Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It seems that they are using a new database now per their update history.

My last scan shows identical detection to 1.20 . If they made any major DB changes it is to long dead malware as fresh malware (less than 30 days old) is still detected at the same rate and as the same detection names .

Share this post


Link to post

http://download.cnet.com/IObit-Security-36....html?tag=mncol

It's v1.10 but that doesn't matter. As soon as you update it you will have the latest version.

You can't expect download sites to ignore a popular download for too long. The accusations aren't between the download site(s) and IObit. It's between IObit and whoever they have infringed upon.

Download.com and MajorGeeks (Download.com mainly) host downloads that I consider spyware/adware so singling out IObit to be removed from their sites is a little over the top. If we go after them for hosting 360 we should go after them for the other downloads also.

Share this post


Link to post
Download.com and MajorGeeks (Download.com mainly) host downloads that I consider spyware/adware so singling out IObit to be removed from their sites is a little over the top. If we go after them for hosting 360 we should go after them for the other downloads also.

Agreed. It isn't just BrotherSoft that hosts bad downloads. I have seen a lot of disagreeable downloads on CNET. Now, on MajorGeeks, not as much.

Share this post


Link to post

The projected Scenario: Iobit had denied and now accepted responsibility and shows good faith will to work with other vendors that they all might together serve our security needs.

This is a deception in logic which denies the facts and then accepts the facts but denies the wrongdoing -- and yet accepts the responsibilities for "errors" they initially denied making -- and now follows up with a "Good Guy -- Let's all work together to prevent such "mistakes" and momopolise the software field, presumably using Iobit's expertise in who knows what underhanded quasi-criminal systems.

We see this kind of bait & switch coming out of that neck of the woods today, like an influenza plague. It is called by those deliberate malefactors who would have us think of them as mere co-victims in need of greater "co-operation" -- this is a perversion of the 'Art of Positive Thinking' into outright fraud which, having been now revealed, becomes mere "mistakes" in need of greater voluntary information sharing, a legitimisation of what they have already been doing, along with vague promises of "accepting responsibility" (read, paying the agrieved parties to move them from potential plaintiffs to partners.

I have recently uncovered a Chinese Writing Impliment operation which purports to be a struggling young engineering working to support orphanages & hospitals in order to give back to the world that has been so good to him -- complete with flowery philosophical essays and "borrowed" student photographs -- to explain away their somewhat higher product asking prices. They claim to charge shipping costs according to weight, which they go on to define as the some total of the weight of each item if it were individually shipped by China Mail, instead of the real cost of the combined items they are going to ship together at very little margin over the individual item cost.

Something right out of of Abbot & Costello sham scams -- this seems the wave of the today coming out of the crooked East Asia -- which gravely tarnishes the impeccable names of the genuinely honest, in the Confucian sense, noble & honourable policies of the gentleman-businessman.

Now, where are those mobile Lethal Injection Chambers today when we need them to make visits to the several crooks doing these wickedly evil things with software and with hardware ? At the least, public canings might become a virtuous import from Singapore, home of my Phony Writing Pens Charity located there ?!

Are the pieces of the puzzle coming together for others as they have for me, one lone customer client without the substantial resources of successful companies to put into investigative work? And, most sadly of all, there seems to be substantial government ministers and lower officials involved in the collusion -- and China & Singapore need to make thorough investigation of a whole lot of various levels of malefactors and take care of things in that highly effective, if summary, Oriental methodology ... or whatever works within humanitarian restrictions which distinguish civilisation from barbarism.

Anybody else out there who might elaborate on this apparent trend -- at once highly disturbing & frustrating, as also ridiculously juvenile, nuisances -- expensive, counterproductive, and anarchistic as they be ?!

Veneta, Metro Eugene, Oregon

Share this post


Link to post

@ DragonMasterJay & EvilFantasy:

How is this software just 'questionable'? The have been caught red handed, denied it, accepted it, but then said maybe no, as so eloquently put by BaBatson. They can't make up their mind.

I don't see what is 'questionable' about that type of behavior.

Borderline rogues sure, I can agree there are tons that are questionable due to ad tactics, and how the present so called 'detections' and ask for payment to remove.

But the word 'questionable' does not come to mind when I think of IOBIT and this situation, far from it in fact.

Share this post


Link to post

I wasn't trying to excuse IObit. :)

Just saying that we shouldn't hold the download sites to the same accountability as IObit.

Share this post


Link to post

This situation is not altogether easy. The only sign that marks IObit products (or at least IObit Security 360) as rogue, would be the fact that they steal databases.

The argument against being rogue, would be the fact that they do not explicitly enforce the need to upgrade to higher version just to remove threats. They offer the chance to in the program, but do not explicitly enforce the need to. Then, they do not unusually attempt to penetrate or intrude the system it is running on. They also do not seem to have any illegitimate advertising going on.

I see IObit Security 360 as rogue, and should not be used. I am not forcing users to remove IObit products, but giving the user the opportunity to choose. Here is how I state it to the user I am helping (to remove malware): "IObit was recently recorded to be a rogue software distributor. Removing it is optional at the moment, but I recommend to remove IObit software because IObit steals databases of good products."

