Jump to content

Fed Up with Malwarebytes Horrible Mess since version 2.0

Recommended Posts

I build and setup Windows computers for my customers and I used to recommend, purchase and install Malwarebytes on every computer I worked on.
However, versions since 2.xxx have been a serious cause of trouble for me and all of my customers.

1 There have been at least 2 and possibly 3 versions (version of 3.xxx) that have screwed up user's computers.

One release kept eating up RAM so that Windows kept slowing down and would hardly work. It took a lot of time for Malwarebytes  to stop blaming customers and admit that their update was causing all of the problems

The other late release also screwed up our machines, so the mouse worked but everything else stopped working. Once again Malwarebytes blamed everyone but themselves. When they finally admitted the problem was caused by their update, they did not inform all users. Only some of us, who had purchased directly were told.

2 From time to time earlier versions of 3.xxx would suddenly turn off one of several of the protections. When you tried to turn them back on, they would immediately turn off. This went on in some unpredictable way until an update would sometimes resolve it for a while, only to begin doing something similar. This went on for at least 6 to 12 months. Huge waste of time during which protection was greatly reduced. Finally, after a while this particular problem appeared to be solved.

Until the latest update 3.8.3. The Exploit Protection has just turned itself off - 1 or 2 days after this latest update was installed.  Clicking on the switch has no effect at all, so it looks like the update is once again screwing things up.

3 Malwarebytes tends to lump serious adware when findind PUPS with fairly harmless things. For example both Auslogic Defrag and JetClean are excellent programs that carry Open Candy. For years Malwarebytes had no issue with this, then suddenly without warning it would stop and delete both programs and the location from where it was installed. Even after EXCLUDING the folders where these were installed. Now it seems to me that if you exclude something, then it should be excluded. But no, Malwarebytes does not clearly mean exclude to mean exclude.
In any case tech support was totally unsympathetic. Worse yet some idiot working for Malwarebytes even claims that JetClean itself is lying, and reports false positives which it then claims to remove.  Total nonsense, JetClean definitely improves Windows, boot time, as well as overall processing speed by defraging the Registry, Optimizing Internet connection settings etc. Does it tag unimportant, negligible stuff during some of its scans? Yes, but that's standard procedure for Malwarebytes and almost certainly for all Security Programs. However, I have never had JetClean in any way install itself the way a real malicious program does. Similar issue with Auslogic Defrag. 

Is Malwarebytes not capable of stripping off the Open Candy without disturbing these programs ? After another tech support inquiry, I was able to get some practical suggestions on how to install and keep JetClean and Auslogic installed and working - methods which I had already more or less worked out on my own previously.

4  Malwarebytes interface has had some serious problems. Mainly unable and refusing to listen to user suggestions. The main problem, still unresolved is the unnecessary waste of time putting in EXCLUSIONS. Malwarebytes insists on doing it the slow, stupid way, even though other programs have figured out a far more efficient way to do it. For example I have posted requests about this at least 5-8 times with clear examples including screen captures.  The way AVAST does it very fast.  You have check boxes next to each file in the folder you are looking at during browse, so you simply click and get a check mark for C:\ Program Files and then for Program Files (x86). It's a hell of a lot faster than having to browse to each folder for both of these locations, then start the browsing steps all over for each item or folder that you wish to exclude.  Now, things have improved from the way things started in the beginning, when the browsing reverted back to the same place (usually Malwarebytes folder) each time you started the browsing process for each exclusion.  Why resist doing things to make life easier, rather than frustrating for the user ? There is no good excuse for doing that.  
Another thing that will drive you crazy is in the Scheduling which has gotten worse. There is a disconnect between a check mark, and or higlighting the rows. Worse yet is the confusion caused by showing the name NORMAL when you choose Threat Scan. Just say Threat Scan when that is what you chose. Yes I know there is some convoluted thinking behind insisting on Normal, but it is not helpful in practice, and simply causes confusion.  Too many Programmers think only from their own point of view, which is totally wrong when you are dealing with the Interface. With the Interface you must think from the users (clients, customers) point of view. They don't care about what goes on under the hood - they simply want it to work, and be easy to setup and use.

5 Now you can try to get Tech Support, but of course, the support basically consist of you having to spend 30 minutes or more in an effort to carry out all of the instructions that you are  given, which includes uninstalling stuff (usually a huge waste of time) especially because you are not told how to save all of your customized settings which will take a lot of labor to reconstruct.  Tech support want's the customer to do all of the heavy lifting, and are not willing to even entertain the possibility that the fault lies with the bugs in the update problem.  Clearly if everything worked fine before the update (no other new programs were installed), then the likely culprit is the main change - the Malwarebytes Update itself.

