is enabled)
PUM/PUP scans
Other security programs running at the same time that may potentially be monitoring all file accesses by any other process.
Drive integrity - if a drive is failing it can take a long time to ignore and bypass sectors on a disk or simply fail period and hang the scan.
Other ongoing disk I/O processes
System being infected can also affect speed of scans
https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=145429#entry811422


Also note that changes in the MBAM database can also cause scan times to increase or decrease, so that's another factor to consider, as mentioned => HERE <=

Sometimes a conflict or slowdown because of your antivirus may be possible, as well.

You may want to try adding exclusions in your AV - the files that need to be excluded can be found HERE. (Sometimes slowdowns are not due to conflicts between MBAM and the AV, per se, but rather to older hardware, insufficient RAM, cluttered disks, excessively tight security settings, etc.)

Reverting to version 1.75: You can edit settings in 1.75 to postpone the automatic update to version 2.0 (see screen shot).
However, if the 2.0 setup file has already been downloaded, you'll also need to delete that file from its location to stop being nagged to upgrade.
In Win7, the file is located here: C:\ProgramData\Malwarebytes\Malwarebytes Anti-Malware\mbam-setup.exe
 
BUT, the reasons to use the newer version are that it has built-in rootkit scanning (1.75 does not); it has a new text parsing engine to address special threats targeted by using configuration files (1.75 does not); and it has built-in Self Protection (1.75 does not). It can also detect and remove some threats that 1.75 cannot because it offers native 64-bit support for 64-bit systems (1.75 does not).
Support for 1.75 will end eventually, so it would be advisable to permit the staff to assist you with getting 2.0 running well.


I hope this helps,


ALSO, for additional information:
There is an FAQ Section here: Common Questions, Issues, and their Solutions
And here are links to the MBAM 2.0 User Guide: Online and PDF
And there are many useful KB topics and videos at the helpdesk support page

post-29793-0-16297500-1401068576_thumb.p

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies and particularly the helpful information from daledoc1.

 

As said I'm using an old P4 laptop with at least 1GB of RAM but what is running at any time has been pared down as little as I know how to, files etc cleaned using CCleaner every session and the HDD regularly defragged. Whatever is new in Malwarebytes v2, the root kit scanning seems a very likely candidate, it is that which I'd suspect is the cause of the slowness not anything else.

 

My current AV has always been said to work without conflict with Malwarebytes, indeed use of Malwarebytes as an on demand scanner and removal tool is regularly recommended in their forums. It does scan for rootkits with the appropriate settings enabled so that part of Malwarebytes v2 is probably something I can disable without consequence.

 

I'll certainly look into some of the other applicable suggestions too and hopefully get the latest version running faster on my system. But if I can't I might well go back to v1.75, so particular thanks for pointing out how to do that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, ColdlyIndifferent:
 
You're most welcome.
 
Slightly longer scan times are to be expected with the newer, more powerful engine in 2.0.  Some users seem to be <for lack of a better term> rather obsessed/preoccupied with the time it takes for MBAM to scan. 

That's the primary reason we recommend disabling anti-rootkit (ARK) and/or archive scanning for those particular users. 

Having said that, your system hardware is not very robust (P4 chipset, 1 GB RAM), so you might find that disabling ARK or archive scanning is helpful. 

The other thing that might improve performance is to set mutual exclusion between MBAM and your AV (as mentioned in my earlier reply) -- please post back and let us know if you'd like help with that. 

Finally -- assuming you are NOT infected -- doing a disk cleanup and clearing TEMP FILES might also speed your scan a bit.  Other tips for a slow PC are here
 
A couple of other thoughts -- you didn't say if you are running the most current build (2.0.2.1012)?
If not, then you might want to clean upgrade to that version, as it has improved scan times for many users.
Finally, if you would like the staff/experts to have a look at your system, please follow the steps in item #2 and post back with some logs.

Please note: Staying with 1.75 long-term isn't a good idea.  It would be better to allow the staff/experts to assist you with getting 2.0 running well.  Otherwise, when support for 1.75 ends, you'll be out of luck. :(

 

Thanks,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi daledoc1,

This is funny now, on some answers we get the advice to update to v.2 because is an improved version and HAS A ROOTKIT SCANNER , few answer down the road we are advised to DISSABLE THE ROOTKIT SCANNER to have the same speed of scanning as in v 1.75. :D :D :D

questions Please stop hijacking other topics, if you have specific concerns or comments start your own topic and you will be assisted.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, ColdlyIndifferent:

 

You're most welcome.

