Jump to content
chrisban35

Campaign Against Iobit products - Why?

Recommended Posts

Guys, I rarely make comments because in truth, the usually NEVER result in a positive outcome. People who WANT to continue doing what they're doing, do so any way... However, my frustration right now is trying to run Malwarebytes, a trusted source of mine, with iobit products, another "trusted" source of mine! I've even added their information in the "exclusions" tab, yet you continue to bring their products to your scan list every single time. Including the "exact" file listed in the exclusions..... 

The only conclusion one can draw from such acts, is that you "absolutely" have a campaign against iobit products. As an IT professional, I've used their products almost since they first hit the internet around 2006 or so. As someone who is a military veteran, and a strong "anti-China" advocate, it might seem odd that I'm in support of this organization, but to date, there products have proven to be very effective and without incident. So why are so many antivirus, anti-malware companies attempting to thwart this great company? 

I can imagine this is a very delicate subject. I'm very aware of the ongoing legal battles with some other entities, like AVG for example. But, I think enough is enough. So my question still stands in accordance with the actual topic here... Why are you still showing me these key files during a scan, when they are clearly listed in my exclusions preferences? 

Thank you in advance for any "true comments" concerning this issue. Those who post irrelevant argument based upon their own personal like or dislike, will simply be ignored. I am looking for some kind of true explanation/justification for including their content in my scans. 

Again, I am a big fan of Malwarebytes and will continue to be one. But, I am also a fan of Iobit and need to find some kind of common ground here. If you provide adequate information, that proves they are a threat, I'll gladly listen.. 

MalwarebytesExclusions.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too funny! - You can't go back to your topic and update a misspelled word?? Who on earth would CARE about such a edit?? That really speaks volumes here... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, chrisban35 said:

People who WANT to continue doing what they're doing,

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot why I stopped using their products. OH, they emailed the crap out of me. Been about 3 years and the emails finally stopped because I changed my address.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been with them for many years and I've never received any emails. I actually refer them to all my clients and I've yet to hear this complaint. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/16/2017 at 4:12 PM, Porthos said:

 

If you look at the illustration I posted with this initial posting, you'll see they are listed as an "exclusion" yet continue to show up each and every time I run the scan. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to thank those who have responded and am wondering why Malwarebytes or one of the professionals who represent this product has not responded. I know the delicate matter with this subject, but it's one that needs to be had. Both products will continue to have success and so both products will eventually need to learn how to coexist. That's the baseline of my concern here, and the fact I have to constantly pull out these files during a scan of my system, or my client's system. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ran a scan, waited for the items to be detected. Then uncheck all items, tell Malwarebytes to Remove items, then click Always Ignore?

As for staff, lets see if we can get @bdubrow @nikhils or @Ried can help you with your concerns...

Edited by Firefox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe Malwarebytes has already commented on why they detect it as a PUP.  Not sure why we have to beat a dead horse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Firefox mentioned,  setting the detections to Ignore Always will suffice and the program will no longer be detected.

Launch Malwarebytes and on the left hand side, click 'Settings'

  • Next, click the 'Protection' tab and look for Potential Threat Protection
  • Change the PUP and PUM settings to 'Warn user about detections'
  • Scroll down to the very bottom and turn off 'Automatically Quarantine Detections'

Reinstall the previously detected PUP program if needed, then run a Scan.  When the scan completes, uncheck the boxes next to all the detections.  To uncheck all of them at once, click the uppermost box next to the column title of 'Threats'

You will now see a Next button -  click the Next button.

In the Next pane, select 'Ignore always'.  After this, Malwarebytes will no longer detect that program.

Please let me know how that worked out for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Firefox said:

Have you ran a scan, waited for the items to be detected. Then uncheck all items, tell Malwarebytes to Remove items, then click Always Ignore?

As for staff, lets see if we can get @bdubrow @nikhils or @Ried can help you with your concerns...

Yes, of course.... Please see my attached pic it clearly shows the exceptions, and these are the same ones that pop up every time. 

Edited by chrisban35

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, sjpritch25 said:

I believe Malwarebytes has already commented on why they detect it as a PUP.  Not sure why we have to beat a dead horse.

Very interesting defensive posture... No one is saying they don't "detect" it... Perhaps you should reread the original post. It clearly states that I am asking "why" they continue to show back up once I've put them in the "Exclusions" category.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ried said:

As Firefox mentioned,  setting the detections to Ignore Always will suffice and the program will no longer be detected.

