Jump to content
Alpharius

Malwarebytes Browser Guard Question

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, rakka said:

@Alpharius

Why do we need email ID? 
We are collecting email addresses to know our customers better, it will be used to deliver product level communications along with promotions and important outage information. We will not, in any circumstances, share your email address with other individuals or organizations.
 

I do not think that many users will like it since they are essentially forced to disclose their email address in order to use this application, and as a result, advertising went to this mail.

I understand that google email will be revealed is not it ?

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

I got the Chrome extension 2 days ago with auto-update. This is on Vivaldi and Edge Beta (chromium).

The older version was showing some hits but this new version showed 0 hits on same sites.

I deleted the new extension and installed it from the store. Now it is working correctly and now getting hits.

On Vivaldi it went to work right away but on Edge it asked for an e-mail address before I could use it.

Jim 😎  

Edited by Phone Man

Share this post


Link to post

Is it possible that you make requirement for email optional ?

Judging by the comments of the application in chrome market many people are unhappy that they are forced to disclose their email address.

For the most part I don't care if spam just arrives in the mail because I hame many this messages from hen..khem anime sites, so it’s not significant.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

It would be nice if someone from MB would clarify exactly what email address MBG will access on Chrome.  Is it the email address for the Google Account that the Chrome Browser is signed into?  If that is the case, what email address will be accessed on Firefox?  I don't have a Firefox account. I use Firefox browser without signing into an account.  What about when I use the extension on MS Edge Chromium?  What email address will you access?

Also, as Alpharius has suggested, please make this optional.  Either by requesting an email address so we can provide the one we want you to have or by allowing us to opt-out after the fact.

Bill

Edited by BillH99999

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, rakka said:

@Alpharius

Why do we need email ID? 
We are collecting email addresses to know our customers better, it will be used to deliver product level communications along with promotions and important outage information. We will not, in any circumstances, share your email address with other individuals or organizations.
 

I don't want you to use my e-mail address without +Malwarebytes appended to my e-mail address. I guess I'll leave the extension disabled until there's an option to change which address it goes to.

 

"deliver product level communications" - I can't wait for Malwarebyte to market their other products in these e-mails, time to look into their "Opt-in" compliance in terms of GDPR on the Chrome Web Store, whether they actually legally gain consent through the install of the plugin.

Share this post


Link to post

@rakka

That only answers a small part the questions in my last posting.

It would be nice if someone from MB would clarify exactly what email address MBG will access on Chrome.  Is it the email address for the Google Account that the Chrome Browser is signed into?  If that is the case, what email address will be accessed on Firefox?  I don't have a Firefox account. I use Firefox browser without signing into an account.  What about when I use the extension on MS Edge Chromium?  What email address will you access?

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Malwarebytes Browser Guard has no way to know your email address or read it automatically. Users need to provide us there email ID by entering it in UI during product activation, and it can be any email (not limited to gmail).

Google needs to update the term "know your email address", sounds like an automated email collection. 

Workaround: If you don't want to provide an email, please re-install Browser Guard and you should not see the email activation screen. This feature is not permanent and depending on the response we get, we will decide the future of it.  

Edited by rakka

Share this post


Link to post

Please reference for mode details:  

 

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, rakka said:

Malwarebytes Browser Guard has no way to know your email address or read it automatically. Users need to provide us there email ID by entering it in UI during product activation, and it can be any email (not limited to gmail).

Google needs to update the term "know your email address", sounds like an automated email collection. 

Workaround: If you don't want to provide an email, please re-install Browser Guard and you should not see the email activation screen. This feature is not permanent and depending on the response we get, we will decide the future of it.  

@rakka Thank you

Share this post


Link to post

I was gonna say, I never saw any prompt to enter my email address so I was wondering how they would get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

@rakka

Thank you for the explanation. 

I did not enable the extension due to my concerns so I never got this screen.  I think there are other people who are not getting the extension because of their concerns.  I think you would be doing yourselves a great favor by stating this clearly on the web extension page in the extension stores for each browser.

I removed the extension, added it back, and enabled it and got the screen and was able to input the email address I wanted to use.

If only it had been made clear before the new version of the app was released, I think there would have been much less concern by a lot of folks.

Thanks,
Bill

Edited by BillH99999

Share this post


Link to post

I just wish we would have been able to actually test this version of the extension in beta before it was actually released as the final build/version, because it appears to work very differently from the builds we were testing before it went final and multiple bugs which were not present in the last betas have already been discovered and reported in this final release.  Kinda defeats the purpose of beta testing if you are going to make any changes to the code in the final release version because you're basically pushing forward with a completely untested build (I'm sure it was tested by QA internally, but still, that's a minuscule amount testing/systems compared to the full public beta).

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, exile360 said:

I just wish we would have been able to actually test this version of the extension in beta before it was actually released as the final build/version, because it appears to work very differently from the builds we were testing before it went final and multiple bugs which were not present in the last betas have already been discovered and reported in this final release.  Kinda defeats the purpose of beta testing if you are going to make any changes to the code in the final release version because you're basically pushing forward with a completely untested build (I'm sure it was tested by QA internally, but still, that's a minuscule amount testing/systems compared to the full public beta).

I completely agree with this!

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, BillH99999 said:

I completely agree with this!