I am not saying it is legal, but if there was a way you can reverse-engineer their software and check it out yourself - you should.

I think it is also dumb that they are using 5 years worth of samples of malware. That will not work because:

  • Malware is a continuous and growing danger, and multiplies daily.
  • Botnets are becoming one of the biggest dangers.
  • Detection of malware should be based on behavior not just signatures.
  • Using old removal methods and old databases can cause the file size of the program to be huge.
  • Some of the more difficult malware cannot be removed easily. Having an up-to-date database is the best and biggest priority all security companies should have.
  • If they are going to detect traces, then detect all of them, not just a few.
  • They need to make sure every signature they have in their database is not a carbon copy of another security companies' work.

I do not think it is questionable, I think it is arguable - about whether or not IObit is rogue. I think IObit is rogue, but I can find a lot of people who would like to argue, especially IObit users.

Share this post


Link to post
This situation is not altogether easy. The only sign that marks IObit products (or at least IObit Security 360) as rogue, would be the fact that they steal databases.

The argument against being rogue, would be the fact that they do not explicitly enforce the need to upgrade to higher version just to remove threats. They offer the chance to in the program, but do not explicitly enforce the need to. Then, they do not unusually attempt to penetrate or intrude the system it is running on. They also do not seem to have any illegitimate advertising going on.

I see IObit Security 360 as rogue, and should not be used. I am not forcing users to remove IObit products, but giving the user the opportunity to choose. Here is how I state it to the user I am helping (to remove malware): "IObit was recently recorded to be a rogue software distributor. Removing it is optional at the moment, but I recommend to remove IObit software because IObit steals databases of good products."

I am not saying it is legal, but if there was a way you can reverse-engineer their software and check it out yourself - you should.

I think it is also dumb that they are using 5 years worth of samples of malware. That will not work because:

  • Malware is a continuous and growing danger, and multiplies daily.
  • Botnets are becoming one of the biggest dangers.
  • Detection of malware should be based on behavior not just signatures.
  • Using old removal methods and old databases can cause the file size of the program to be huge.
  • Some of the more difficult malware cannot be removed easily. Having an up-to-date database is the best and biggest priority all security companies should have.
  • If they are going to detect traces, then detect all of them, not just a few.
  • They need to make sure every signature they have in their database is not a carbon copy of another security companies' work.

I do not think it is questionable, I think it is arguable - about whether or not IObit is rogue. I think IObit is rogue, but I can find a lot of people who would like to argue, especially IObit users.

Hello, I wonder that whether the latest version of IObit Security360 is clean. I think the program itself has no problem, the interface, the function and the design, IObit is good at it, much better than Malwarebytes.

The question is that the database they used. For the latest version, are they still using Malwarebytes' database? Is there any proof?

Share this post


Link to post
My last scan shows identical detection to 1.20 . If they made any major DB changes it is to long dead malware as fresh malware (less than 30 days old) is still detected at the same rate and as the same detection names .

Can you upload the scan report file here? I think they could not be so risky as they also have the brand, not like the real rogueware who changes products and websites often.

Share this post


Link to post
Hello, I wonder that whether the latest version of IObit Security360 is clean. I think the program itself has no problem, the interface, the function and the design, IObit is good at it, much better than Malwarebytes.

The question is that the database they used. For the latest version, are they still using Malwarebytes' database? Is there any proof?

Yeah, the software's great, the interface is great, the features are great...and they're also all STOLEN. If you haven't tried the software on my list (all of which is FREE and existed long before IOBit), give it a try and compare it for yourself.

They stole a LOT more than just databases :) .

Share this post


Link to post
Yeah, the software's great, the interface is great, the features are great...and they're also all STOLEN. If you haven't tried the software on my list (all of which is FREE and existed long before IOBit), give it a try and compare it for yourself.

They stole a LOT more than just databases :) .

Can you please specify? I read your thread but that's very foolish. Can you tell me that whether MS steal Mac's idea or Mac steal MS' idea?

* It steals from the functionality of HijackThis

* It steals from the functionality of Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware, including FileASSASSIN ("Unlock Delete")

* It steals from Spybot Search & Destroy/SpywareBlaster with it's "Passive Defense" functionality

* It steals from Secunia PSI with it's "Security Holes" checker

* It steals from CCleaner (even the user interface looks the same) with its "Privacy Sweeper"

That's what you think, right?

I started to use IObit's Advanced SystemCare at 2006. At that time, there is a module like what you said, the passive protection feature.

And the "Unlock Delete", why don't you say Malwarebytes steals from KillBox? At least, the "Unlock Delete" tool has the unlock feature but not only delay deletion. While Malwarebytes' FileASSASSIN is absolutely the same as KillBox.

I'm the user of Advanced SystemCare and Malwarebytes AntiMalware. I don't want to be a brawler between the two company, but I know that we should have the principle. IObit's Advanced SystemCare created and carry forward the one-click maintanence feature, and then GlaryUtilities, Tune Up Utilities and PCTools copy this idea. Can you say that they are all thief? IObit was online from early in 2005, they are not founded yesterday.