I have not personally experienced any other Security Program create such critical problems with any of their updates. Maybe everyone else takes Beta Testing seriously. This is a disgrace for any company and one would think that making the mistake once would be enough to learn from. Sadly, not true for Malwarebytes.


I don't know what happened during the switch form versions 2.xx to 3.xxx,  so I'm only guessing that there was big change in leadership and programming staff at Malwarebytes.  Proven, capable, competent people were replaced by some seriously incompetent, short sighted staff and that's why a Security Program that had earned a great deal of admiration and respect for doing a superb job turned into a mess and a headache. 

I no longer recommend and install Malwarebytes Premium in every new machine that I work on, and simply continue, at least for now, to run the free version, without the Memory Resident Components. I will keep one Premium version going in my office to see if the company is willing and able to make a turnaround and stop releasing damaging updates, and fix the interface issues that are badly needed.



Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Staff

Hi Dan--

Very much appreciate all your thoughtful and detailed comments!  I understand that there's been a lot of frustration in dealing with many of the issues you pointed out.

I just wanted to provide a few comments and let you know we do take all feedback to heart.

13 hours ago, drdancm said:

1 There have been at least 2 and possibly 3 versions (version of 3.xxx) that have screwed up user's computers.

Yes, there have been a few cases where there have been problems related to an update or new release, but we typically try to be as transparent as possible in dealing with these cases. Sometimes we start out with limited information and learn as we are able to do more testing, but we do our best to keep people informed. Regarding communicating issues out, you raise a great point. It would be extremely helpful for those kinds of situations if we had an email address for all users so we could provide this type of communication. Currently this is not a requirement, so we've had to leverage public forums like this to help get the word out.

13 hours ago, drdancm said:

2 From time to time earlier versions of 3.xxx would suddenly turn off one of several of the protections.

As I'm sure you're aware, our 3.x version was completely re-architected from the ground up. It was made more modular to allow us greater flexibility and control in providing new features and rolling out updates more quickly and dynamically. However, with this increased modularity came some trade-offs and we absolutely needed to spend a lot of time improving the syncing between different components. The latest 3.x versions are very stable in this regard now and the occasional issue reported is typically due to some 3rd party interference, usually another security software program installed. Once mutual exclusions are set up usually this can be resolved.

If you are still having issues with the Exploit Protection, please do run our Support Tool and provide the logs requested. We would very much like to get this straightened out for you.

13 hours ago, drdancm said:

3 Malwarebytes tends to lump serious adware when findind PUPS with fairly harmless things.

Malwarebytes does have a much more aggressive stance toward PUPs and we detect a lot of PUPs that other security vendors do not, and many of our users appreciate this hard stance. We have clearly stated the criteria used for determining a PUP.  While there are certain usability issues currently (as you rightly pointed out in your next point), our support team is always willing to help you set up exclusions for specific programs that you wish to continue using. 

13 hours ago, drdancm said:

4  Malwarebytes interface has had some serious problems.

I agree. There are numerous reasons for this, but rather than making a bunch of excuses the only comment I'll make is that after the release of 3.x we decided focusing on the core protective capability and protection-related issues were more important than other usability concerns. Of course, ideally it would have been great to be able to do it all. But it's a continual balance of prioritizing with our available resources. The issues you point out with Exclusions and Scheduling are known and I can let you know that we're already working on our next major release of Malwarebytes and we have already made some improvements in those areas. We know that Exclusions is still a major pain point. I reviewed your previous feedback and you had other great suggestions, so I'll make sure our team also sees them.

14 hours ago, drdancm said:

5 Now you can try to get Tech Support

Our Support team does a great job helping our customers, though depending on the specific situation some cases may require more time to resolve. We do already have the suggestion to allow exporting / importing of settings and custom configurations on our list. Hopefully that is something we can offer in the future. Totally agree it would make things easier for folks such as yourself who are setting up new systems often.

Again, I do feel your frustration, but we do listen and try to be transparent about known issues and will do everything in our power to assist. I know that there are some longstanding improvements we've yet to make, but we try to include improvements in each release we put out.

I appreciate your keeping Malwarebytes installed so you can continue to see our progress over the next major releases. Looking forward to your continued feedback on those! :)


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.