Launch Malwarebytes and on the left hand side, click 'Settings'

  • Next, click the 'Protection' tab and look for Potential Threat Protection
  • Change the PUP and PUM settings to 'Warn user about detections'
  • Scroll down to the very bottom and turn off 'Automatically Quarantine Detections'

Reinstall the previously detected PUP program if needed, then run a Scan.  When the scan completes, uncheck the boxes next to all the detections.  To uncheck all of them at once, click the uppermost box next to the column title of 'Threats'

You will now see a Next button -  click the Next button.

In the Next pane, select 'Ignore always'.  After this, Malwarebytes will no longer detect that program.

Please let me know how that worked out for you.

With respect, I believe some responses here are just quickly browsing and dropping template answers without fully reading or comprehending the original post. Clearly my illustration shows they are "exclusions" and yet still showing up in scans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way to exclude registry keys via the Settings > Exclusions interface which is why I posted the instructions I have in Post #10.   Please scroll up to see my reply (you and I had posted at the same time)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ried said:

There is no way to exclude registry keys via the Settings > Exclusions interface which is why I posted the instructions I have in Post #10.   Please scroll up to see my reply (you and I had posted at the same time)

Thank you for clarification, and I apologize for not adding or clarifying myse,f that I have followed these procedures as I am a longstanding user of Malwarebytes, and a fan, as mentioned. But they're still showing up. My question might relate more to upgrades or updates? Does Malwarebytes see the file as a "different" or "new" file if the file name is the same, but the size or content has changed? 

That is the only conclusion I could think of where it would be popping back up in my scans... Your thoughts?

Edited by chrisban35

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slow down and give people a chance to reply. :)

That is not a template, I read exactly what you wrote out and gave you specific instructions on how to properly exclude such a large program.  It took time to add the bullet points for you - trust me, not a template.

We are not going to discuss the 'why'.  The criteria is listed in the public post you were linked to.  We are not automatically removing it - it is detected as a Potentially Unwanted Program - emphasis on the Potentially

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ried said:

Slow down and give people a chance to reply. :)

That is not a template, I read exactly what you wrote out and gave you specific instructions on how to properly exclude such a large program.  It took time to add the bullet points for you - trust me, not a template.

We are not going to discuss the 'why'.  The criteria is listed in the public post you were linked to.  We are not automatically removing it - it is detected as a Potentially Unwanted Program - emphasis on the Potentially

I'm sure some respond with defensive negativity because they want to hear what they want to hear. I assure you, I did not post that response with the same type of aggressive demeanor. I was merely stating that my illustration showed I had already attempted to make it an exclusion. Where I failed was in explaining that I had also used the "always ignore" option, which is why I then went and added them to "exclusions" in the hopes that would fix the problem. 

Also, we'll just have to agree to disagree on whether or not it's truly a PUP or not. :) But, whether it is or not, you and I both know that's not why it continues to appear. As you mentioned, those steps "should" resolve the issue of them popping back up in my scans. Yet, they still do every time. I will run another scan now and then post that scan result. Which of course will be "after" I have followed your above mentioned tasks again... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK:  I read the instruction, but I already had fired Malwarebytes for being arrogant about its inherent "right" to remove programs from my computer without me specifically authorizing that first.

 

Furthermore, the process by which MWB was deleting ASC11 apparently created some kind of software conflict which turned my operating speed to molasses and, on startup, constantly returned the error message, "ASCTray.exe failed to start because rtl120.bpl is missing."  I looked, and the file (which accompanies almost all IObit products) was NOT missing.

 

An internet search turned up that many others also are receiving this same error message and apparently are totally mystified re how to fix it.  In my case, the error message began appearing after MWB deleted ASC a second time, and that clearly identified the source of the difficulty. 

 

Finally, after MWB deleted ASC for the third time in less than two months, I reinstalled ASC, uninstalled MWB, and now the computer runs fine and the error message on startup is gone.

 

I reject Malwarebytes' fix:  That, somehow, I have to do something to stop MWB from imposing on me its ideas on what to allow and not.  Malwarebytes easily could offer its program with the settings rendered ahead of time to the purported "fix," and if the user wants to change them to something more severe, fine, let him or her do that.  But, the current settings are a serious broach of computer etiquette.  I understand that MWB is mad at IObit over a matter that went to litigation, but I was not party to that and don't want to be party to that.  Until the people at MWB grow up a little, I've solved the problem by removing Malwarebytes from my computer -- there are other programs out there that hunt down malware, and MWB will not be reinstalled on my computer until the policy changes.

 

End of debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greetings and welcome,

The issue with ASC has nothing to do with any past issues between Malwarebytes and IOBit, otherwise all IOBit apps would be detected, yet they are not.  ASC fits into the category of PUP (Potentially Unwanted Programs) on the basis of several of its components and behaviors and by default, Malwarebytes is aggressive against PUPs and detects them by default (which is overwhelmingly what Malwarebytes' customers and users have requested of them to do).

