[[Template core/front/global/favico is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]] Jump to content

Malwarebytes 3.0 ideas for improvement regarding some issues and interaction with beta stand-alone protection agents


Recommended Posts

1. Malwarebytes 3.0 premium/trial and beta stand-alone protection agents
Let's consider this scenario. We have a user that uses Malwarebytes 3.0 premium or trial but he/she also wants to beta test at least 1 stand-alone protection agent. While there is no reason to do this at this monent considering this timeline:

<table border='1'>
<tr>
<th>Stand-alone protection agent - latest public beta</th>
<th>Announce date</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Malwarebytes Anti-Ransomware v.0.9.17.661</th>
<th>September 6</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Malwarebytes Anti-Exploit v1.9.1.1280</th>
<th>December 5</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Malwarebytes 3.0</th>
<th>December 8</th>
</tr>
</table>

this issue will definitely come into play later on. At this moment it is safe to assume that Malwarebytes 3.0 includes these agents functionalities as it is implemented in their latest versions outlined in this table, but this is meant to change. I theoretically see only one way for this - disable the real time protection layer in Malwarebytes 3.0 that the user intends to substitute with the beta agent implementation.
While this looks like a neat workaround it has some problems:
-Malwarebytes 3.0 will keep bragging that one or more protection layers are disabled;
-I didn't test this, there could be conflicts - most likely device drivers overlaps and is unsupported.
Updated: made a check with Autoruns and definitely there will be drivers overlaps (mbae64.sys and farflt.sys).
Related: https://forums.malwarebytes.org/topic/191882-how-install-malwarebytes-30-anti-exploit-free-in-the-same-time/

2. Late alert about protection disabled during database update
This known issue is pretty annoying considering that nobody mentioned the fact that this alert which comes late informing about an event that has already expired also steals input focus.
Most comprehensive thread: https://forums.malwarebytes.org/topic/191921-not-fully-protected/

3. The dashboard doesn't mention database version and most importantly last definition update
The dashboard only mentions if databases are current. Although I can lookup database version in Settings - About, the time of last definition update can only be looked up from logs:
%ProgramData%\Malwarebytes\MBAMService\dbupdate.log
This needs improvement.

4. Reports panel needs some organising per days. It will quickly get cluttered.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is also the factor that any software upgrades to MB3 in the future mgiht still go and remove any existing standalone MB product, which is something that we need clarification on from the Staff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5. Scan engine often uses 100% CPU

I know Malwarebytes 3.0 boasts being up to 4x faster. It's obvious this is because the scanning engine is now multi-threaded.

But faster is not always better. You practically can't do anything while threat scan is running. Scanning engine should not use more than half of the available CPU threads by default. This should be configurable.

Edited by pal1000
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, pal1000 said:

5. Scan engine often uses 100% CPU

I know Malwarebytes 3.0 boasts being up to 4x faster. It's obvious this is because the scanning engine is now multi-threaded.

But faster is not always better. You practically can't do anything while threat scan is running. Scanning engine should not use more than half of the available CPU threads by default. This should be configurable.

It seems the option to reduce the priority of scans to improve multitasking performance was removed in 3.0 (it existed in 2.x).  I'll ask the Malwarebytes team to reintroduce it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, exile360 said:

It seems the option to reduce the priority of scans to improve multitasking performance was removed in 3.0 (it existed in 2.x).  I'll ask the Malwarebytes team to reintroduce it.

Thanks.  In looking a lot mroe closely at the Task Manager in my VM, I notice that it is a combination of MB and Windows Defender on my Windows 10 VM that is spiking the CPU up to 100% at times.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi @John L. Galt

There appears to be some type of conflict with Microsoft Security Essentials at this time. If you can at least temporarily uninstall it and retest it should show a lot of improvement. Also, I've noticed that the new combination of engines,etc the disk I/O now takes at least 3 minutes on my laptop to settle down and stop, and I have an SSD drive on mine. Once the initial load time has passed the resource usage drops to nothing again.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, AdvancedSetup said:

Hi @John L. Galt

There appears to be some type of conflict with Microsoft Security Essentials at this time. If you can at least temporarily uninstall it and retest it should show a lot of improvement. Also, I've noticed that the new combination of engines,etc the disk I/O now takes at least 3 minutes on my laptop to settle down and stop, and I have an SSD drive on mine. Once the initial load time has passed the resource usage drops to nothing again.

 

Is this incompatibility with M$E relevant to Windows 10 and Windows defender?  If so, would it be advisable to do as Porthos mentioned in another thread, set up the exclusions between the 2 programs again?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/12/2016 at 3:36 PM, pal1000 said:

1. Malwarebytes 3.0 premium/trial and beta stand-alone protection agents
Let's consider this scenario. We have a user that uses Malwarebytes 3.0 premium or trial but he/she also wants to beta test at least 1 stand-alone protection agent. While there is no reason to do this at this monent considering this timeline:


<table border='1'>
<tr>
<th>Stand-alone protection agent - latest public beta</th>
<th>Announce date</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Malwarebytes Anti-Ransomware v.0.9.17.661</th>
<th>September 6</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Malwarebytes Anti-Exploit v1.9.1.1280</th>
<th>December 5</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Malwarebytes 3.0</th>
<th>December 8</th>
</tr>
</table>

this issue will definitely come into play later on. At this moment it is safe to assume that Malwarebytes 3.0 includes these agents functionalities as it is implemented in their latest versions outlined in this table, but this is meant to change. I theoretically see only one way for this - disable the real time protection layer in Malwarebytes 3.0 that the user intends to substitute with the beta agent implementation.
While this looks like a neat workaround it has some problems:
-Malwarebytes 3.0 will keep bragging that one or more protection layers are disabled;
-I didn't test this, there could be conflicts - most likely device drivers overlaps and is unsupported.
Updated: made a check with Autoruns and definitely there will be drivers overlaps (mbae64.sys and farflt.sys).
Related: https://forums.malwarebytes.org/topic/191882-how-install-malwarebytes-30-anti-exploit-free-in-the-same-time/

2. Late alert about protection disabled during database update
This known issue is pretty annoying considering that nobody mentioned the fact that this alert which comes late informing about an event that has already expired also steals input focus.
Most comprehensive thread: https://forums.malwarebytes.org/topic/191921-not-fully-protected/

3. The dashboard doesn't mention database version and most importantly last definition update
The dashboard only mentions if databases are current. Although I can lookup database version in Settings - About, the time of last definition update can only be looked up from logs:
%ProgramData%\Malwarebytes\MBAMService\dbupdate.log
This needs improvement.

4. Reports panel needs some organising per days. It will quickly get cluttered.
 

You're suggestions are very good. I also believe that Malwarebytes should try to take at least 1/2 amount of ram. It really hurts computers with 4gb or less.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 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.