 

Slightly longer scan times are to be expected with the newer, more powerful engine in 2.0.  Some users seem to be <for lack of a better term> rather obsessed/preoccupied with the time it takes for MBAM to scan. 

That's the primary reason we recommend disabling anti-rootkit (ARK) and/or archive scanning for those particular users. 

Having said that, your system hardware is not very robust (P4 chipset, 1 GB RAM), so you might find that disabling ARK or archive scanning is helpful. 

The other thing that might improve performance is to set mutual exclusion between MBAM and your AV (as mentioned in my earlier reply) -- please post back and let us know if you'd like help with that. 

Finally -- assuming you are NOT infected -- doing a disk cleanup and clearing TEMP FILES might also speed your scan a bit.  Other tips for a slow PC are here

 

A couple of other thoughts -- you didn't say if you are running the most current build (2.0.2.1012)?

If not, then you might want to clean upgrade to that version, as it has improved scan times for many users.

Finally, if you would like the staff/experts to have a look at your system, please follow the steps in item #2 and post back with some logs.

Please note: Staying with 1.75 long-term isn't a good idea.  It would be better to allow the staff/experts to assist you with getting 2.0 running well.  Otherwise, when support for 1.75 ends, you'll be out of luck. :(

 

Thanks,

 

As indicated my laptop is running just fine, or I should say, as well as could be expected  for an 11 year old machine which has never had a Windows reinstall. I've pruned my startup and everythingl else,  defrag, run regular quick and full AV scans and as said,  use CCleaner at the end of every session to remove all the unwanted cookies and temporary files you pick up.

 

The speed of the scan is important to me because of the way I most often use MWB and that is as an on demand scanner from the context menu. Everything I download is scanned manually using my AV and MWB, I even rescan compressed files/folders after extraction. Probably overkill but it is what I've always done almost without exception. I've only caught one nasty this way, a few PUPs included in installers and had the odd false positive but that in itself proves my AV is doing its job, and using MWB like this is useful confirmation of that if nothing else. 

 

But now with the considerably slower MWB v2 scan speed and greater use of my limited resources on these individual files/folders it is really impractical to use MWB in this way. The right click context menu quick scan facility has thus been rendered redundant unless I can speed it up using some of the suggestions provided.

 

If this is not possible then I'd still use it for my weekly system 'Quick' now called 'Threat' scans and monthly Full system scans unless they are being slowed down to unacceptablelevels too. v1.75 typically would be done in under 15 minutes for a Quick scan and 90 mins for a Full scan including attached external storage. I've not tested either scan types yet with v2 but if these sort of times are grossly exceeded then it will be back to v1.75 on this laptop.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi:

 

Well, TBH, with a P4 chipset & 1 GB of RAM it's going to be a struggle to run much of anything these days. :(

I presume the OS is XP, which is EOL/EOS -- so that's a security risk even MBAM can't entirely overcome.

So, at some point, it's just going to be a bit of a "lost cause" to try to run modern software on such a platform, especially "multi-tasking".

While Malwarebytes corporation has committed to supporting XP for as long as it's feasible to do so, they can't really do anything about weak hardware.

And that support will be via its current program versions, not 1.75; support (and definitions updates) will end eventually.

<just saying>

 

Perhaps start a new topic in the PC Help section and the expert forum members can help you determine if it's possible to at least add more RAM?

 

Aside from that, all I can suggest at this point is what's already been suggested:

Perhaps someone else will have some additional ideas.

 

Thanks,
 

P.S. If you could use the vEsOWqp.png button, instead of the JlJ2Op6.png button, it would be easier for everyone to follow the thread. Thanks! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have taken some of the recommended precautions for using XP (the dangers of which have been grossly exaggerated) but I am currently in the process of finally finishing building a couple of Win7 desktops which are going to take over from my current set up.

 

When they're up and running properly my laptop, which is essentially just used as desktop, will be semi-retired, just used for some retro-gaming stuff which runs well on it and as backback. My intention has always been to do a complete WinXP reinstall, update the BIOS (which has always had some issues) and put in a larger HDD. Up until now, relying on it as much as I do as I have had no easy alternative, this has been too risky. 

 

I'm fairly certain that as I have it set up there is nothing significant I want to change that can be tweaked to get better performance. It is running as mean and lean as I want to make it.  I could have, for instance, set it to run for best performance, rather than the default balanced Windows controlled settings.

 

But when the issue is with just one element of one particular updated program whose previous version worked acceptably well, changing main computer settings just to accomdate the new version is too much like the tail wagging the dog for my liking. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
Back to top
×
×
  • 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.