Is malwarebytes premium enough for Mac

[Davidtoo]

I have been using windows forever...and I use Malwarebytes premium on top of Kaspersky.  Kaspersky provides firewall, mail scans, etc. protection and lets nothing through...and Malwarebytes I consider secondary protection just in case something gets by Kaspersky.  And it has come in handly blocking rogue websites and exploits before detected by Kaspersky.

My daughters use Mac and have done so without any sort of malware protection.  Recently I installed malwarebytes premium on their computers and it did, on a scan, detect four malware threats and quarantined them on my daughter's college computer, which she has been using for three years now.  Not sure what the malware was, one of the threats had gibberish letters..

Which brings up the question.....is Malwarebytes for mac enough...I know mac has its own security superior to that of windows...and is not targeted like windows is, but lately I have been reading that mac is becoming more of a target.  Also reading that malwarebytes for mac is lacking since it does not have a firewall and does not prevent phishing.  I don't know if the issue about phishing is accurate, but I do know kaspersky on my windows computers has regularly prevented phishing...which lately seems to be very sophisticated...fake dropbox emails, fake shareone emails etc...and Kaspersky blocks these sites or prevents malicious downloads.   I have some extra kaspersky licenses lying around, but don't want to activate them yet and waste them on the Mac if not necessary.   

Opinions?  Thanks.

 

 

 

[alvarnell]

You are unlikely to receive unbiased views here. I doubt the staff will even comment on it's competition and most users are going to be somewhat biased, having chosen Malwarebytes.

But more importantly, there is no one size fits all. Without knowing how savvy the user is about computers in general and various types of malware, it isn’t possible to make recommendations . Some get by with nothing but macOS while others need maximum protection on all fronts due to their frequent use of shady web and torrent sites, falling for phishing emails and / or indiscriminately clicking hyperlinks.

My only recommendation in such cases is not to run more than one AV package in real-time or on-access mode. That will only result in a struggle over which software gets access to a file and slow your computer in the process. There can also be conflicts where one package detects the other as infected (that has mostly been resolved now) or refuses to allow it's installation if a competing brand is not fully removed first.

Malwarebytes does intend to add features to it's Premium level along the lines you mentioned, but won't commit to a timeline.

 

[PaulBostock]

I found this article which I believe answers the question.

https://thewirecutter.com/blog/best-antivirus/

Hope this helps

 

[alvarnell]

Unfortunately, that article covers the Windows version of Malwarebytes, but many of the advantages mentioned would also apply to the Mac version.

[PaulBostock]

Whilst most of the article focuses on Windows, there are references to MacOS & Malwarebyes for Mac premium in the article.  & the article does recommend Malwarebytes for Mac premium for MacOS. (To be run on it's own)

 

[alvarnell]

So it does, and thanks for pointing that out. I didn't read far enough in the article to realize it also addresses the different thread environment impacting Windows and macOS users.

[Davidtoo]

Thanks...interesting article and I will go with just Malwarebytes on the macs...but not on my windows computers.....The article says Windows defender is good enough supplanted with Malwarebytes...and that "But the best protection is layers and good habits:.......They can talk about good habits all they want...but I have an office with several staff members who will open up malicious but innocent looking email items no matter how much training they have.  Before Kaspersky (sans malwarebytes), I used Symantec and before Symantec free AV programs...and managed to get infected no matter what program I was using.  In one case, my secretary, even with Symantec End Point, managed to infect her computer so badly, it was being used as some sort of botnet to store hundreds of viruses....the infection made it over to our server and trashed the server too...never made it to my computer from the server though because Kaspersky cut off the network before any harm could be done.  that was it...all computers in the office used Kaspersky Internet Security (or Kaspersky small office...same thing...as Kaspersky Total Security).  Even with Kaspersky, my staff has opened up packed files and dropbox phishing mail that was not detected initially, but was stopped in its tracks by Kaspersky and then the damage rolled back.  So this is the way I see it....the downtime from an infection can cost thousands of dollars...the investment in a top quality program like Kaspersky backed up by malwarebytes is a relatively minimal cost and other than the malwarebytes fiasco last January...my computers having been running smoothly since I adapted Kaspersky paid version a few years back....I do not trust Windows Defender to be as good as Kaspersky....the only other program I might consider for my windows computers would be Bitdefender...but since nothing has penetrated our computers since adapting Kaspersky backed up by malwarebytes...for windows that is what I am sticking with.  I am not taking the chance of being hit with Ransomware etc...which I have no doubt Kaspersky has prevented several times in the last few years.

[Davidtoo]

By the way, I do use Malwarebytes business anti exploit on the server and malwarebytes premium on the desktops as secondary protection.  I feel comfortable that between the two programs...we will have no problems regardless of what the staff opens in email or not.