Protection tab for PAID users

[sulliman24]

Here is my simple suggestion. I would like it if I could choose between several different times for automatically updating and scanning. In other words, if my computer is not on when the update is scheduled for it doesn't get updated unless I manually do it. I have the update set at 7 PM, but there are times when I don't turn the computer on until 8 PM. Updating MBAM is not the first thing on my mind when starting the computer if you know what I mean. If I could have it automatically update at 1 PM, 6 PM, and 11 PM that would be awesome because on the weekends I usually have the computer turned on by at least 1 PM. All of this applies to the scanning option as well. Please let me know if any of this is possible or if you have questions about my suggestion.

[yardbird]

see if this thred helps: http://www.malwarebytes.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=14247 I think its near the bottom, 24 hrs ago someone posted the same question, and is using the task manager? if I recall right. post back if you don't find your answer please.

[sulliman24]

That doesn't really answer my question. It shows a bunch of command line parameters, but I haven't a clue as to how I would use them. I just want to be able to update several times a day automatically. This way if I miss one of the update times it isn't a big deal.

[TeMerc]

That doesn't really answer my question. It shows a bunch of command line parameters, but I haven't a clue as to how I would use them. I just want to be able to update several times a day automatically. This way if I miss one of the update times it isn't a big deal.

You can set the schedule scan to run when Windows logs in from the task properties.

Also, this is a feature we're thinking of adding, the multiple times per day scheduled scans.

[sulliman24]

You can set the schedule scan to run when Windows logs in from the task properties.

Also, this is a feature we're thinking of adding, the multiple times per day scheduled scans.

Windows task properties? Do you mean Windows Task Manager? Please describe in steps how I would go about such a thing because I am still lost.

[TeMerc]

Windows task properties? Do you mean Windows Task Manager? Please describe in steps how I would go about such a thing because I am still lost.

To open Scheduled Tasks, click Start, click All Programs, point to Accessories, point to System Tools, and then click Scheduled Tasks.

When you create the task, when presented when to select to run the task, tick the radio button marked 'When my computer starts'. The task will run when Windows boots up

[sulliman24]

To open Scheduled Tasks, click Start, click All Programs, point to Accessories, point to System Tools, and then click Scheduled Tasks.

When you create the task, when presented when to select to run the task, tick the radio button marked 'When my computer starts'. The task will run when Windows boots up

Thanks for the information as I just set it up to do that. However, I still think a feature should be added in the GUI so users like myself can easily add multiple update times and not be restricted to just one time a day. The same applies for the scan, but I am not concerned too much with the scan since running it more than once a day is a little overboard.

[TeMerc]

If you only scan once a day, you only need to update once a day. If you need to scan more than that, you're doing something wrong, surfing for P2P, warez, all sorts of freeware.

[mountaintree16]

@ TeMerc, just jumping in here.

Even if you don't scan more than once a day, would you say its important to update more than once a day (if there is more than one update in a day) to keep the active protection as current as possible?

I've actually turned off my automatic updates and just manually update MBAM, generally when the computer is first booted up, and if the computer is on still on a few hours later, I'll do another manual check. Main reason I turned it off is because there is only one time you can pick and the computer isn't always on at the time that I had originally picked, and before I bought the paid version, I was used to updating the free version daily or whenever I turned on the computer, so it was already a habit

(Of course I mean the paid version here, not the free version, since the free version is an on-demand scanner and doesn't protect in the background).

If you only scan once a day, you only need to update once a day.

[TeMerc]

@ TeMerc, just jumping in here.

Even if you don't scan more than once a day, would you say its important to update more than once a day (if there is more than one update in a day) to keep the active protection as current as possible?

I've actually turned off my automatic updates and just manually update MBAM, generally when the computer is first booted up, and if the computer is on still on a few hours later, I'll do another manual check. Main reason I turned it off is because there is only one time you can pick and the computer isn't always on at the time that I had originally picked, and before I bought the paid version, I was used to updating the free version daily or whenever I turned on the computer, so it was already a habit

(Of course I mean the paid version here, not the free version, since the free version is an on-demand scanner and doesn't protect in the background).

I suppose a case could be made for that, yes. I just don't think that if you practice any type of layered protection and safe hexing, updating more than once is not required.

