Malwarebytes claim: IObit is stealing signature databases

No,what i thank is there has been a rush to judgment.

The Malwarebytes evidence looks solid.
As you would expect.
It is their evidence.
Perhaps it would not be as macho,but it would be more fair,to consider the
time zone difference,and give IObit a chance to respond.

 

Your asking me? I honestly think all is true. And between sites like this and a few other reputable ones, the word is going to spread very quickly. I would not be surprised to see a publication media or two pick up on it. Maybe not as this stuff has happened before but we wont go there. You, have to keep moving forward and let the power of the members, users, people, call it what you want, be the jury and judge and possible the executioner. This will pan out over a few days but more software is sold and/or dies here at Wilders just from the public voice. And isnt that ironic and funny at the same time as it is being done globally but yet who would have thunk it possible.

Malwarebytes has nothing to prove, the astute members here, myself excluded, as I am not astute, just like pretty avatars, will pave the road to what is right.

 

I agree as I posted similar thoughts earlier.

 

"Malwarebytes has nothing to prove."

I am sorry,I thought the accuser had everything to prove.

 

not when the DNA is inclusive of the charged offender. CSI ya know.

 

Yep,that the thing about CSI,they down play the Day In Court.

Lot of guys still setting on death row with DNA evidence saying they are innocent.

 

There is just one thing i don't understand, If i went through all the trouble to crack malwarebytes and reverse engineer it..... I would probably change the names of the "Definition files" if they did this it would have gone undetected.

What i think probably happened is they bought signatures off a 3'rd party company and thought it would be okay because that company is making the signitures for them when in reality they just stole them from other companies.

if you change "Don’t.Steal.Our.Software.A" to "Keygen-Generic#" Then you would be 99% safe from ever being caught out. I have looked into the code of a few different programs using reverse engineering and i have found that VBA32 + Superanti-spyware have similar flaws that would allow for signatures harvesting. And i am sure if the vendor was smart enough they could get away with it easy.

What you guys have to look into is a self decrypting cipher that works like a Cloud antivirus, where is calls home for decryption when the user logs into the computer and does all its decrypting in the cloud and sends back packed encrypted files and during scans decrypts them again in the cloud and so on.

 

You are confusing fact with public perception. Both can be deadly. The reality is, if all our time is wasted here today then Iobit will get their chance to state their case to. I dont see any mods deleting them from here. I totally agree that no one should form any judgement till both sides are told. I said this earlier. But what Iobit doesnt understand, the public perception time table has started running and they are failing to step up and alter father-time.

 

all iobit.com are achieving is giving themselves a bad name. did they really think that this wouldn't get leaked out?

I also notice on their home page http://iobit.com/security360.html they claim Malwarebytes has a low detection rate when we all know that is not the case.

well that says it all then, I class this as evidence.

 

here is a quote from one of their mods:

came from their forum
__________________

 

Threads have not been deleted off the IObit forums. They have been temporarily removed until IObit can address them. We do not need a flame war beginning by people who really do not know both sides.

The evidence is incriminating, but I am asking you all to wait for a response by IObit, whether or not they plead guilty or innocent. That will settle the issue, but until then do not assume. The information has been provided by MalwareBytes, and I ask you to read it with a clear mind and read it on an 'as is' basis. In other words, take it for what MalwareBytes has said until IObit responds, and do not assume on any information in the article. Thank you.

 

"Temporarily removing" is hiding in IMO.

 

I am not responsible for temporarily removing the threads, I am just relaying the information to you. Once IObit responds the threads will be placed back.

 

He should know, He is a Prairie Dog.

 

HA!

I wish they wouldn't "burrow those threads"

 

We can't respond to these threads right now, so we are going to hide them and ban members who create them. There is a better way to handle it than this. Bad judgment on the moderator's part. I am glad now that I never used Iobit security regardless of how this plays out.

 

Well...

If they are stealing signatures from Malwarebytes, I wonder what else they might be stealing.

How many computers- worldwide- would you imagine have Iobit 360 (or any of their other applications) installed ?

 

can you see the funny side of this? its mid morning online flame fest entertainment all over the internet on forum sites.

 

Nerds Unite! Also for some reason the people on the Iobit forums remind me of that "Leave Britney Alone!" guy. *Sobs ;-;*

*Mods deleteing posts here too "

 

Weren't they accused of using HJT in their application, without permission too?

 

All the WOT users are chiming in on this one.

http://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/iobit.com

 

If this proves to be true (and likely it will) IOBit should reimburse all their paid subscribers or at least pay Malwarebytes for each license of 360 sold (plus interest). Where I'm from we would say that IOBit just "screwed the pooch."

 

First, I do not want to say whether IObit is stealing signature databases or not. What I can see as Malwarebytes mentioned was that IObit detect the file with same name as Malwarebytes.

But if it just uses Malwarebytes' naming method, is it steal Malwarebytes' copyright?

Naming method has copyright?

Or Use the same naming method = stealing signature databases?

There are many cases that some AV vendors(not oem engine) use the same naming mehtod as others.

Hopes to see more exactly evidences from Malwarebytes

 

Not useing nameing method. Missed the point. please read this thread before post

 

LOL now that'd be payback and not unjustified given the alleged rogue behaviour of IOBit

If this turns out to be true it's truly shameful behaviour,especially since Malwarebytes is just a small player offering a great free product that must be very time consuming to maintain.