Please learn the history first, my friend.

Share this post


Link to post
IObit is good at it, much better than Malwarebytes.

Sure you can jazz up the GUI all you want but that does not make IOBit a better product.

Plus if you have to resort to stealing databases to make your product good, that tells you something :)

And the "Unlock Delete", why don't you say Malwarebytes steals from KillBox? At least, the "Unlock Delete" tool has the unlock feature but not only delay deletion. While Malwarebytes' FileASSASSIN is absolutely the same as KillBox.

We can say that Malwarebytes didn't steal from KillBox because they do not use the same code and GUI of KillBox, they are completely different. Unlike what IOBit did.

Share this post


Link to post
Yeah, the software's great, the interface is great, the features are great...and they're also all STOLEN. If you haven't tried the software on my list (all of which is FREE and existed long before IOBit), give it a try and compare it for yourself.

They stole a LOT more than just databases :) .

And you said that the interface is also stolen. What can I say? You have lost your reason now.

Share this post


Link to post
And you said that the interface is also stolen. What can I say? You have lost your reason now.

:) I think not my friend.

The evidence is clearly laid out in front of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Sure you can jazz up the GUI all you want but that does not make IOBit a better product.

Plus if you have to resort to stealing databases to make your product good, that tells you something :)

We can say that Malwarebytes didn't steal from KillBox because they do not use the same code and GUI of KillBox, they are completely different. Unlike what IOBit did.

What I mean is only the program itself. I don't use IObit Security 360 as it slows down my computer. I'm the user of Malwarebytes AntiMalware and Advanced SystemCare.

That's my suggestion for Malwarebytes. Make a good GUI and less error code, everytime when I scan my computer, there is an error code.

Anyway, the only issue is the database, but please don't lose your reason.

Share this post


Link to post

What exile360 was saying is that IOBit did not steal MBAM's GUI, but they did steal the database, they stole the GUI from other vendors.

MBAM was not the only company IOBit stole from.

Share this post


Link to post
:) I think not my friend.

The evidence is clearly laid out in front of you.

Can you please specify the comparability of the inferface between the two program?

Share this post


Link to post
Can you please specify the comparability of the inferface between the two program?

We're not talking about the MBAM interface.

Share this post


Link to post
What exile360 was saying is that IOBit did not steal MBAM's GUI, but they did steal the database, they stole the GUI from other vendors.

MBAM was not the only company IOBit stole from.

Sorry for that. Usually vendors copy the ideas from other company, even Microsoft and Apple, you won't know who did it first.

As I said, Malwarebytes also copied the feature from KillBox, and you think it's "copy" or "learn" from other product. Maybe IObit did the same thing, they made a Unlock Delete tool which has more feature, but you think it's "steal" but not "copy" or "learn".

That's my opinion, they steal the database but not the program.

Share this post


Link to post

Run Ccleaner (it existed long before IOBit) - same interface as the privacy cleaner

HijackThis - same functionality

Spybot Search & Destroy and Spywareblaster both existed and had the same types of "passive protection" as IOBit long before IOBit existed.

Try the software I listed, it's all free, then you'll see exactly what I'm talking about. IOBit took a bunch of copyrighted existing tools and stole their code and bundled it all together in their own application in an attempt to sell their product to unsuspecting users. You can believe what you want about me and my opinions, but I've been using these tools long enough to recognize when someone has blatantly ripped them off.

Share this post


Link to post
Sorry for that. Usually vendors copy the ideas from other company, even Microsoft and Apple, you won't know who did it first.

As I said, Malwarebytes also copied the feature from KillBox, and you think it's "copy" or "learn" from other product. Maybe IObit did the same thing, they made a Unlock Delete tool which has more feature, but you think it's "steal" but not "copy" or "learn".

That's my opinion, they steal the database but not the program.

We are not talking simply about copying ideas, IOBit stole code and used it in there own programs to make it look like their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Sorry for that. Usually vendors copy the ideas from other company, even Microsoft and Apple, you won't know who did it first.

As I said, Malwarebytes also copied the feature from KillBox, and you think it's "copy" or "learn" from other product. Maybe IObit did the same thing, they made a Unlock Delete tool which has more feature, but you think it's "steal" but not "copy" or "learn".

That's my opinion, they steal the database but not the program.

Also, you mentioned CCleaner. Both CCleaner and Advanced SystemCare were online from 2005. The privacy sweeper feature was there at 2005, I think only CCleaner knows whether it is copied from their product. Also, you will find that there are lots of product copy the design, interface and idea from CCleaner, IObit Advanced SystemCare and TuneUP utilities.

One of the most popular cloned product is GlaryUtilites. CNet reviewed it as the best utilities product, but the tools were the same as TuneUp, the main interface and one-click maintenance feature is copied from IObit.

As a user, what we want is great product. Vendors learn from other company at times, it's only learn or copy, but not steal. Wisdom is shared by human being, but not only the first man who implement it, or it's protected by patent.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • 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.