[mountaintree16]

@ TeMer

Okay, thanks I just wanted to know what you thought. I just think, hey, why not have the most current database when possible? My AV updates automatically every few hours, but I do a manual check every so often anyway too

I wasn't trying to say that I think that the paid version should change the once-a-day update to a multiple option, I was just saying that I personally like to update it more than once a day if I can, just to be the most current. I guess I am a bit of an odd-duck here; the first thing I think about when turning on the computer, usually, is making sure the AV is updated to the most current version and MBAM too.

Right now I have an AV, Mbam Pro, SpywareBlaster, and Spybot Immunization. and as far as I know, all my "things" (for lack of a better word) are up to date. java, adobe, etc. Although I rarely use Adobe, but still udpated it nonetheless. Before I did, it was at version 6!

I suppose a case could be made for that, yes. I just don't think that if you practice any type of layered protection and safe hexing, updating more than once is not required.

[TeMerc]

@ TeMer

Okay, thanks I just wanted to know what you thought. I just think, hey, why not have the most current database when possible? My AV updates automatically every few hours, but I do a manual check every so often anyway too

I wasn't trying to say that I think that the paid version should change the once-a-day update to a multiple option, I was just saying that I personally like to update it more than once a day if I can, just to be the most current. I guess I am a bit of an odd-duck here; the first thing I think about when turning on the computer, usually, is making sure the AV is updated to the most current version and MBAM too.

Right now I have an AV, Mbam Pro, SpywareBlaster, and Spybot Immunization. and as far as I know, all my "things" (for lack of a better word) are up to date. java, adobe, etc. Although I rarely use Adobe, but still udpated it nonetheless. Before I did, it was at version 6!

I used to run:

Spybot S&D w\TeaTimer- Free

SpySweeper-Paid

Ad-Aware w\AdWatch - Paid

SpywareGuard- Free

SpywareBlaster-Free

Norton Systems Works & Personal firewall-Paid

Hosts file -Free

WinPatrol

Once I realized that my surfing habits virtually guaranteed I'd never get infected, I dumped:

Spybot

Ad-Aware

SpySweeper

SpywareGuard

Norton-Except firewall

SpywareBlaster

MailWasherPro-Paid

SiteAdvisor-Free

I now run:

Avast- Free

Fort Knox Firewall-Paid

Hosts file

WinPatrol

MailWasherPro

I've not scanned with Avast in about 6 months at least. As a matter of cat, I don't think I've ever scanned with it since I installed it.

The only thing I update is the hpHosts file and Avast of course updates by itself.

Granted, I do have a test machine, but didn't always. For many years I used one machine. NEVER been infected, not once, not even close. Maybe it's dumb luck, but I don't think so.

It's more important not to do risky tings than to have tons of security software installed in case something happens. People do all sorts of stupid things and get infected. All those things can be avoided if they thought smart.

But I suppose I should embrace all those other people, they keep me employed.

[mountaintree16]

@ TeMerc

It's more important not to do risky tings than to have tons of security software installed in case something happens. People do all sorts of stupid things and get infected. All those things can be avoided if they thought smart.

That's very true! Do you have any safe surfing recommendations? And what would you consider stupid things?

they keep me employed.

This is true.

[Supernovasky]

Granted, I do have a test machine, but didn't always. For many years I used one machine. NEVER been infected, not once, not even close. Maybe it's dumb luck, but I don't think so.

It's more important not to do risky tings than to have tons of security software installed in case something happens. People do all sorts of stupid things and get infected. All those things can be avoided if they thought smart.

But I suppose I should embrace all those other people, they keep me employed.

It is partially luck I would say... especially when websites that people thing are safe and secure get hacked and have spyware embedded into them and thus many users could become infected on a perfectly clean website prior to the attack... I've read some articles lately that talked about this happening... so if you are unfortunate enough to navigate to one of these websites at the time of infection... you too could become the next victim...

but you are very right it still is 99% safe browsing habits and having the proper defenses in place...

[YoKenny1]

It is partially luck I would say... especially when websites that people thing are safe and secure get hacked and have spyware embedded into them and thus many users could become infected on a perfectly clean website prior to the attack... I've read some articles lately that talked about this happening... so if you are unfortunate enough to navigate to one of these websites at the time of infection... you too could become the next victim...

but you are very right it still is 99% safe browsing habits and having the proper defenses in place...

One of the reasons I like avast!

Chameleon redirectors

Infections inserted into valid websites are often an iframe/script tag itself, sometimes the simple encryption functions are used and sometimes very complex algorithms are used to hide the redirection process. But all these methods have the same objective