That used to be how we did things.  It was a pivotal part of our release process.  No untested code was ever to be published as a final release product.  Each build had to go through a full round of testing prior to being released, and if any change (even minor) is made to the code (for example, fixing a last minute minor bug or adding a last minute feature/change) then the resulting new build had to go through the entire full testing process prior to being released because we were burned too many times by builds going live with seemingly insignificant changes that resulted in sometimes catastrophic failures and issues due to unforeseen consequences to those changes in the code.  I understand that public beta testing is not necessarily a requirement for Malwarebytes product releases and that it may be an optional tool utilized when they are seeking a wide range of test systems, variables and product feedback, however I've always found it to be invaluable in helping to ferret out those elusive bugs that no one in QA ever seems to find until a drove of customers/users start hitting the Support channels with widespread reports of the issue.  Public beta testing helps to avoid this by having the product tested on a larger diversity of systems and configurations rather than a number of relatively pristine VMs and test systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, exile360 said:

That used to be how we did things.  It was a pivotal part of our release process.  No untested code was ever to be published as a final release product.  Each build had to go through a full round of testing prior to being released, and if any change (even minor) is made to the code (for example, fixing a last minute minor bug or adding a last minute feature/change) then the resulting new build had to go through the entire full testing process prior to being released because we were burned too many times by builds going live with seemingly insignificant changes that resulted in sometimes catastrophic failures and issues due to unforeseen consequences to those changes in the code.  I understand that public beta testing is not necessarily a requirement for Malwarebytes product releases and that it may be an optional tool utilized when they are seeking a wide range of test systems, variables and product feedback, however I've always found it to be invaluable in helping to ferret out those elusive bugs that no one in QA ever seems to find until a drove of customers/users start hitting the Support channels with widespread reports of the issue.  Public beta testing helps to avoid this by having the product tested on a larger diversity of systems and configurations rather than a number of relatively pristine VMs and test systems.

@exile360

Again, I completely agree.  I was in technical support in an IT department for over 30 years.  We ALWAYS did an acceptance test by the customers after our unit (module) and integration testing was completed.  We could not move to production without acceptance by our users.

Bill

Edited by BillH99999

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, I guess in this case there is little difference since everyone had access to the beta the entire time anyway, but still I guess I'd just feel a lot better if it had some indication that this current build is a beta/test build rather than everything indicating that it is the final release knowing that it hasn't really gone through all the same testing that the previous betas were given over time by so many users.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

I guess what I was saying is the same as what I think you were saying in your earlier post.  We were not given the release version after they modified it from the beta version.  We were able to test a beta of 1.0, but a lot changed between 1.0 and 2.0.  I would have like to have been able to beta test what was released as 2.0 before they released it... maybe beta 1.99.  In my day we would have given the users 2.0 to test before we ever released as production.  One last chance to catch any problems before going live.

Bill

Edited by BillH99999

Share this post


Link to post

Yep, agreed.  My point was simply that because it's been available for download via the Google web store the entire time, it makes little difference as far as access is concerned, but I would have preferred they put up this new version as a last beta just to note to everyone that it hasn't gone through testing yet and is still not fit for use in production environments just to have that awareness there for any would-be users of it that maybe aren't comfortable running untested/non-final code.

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/28/2019 at 3:02 PM, rakka said:

Malwarebytes Browser Guard has no way to know your email address or read it automatically. Users need to provide us there email ID by entering it in UI during product activation, and it can be any email (not limited to gmail).

Google needs to update the term "know your email address", sounds like an automated email collection. 

Workaround: If you don't want to provide an email, please re-install Browser Guard and you should not see the email activation screen. This feature is not permanent and depending on the response we get, we will decide the future of it.  

Bad idea asking for users email addresses to spam them with promotional material. 

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/28/2019 at 4:17 PM, exile360 said:

That used to be how we did things.  It was a pivotal part of our release process.  No untested code was ever to be published as a final release product.  Each build had to go through a full round of testing prior to being released, and if any change (even minor) is made to the code (for example, fixing a last minute minor bug or adding a last minute feature/change) then the resulting new build had to go through the entire full testing process prior to being released because we were burned too many times by builds going live with seemingly insignificant changes that resulted in sometimes catastrophic failures and issues due to unforeseen consequences to those changes in the code.  I understand that public beta testing is not necessarily a requirement for Malwarebytes product releases and that it may be an optional tool utilized when they are seeking a wide range of test systems, variables and product feedback, however I've always found it to be invaluable in helping to ferret out those elusive bugs that no one in QA ever seems to find until a drove of customers/users start hitting the Support channels with widespread reports of the issue.  Public beta testing helps to avoid this by having the product tested on a larger diversity of systems and configurations rather than a number of relatively pristine VMs and test systems.

When version 3 was released the forum was clogged with users having issues for months, I know a lot of users were turned off by this and stopped using and/or recommending Malwarebytes. I certainly hope version 4 is not a repeat.

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, digmorcrusher said:

Bad idea asking for users email addresses to spam them with promotional material.

Quote

Why do we need email ID? 
We are collecting email addresses to know our customers better, it will be used to deliver product level communications along with promotions and important outage information. We will not, in any circumstances, share your email address with other individuals or organizations.

As long as there’s a way to opt-out and/or unsubscribe from promotional material, I don’t see that as a problem, and they already know most of our email addresses, in any case. Perhaps they could make opting out a more obvious choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Deleated. Duplicate post.

Edited by alvarnell

Share this post


Link to post

Okay this something new.

What kind of data exchanges with certain sites and with what sites ?

I thought surprises would end with email adress but was mistaken.

Share this post


Link to post

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.