MBAM 2.00 Beta Released.

Don't have to deal with the built-in trial. It'll give you full access to the protection, scheduler, etc.

 

Then those running the Beta need to bang a new refresh over-top when released and not thru the software. Will keep eyes pealed.

 

I Used to run the pro version on my system but it felt a little heavy when using it with another AV Not over the top heavy but I could certainly feel it. And on top of that I prefer detection of files On Creation or On opening and not just On Execution. Overall, Love the software, just not to run real-time.

 

I absolutely love Malwarebytes and the protection that it provides, but the only reason why I don't run it, is for the simple fact that it uses way too much RAM.

If the RAM usage was dramatically reduced, I would use it full time.

I know that many say that high RAM usage is no big deal, but if you consider people who do Photo and Video Editing, then you'll realize that programs like that are required to use large amounts of RAM, and if Malwarebytes Anti-Malware is taking up a lot of that RAM, those resources that it uses could have been utilized for that Photo or Video editing program, instead of MBAM.

This is why RAM usage that MBAM uses is such a big deal to me.

and Yes, I do realize that some of you may think, what is a few MBs of RAM versus the GBs of RAM you have. Well, when you do a large video edit that need's to be compressed, your systems RAM literally gets used up. So if MBAM is using a couple hundred megabytes, those couple hundred megabytes could have been pushed out to get a video edit done.

So, if any developer may be listening, please reduce RAM usage.

 

We've already fixed a lot of RAM usage issues in a test build. It will be fixed before GA.

 

Can't wait to see how much has been freed, I would love to run this full time/real-time.

 

Hello
Marcin..the last beta release..has it been reduced some or a lot?
thanks G

 

Neither, it won't be for another beta or two. Definitely before release.

 

Thank you very mucho!!

 

I'm wondering;

Is the GUI design pretty much final ?
will quarantine have a named and dedicated tab or button as in version 1.75 ?
would it be possible to incorporate FileAssassin and RegAssassin in version 2.0 ?

-thanks.

 

Over the past week and through several uninstall/re-install events with MBAM 2.0 I've experienced recurrent failure in both the custom and the Threat Scan to recognize as excluded two files which were added to exclusions prior to that scan.
They are:
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\drivers\AntiLog32.sys
-and-
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\drivers\mbam.sys

After adding these files to exclusions, they are repeatedly detected as potential threats even though both are in exclusions.

How can this recurring problem be fixed ?

Thanks.

 

Hello wtsinnc:

Of course adding MBAM2's own mbam.sys to its own exclusions was tried as a diagnostic step and would never be necessary in normal usage. Even if your copy of mbam.sys compares favorably to the one below, I would encourage you to open a thread in the Malwarebytes Anti-Malware 2.00 Beta sub-forum as your trouble does seem unique.

~VT link removed per policy~

If your AntiLog32.sys is legitimate and related to Zemana AntiLogger, you may have found an MBAM2 incompatibility that's also worthy of reporting to the MBAM2 project team.

HTH

 

Thanks 1PW;

will do.

I might add that both files were not detected as malware or potential threats when using version 1.75

 

A lot of times after I boot, I notice two instances of MBAM running. At first I thought maybe it was just two system tray icons, but I have confirmed two mbam.exe files running.

This is on win8.1-64. Anyone else have this issue?

 

What in the world is going on with MBAM 2.0 ?

A few minutes ago, I got an onscreen message that MBAM was successfully updated- despite the fact that I have 'successful update notification' unchecked in advanced schedule options.

-also-
a look at 'Malware Exclusions' shows the files I referenced in post #211 three times each- the number of times I have submitted them for exclusion- yet, they are still being tagged as potential threats.

This is getting to the point that I am considering reverting back to version 1.75 until these bugs are worked out.

I haven't yet joined the Malwarebytes forums so to report these irregularities; I just don't want to register with another forum.
Hopefully, someone at Malwarebytes will read this and work on a fix for these two issues.

Addenda: In reference to post #212 by 1PW, I have the paid version of Zemana Antilogger, I am running the latest version and until this issue with MBAM version 2.0 have experienced no conflicts with it. A search confirms no duplicates for the two files referenced in post #211.

 

It is not released yet, you are running 2.0 beta, a beta might contain bugs like you experienced

 

Hello my fellow friends..

I was just wondering why under advanced settings the enable self-protection and enable self-protection early start boxes are not checked by default?

Thanks

 

There not enabled as of yet until there has been further testing, some systems can have problems with the self protection just the same as the rootkit scanning is unchecked.

You might not have problems with either but until further testing has been done they are unchecked by default.

 

I just got a program update.

Edit- still using boatloads of resources

 

In case people haven't seen, and may be able to help:

https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=142107

 

MBAM Beta 2.00.0.503 is available via internal update for those running the software or via https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=141268&p=784051

 

Full list of changes here:
https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=142167

 

The next beta will hopefully have the RAM usage tweaks . They're still in testing.

 

This version using 156,000 k, I think last version of beta was running around 130,000 k the one time I looked.