MBAM & Evidence Eliminator

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

Maybe because the answer can be found with a simple search....

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1238385&postcount=45
http://www.malwarebytes.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=4289
http://www.dozleng.com/updates/index.php?showtopic=18279&hl=#

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

Was that last sentence really necessary? While I respect MBAM and its developers/researchers, it appears that your people skills could use a little refinement. Just my $.02

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

I might have put it badly , I just want to avoid escalation of this issue .

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

I can not imagine that anyone who has followed the Evidence Eliminator "development" from the beginning would want to have it running on a PC. It doesn't take much investigative work to look up the EE saga. The only conclusion is that those who praise the program here are unaware of its past.

What's happened in the past doesn't necessarily mean that it's more than just "history" but given the apparent lack of morals and ethics of the developers I wouldn't touch it with a 10 ft pole even if I was paid to do so...

The question is not why MBAM is flagging it as rogue - the question is why not every reputable security software vendor doesn't.

regards,
T

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

As long as many many other major security companies gives false positives in various degrees (including flagging crucial system files as malware), I really don't understand this thread at all. If people were to make a thread for each false positive some piece of security software gives, then Wilders would become total chaos.

As far as the whole discussion about Evidence Eliminator being rogue or not, I can certainly understand why it would be labeled as rogues and if you don't agree with it then add it to your exclude list..... problem solved!

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

If ShadowProtect is reported as a false positive, nobody will create a thread about this, because ShadowProtect has no "rogue history".
This is not the case with "Evidence Eliminator", which has a "rogue history".

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

I will do ! But thread would be very short. lol

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

This is even more of a reason not to make a thread about it.

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

I want it running on my PC as it is the besr cleaner / eraser.

I am aware of its past and dont care as this does not detract from what it does

It has always run perfectly on my PC, on my brothers and on two friends systems with no problems ever.

It is not a rogue app. There has never been any evidence presented anywhere that shows it does anything other than what it claims to do. If there is, show it to us. (and I dont mean talk about the vendor spamming and how their advertising stinks - as we already know this!)

MBAM is wrong and just following the ignorant and misguided who dont know better. I wouldnt have any AM software on my PC that was so poor that it flagged an app like EE because they dont like the vendors advertising.

Anyhow, it seems to me that there are endless threads about wipers and cleaners at the moment so Im not going to waste any more time posting on the subject as its become exhausted.

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

This is part of a small group of applications that seems to cause the following problem :

If I add it people complain .

If I dont add it people complian .

I am going to go with the experts I have trusted for years on this one , I am sorry that we do not see eye to eye .

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

There is also a small group of people who just like to complain. They are related to the small group of people who like to tell you how to run your business.

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

No need to apologise!

Perhaps one of the experts you mention can come here and show us any evidence that EE does anything other than what it claims?

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

Hi, thanks very much for your guidance. I just, just wish these could have come from the wise guy (?). Apparently his feedback are laced with selective nature. Or perhaps he does not really know the answers.

I have since disabled the real time monitor--how can use it if I have NO clues(now I do after the third party's help-- -). I will not change my minds if He still exercises that kind of Warrior style customer service. MBAM may have a good degree of potential to grow, but these hopes are certainly damaged by that style. Mind you, MBAM is not the ONLY one that can save your bacon, why bother ? I will continue to search SAS's understudy. As for MBAM ? a good product, but not a MUST have. I will use its free version for now. 2 weeks from now ? a big question mark.

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

I am sorry that you feel this way . MBAM has an ignore option for these cases . I believe that the number of people that would like me to keep this listed outnumbers the number of people that would like me to delist it .

I made the mistake once already of delisting an application by persistent request . Once I did I was met from the other side with persistent requests to relist it .

I feel that the best option for these cases is to use the ignore option . You will not see EE in scan results and the rogue listing will be kept consistent with the general consensus .

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

Your definition of rouge software may apply to the very definition of the word "rogue" but seeing things in a larger perspective I have to agree with Suzi & Eric Howes on this one:
(As EE isn't related to anti-spyware they're not listed on that site.)

EE should definately be blacklisted, IMO. Robin Hood Software are scumbags - period. If u wanna trust them and their products - good for you.

I applaud MBAM for detecting EE as rogue. This is exactly how I want a good malwarecleaner to act. My money was well spent Thank you, nosirrah!

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

"Using false, deceptive, misleading, or confusing scan reports or other GUI elements to badger, coerce, or trick users into purchasing the product"

None of these apply to EE itself as an app. (again - unless anyone can present any evidence to counter what Im saying)

Anyhow, its up to each of us to decide what we will, even if that decision ignores facts and is based on emotion and not logic.