With that said, if you don't want Malwarebytes to detect PUPs, there is a single setting which you may change that will prevent it from detecting PUPs.  In Malwarebytes under Settings>Protection, locate the Potential Threat Protection section and use the drop-down menu below Potentially Unwanted Programs (PUPs) and change it to either Warn User if you wish to be prompted by Malwarebytes on how to handle any PUP detections or Ignore Detections if you would rather have Malwarebytes not detect PUPs at all and just to detect malware threats.

Otherwise, if you only wish to exclude ASC then perform a Threat Scan with Malwarebytes and once it completes, click the uppermost checkbox on the top left of the list of detected items to clear all checkboxes in the list then click Next.  It will then prompt you on how to handle the remaining unchecked items; click Ignore Always and those items will be added to Malwarebytes Exclusions so that they will no longer be detected.  Note that if you download an installer for a later version of ASC or any other excluded application that you will need to either exclude the installer to allow it to run or temporarily disable the Malware Protection component in Malwarebytes so that it does not detect it.  Additionally, you may configure Malwarebytes to prompt you on what to do, either by changing the aforementioned PUP setting in the Protection tab or by disabling the Automatic Quarantine setting also located under the Protection tab so that it prompts you whenever an item is detected.

Any vendor that would like Malwarebytes to review their application for reconsideration and possible removal from PUP classification may do so by contacting Malwarebytes at the email address on this page.

Specifically with regards to ASC, I believe the classification primarily has to do with the inclusion of a registry cleaner.  More information may be found here on the subject as well as here and if you search the Malwarebytes Blog for registry cleaners you'll find plenty of other examples of similarly classified apps and the reasoning behind it.

If there is anything else we might assist you with please don't hesitate to let us know.

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, count_herout said:

End of debate.

In reality there is no debate concerning IObit software.  They have a very long history of creating products that are worthless and/or potentially very damaging.  No reputable security expert would ever recommend the use of any IObit product.  The best advice concerning any and all IObit software is to remove it from your computer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/4/2018 at 3:25 PM, Unicore said:

In reality there is no debate concerning IObit software.  They have a very long history of creating products that are worthless and/or potentially very damaging.  No reputable security expert would ever recommend the use of any IObit product.  The best advice concerning any and all IObit software is to remove it from your computer.

So @Unicore it sounds like you are claiming to be a "security expert".  Can you explain why IObit is worthless or why you would not recommend it?  Opinions are like you know what, every security expert has one.  Instead of just saying "they suck", it would be constructive if you gave an explanation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you do not like the comments here, don't revise this thread. Another idea, remove iObit or Malwarebytes. There are other programs to use. To the user that said they never got emails from iObit, you are lucky. I got 'tons' of them. They could have changed, but TOO late. Funny how users with ONE post complain about another post. It is very easy JUST GO AWAY.

Nothing else to do on this Sunday afternoon !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, cibertek said:

So @Unicore it sounds like you are claiming to be a "security expert".  Can you explain why IObit is worthless or why you would not recommend it?  Opinions are like you know what, every security expert has one.  Instead of just saying "they suck", it would be constructive if you gave an explanation.

 

The main problem is that IObit ASC uses a registry cleaner and registry cleaners are really nothing more than snake oil and should be avoided.  Routine cleaning of your registry provides no benefit but is potentially harmful to your operating system.  It's not just IObit.  There are other software companies that produce registry cleaners as well and those too should be avoided.  As I stated before, this is not a debatable issue.  Microsoft does not support the use of registry cleaners to wit:

Microsoft’s official position on the use of Registry Cleaners

Microsoft does not support the use of registry cleaners

Microsoft is not responsible for issues caused by using a registry cleaning utility.

Microsoft cannot guarantee that problems resulting from the use of a registry cleaning utility can be solved

https://www.thewindowsclub.com/microsoft-support-registry-cleaners-windows

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got burned using a cleaner years ago because I let it do it's thing.  While I let Ccleaner do it every so often I also have a better understanding of the how & why & to what it does the cleaning. I also use a registry program or Regedit to kill leftover stuff,Norton & McAfee, when they are installed on a new laptop.

The only thing I disagree with MBAM is the setting to Automatically Quarantine  Malware as too dangerous. Went through this a few years ago and understand their point.

The thing with iObit is people bringing up an old thread just because they want to cause problems here.

Edited by KenW

Share this post


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.

×
×
  • 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.