Could Malwarebytes run on Windows 95?

[Amaroq_Starwind]

This is probably a very niche case, and probably wouldn't have any practical use besides idle experimentation, but...

Does Malwarebytes rely on anything (such as specific Win32 API calls or the .NET Framework) that isn't present on Windows 95? If so, then what would it take to get it working? If not, could the hardware of the time actually handle MBAM?

I'm asking all of this for purely hypothetical reasons, hence why this is in General Chat. I don't actually have any present need for this, nor do I know anyone who does.

[exile360]

I'm not a Developer so I don't have any specifics, however the following are the current hardware and OS requirements for Malwarebytes 3 from here:

Software requirements 
Windows 10 (32/64-bit) 
Windows 8.1 (32/64-bit) 
Windows 8 (32/64-bit) 
Windows 7 (32/64-bit) 
Windows Vista (Service Pack 1 or later, 32/64-bit)* 
Windows XP (Service Pack 3 or later, 32-bit only)* 
Active Internet connection

Hardware Requirements 
800MHz CPU or faster, with SSE2 technology 
2048 MB (64-bit OS), 1024 MB (32-bit OS, except 512 MB for Windows XP) 
250 MB of free hard disk space 
1024x768 or higher screen resolution

*The anti-ransomware protection component is only available on Windows 7 or higher

[Amaroq_Starwind]

Hmm, interesting.

[David H. Lipman]

The libraries used to generate the executables have Windows NT dependencies.  Thus it is incapable of running on Win9x/ME.

 

[Amaroq_Starwind]

I believe that Microsoft has tools for making Windows NT programs completely portable and cross-platform, IIRC, by building the libraries in question directly into the program. I'll have to find the docs again and verify though.

[exile360]

Malwarebytes for Windows in its current form is also based on QT, so if QT apps are incompatible with older operating systems then that could also be a potential hurdle.  I don't know if QT is used for the underlying SDK of the scan/detection engine though.

The Web Protection component currently uses WFP, the same APIs/technology the new Windows Firewall in Vista+ is based on so it wouldn't function in older operating systems either.  There is an older version of the protection which is used on XP, but it is far more limited in its capabilities (IP blocking only, no specific URL/domain blocking) but it requires SP2 at a minimum I believe.

I don't know if there are any .NET requirements or not, but there may be.

[David H. Lipman]

16 minutes ago, Amaroq_Starwind said:

I believe that Microsoft has tools for making Windows NT programs completely portable and cross-platform, IIRC, by building the libraries in question directly into the program. I'll have to find the docs again and verify though.

Since Win9x/ME are dead, its a moot point.

[Amaroq_Starwind]

3 minutes ago, exile360 said:

Malwarebytes for Windows in its current form is also based on QT, so if QT apps are incompatible with older operating systems then that could also be a potential hurdle.  I don't know if QT is used for the underlying SDK of the scan/detection engine though.

The Web Protection component currently uses WFP, the same APIs/technology the new Windows Firewall in Vista+ is based on so it wouldn't function in older operating systems either.  There is an older version of the protection which is used on XP, but it is far more limited in its capabilities (IP blocking only, no specific URL/domain blocking) but it requires SP2 at a minimum I believe.

I don't know if there are any .NET requirements or not, but there may be.

So basically what you're saying is that a lot of that functionality would need to be rebuilt from scratch in assembly?

 

2 minutes ago, David H. Lipman said:

Since Win9x/ME are dead, its a moot point.

Where's your sense of adventure? The whole point of an MBAM 95 discussion is a brainstorming-for-fun kind of thing. 🦊

[David H. Lipman]

Spoiler

 

 

[exile360]

2 hours ago, Amaroq_Starwind said:

So basically what you're saying is that a lot of that functionality would need to be rebuilt from scratch in assembly?

Potentially, yes, depending on the underlying code and how portable it is.  They do use an SDK and have modularized much of the code deliberately to make cross-platform development easier, but that's not necessarily the same thing as replicating full functionality of all of the protection components on outdated versions of Windows since many of the new features rely on APIs that didn't exist back then (incidentally, this is also why some components don't function at all or function differently on pre-SP1 versions of Vista and Windows XP).  Because the minimum OS required to use all functionality in Malwarebytes is Windows 7, I have my doubts about the chances of making it function under pre-XP operating systems, though it might be possible to get the basic scan engine to work there, but of course that would mean no real-time protection.  Obviously it wouldn't be of much use on those older operating systems anyway even if it were somehow made compatible since the threats it detects themselves aren't compatible with those older operating systems (nor are they generally found in the wild today as I understand it).

[Firefox]

On ‎11‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 4:28 PM, David H. Lipman said:

Since Win9x/ME are dead, its a moot point.

+1

Why waste resources and time of staff and experts trying to help others with real problems with moot points???  We all could go on for years on what if's...