Personally, I would classify MBAM as rogue, because as an application, it flags apps as bad even if the app is not bad in any way, just because they dont like the publisher / vendor - and not based on any property of the application itself.

Bit like a car mag giving a particular Ford model a bad review / rating because the reviewers wife ran off with a bloke who owned one!

I wont be saying any more on the subject.

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

Hi, again.

I am not qualified to make such comments as whether MBAM has done or over done its job. Just to remind guys to look at these:

If MBAM has (?) an unique technology to single out many rogue applications, and NO other AS/AM have so far come forward to ENDOSE its findings,

What does that mean ? Be my guests. One versus so many others. Clear verdict ? eh ?

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

You can decide, and this is a prime reason why MBAM has the ignore feature available. I think it's pretty obvious that more people (at least the people that have posted in this thread) are in favor of blacklisting EE than whitelisting it. In the end if you strongly disagree as a whole simply refrain from using MBAM altogether.

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

So what? The definition above is accepted universally as rogue behavior. According to you this doesn't count? Dropping Vundo is fine as long as the program works?

Removal instructions for EE

Screen shots of a hijack (from Alex Eckleberry's blog, can't link to story, URL doesn't properly resolve):





This is recent. His blog post is Jan 2007, and I removed a very similar hijack about six months ago. It IS rogue behavior by commonly accepted standards. It should be detected.

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

If the makers of Winfixer created a 100% on the up and up application would you install it ? Would you trust that all past problems were gone for good ? What would have to happen for them to earn your trust ? Could it be done ?

If this was day one for EE (as in all past issues never happened) would anyone have an issue with the actual application ?

Are there people that feel that the makers of EE have never done anything wrong ? Are the people that feel I should delist EE 100% convinced that they will never pull the same blackhat tricks ever again ?

If I were to delist it here and now what would people think of me and MBAM ? Is there any chance that everyone would agree with this decision ?


Some tough questions , some easy . I am interested to hear what everyone thinks .

The big questions here are where is the line in the sand and what is the path to redemption ?

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

You seem unable to understand facts or apply logic. There is nothing wrong with the app itself - it does not have pop ups etc - you refer only to the advertising / behavopr of the vendor.

You have a simple choice -

1) for AM software to detect software that does something other than what it says it does annd therefore protect you from IR theft, unwanted adverts etc or whatever. (which is what all AM SW does, other than MBAM)

2) for AM SW to detect apps that are fine in themselves, but the AM author does not like the politics of the company that made the app.

If we apply 2) above, you may logically argue AM SW should flag any Microsoft software as it is a huge company, has not shared its billions with the world, has crushed many smaller and dynamic businesses, has broken the law and been taken to court over major issues etc. If you extend the same logic further, you could blacklist all American software because of Americas crimes against humanity in Iraq. Murdering millions is bit worse than spamming a few hundred people.

Once you base detection on 2) AM SW becomes worthless.

I notice none of the "experts" has come up with any evidence against the EE app itself - because there isnt any.

This genuinely will be my last post on the issue.

If anyone posts something ignoring logic and that fails to prove the EE app itself is dodgy, just pretend I follow your post with one that says "Whatever!!!"

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

I can't get onto their site because my hosts file blocks them. Their (EE) strategy seems to be questionable at the very least.

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

Judging from the EE marketing it seems they're targeting the group of people that falls into that category.

If untrustworthy people code an app that is security related there is no chance I would trust they're "good guys" all of a sudden. I'm a bit amazed you choose to look the other way regarding anything other than if EE does what it is supposed to do. Apparently you don't care at all about ethics and that's good for Robin Hood Software. That is their best bet to get their product sold.

Just because you (obviously) have failed to see that there is more to the expression "rogue software" than the literal interpretation of the word "rogue" I can understand that you're upset. Many posters here have tried to explain but since there are some rudimentary differences in how we look at marketing ethics we will never agree. You don't care about the marketing - fine. A majority do care and we think it's great that MBAM alert its users. If you disagree (like in any other case, whether it's a FP or not) you can choose to ignore the alert.

Like I said - if you're happy with EE that's good for you.
I prefer to pay for software from trustworthy vendors.

This is my last post in this thread on the subject.

regards,
T

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

And greyware doesn't exist either, greyware = blackware. Never give the bad or even the good guys an inch.

 

Re: MBAM & Evidense Eliminator

Sorry if I am mistaken, but wouldn't Alex Eckleberry be considered an expert. I mean, he ownly owns one of the biggest anti-spyware markets in the world.