I explained my position with an example here: Malwarebytes Anti-Rootkit BETA As they made it clear that this is the way they think about security, I will not insist anymore, but I will say that a tool that behaves in that way is useless for me.
There's a simple way to find out; run a bundleware installer without opting out of all the PUPs and see if Avira detects any of them. It very likely will not because most AVs don't. MBAM with real time protection enabled will detect and offer to remove the PUPs. Of course it also detects and blocks more serious trojans, etc.
That was in 2013, MBAM has been out standing for me on all my PC's I wouldn't think about getting on the net with out it. Most certainly it's still useful.
Agree, I still use it on all computers but with auto quarantine disabled. I want to see what it's going to quarantine before it does it.
Another major improvement on Win8 is SmartScreen, expansion of SmartScreen filter in IE on other Windows which employ good reputation system. When I tested Win8, I find it is relatively efficient though also caused many FPs for new software. I can say, with this improvement one can build quite safe environment against malware w/out any 3rd party security software. Combine SRP with all security tweaks including 1806 trick, ValidateAdminCodeSignatures, CWIllegalInDllSearch, RestrictAnonymous, custom ACL etc.etc., attack sufrace reduction including strict firewall config and disable all unnecessary functions, services, etc., and best practice including threw all executable to Virustotal, always check code-sig and SSL cert etc., then you're much more safer than an environment which just installed, say, BDTS w/ default setting and don't go further. You can even use Chrome and/or EMET to further enhance protection. Oh, sorry, it might be just a description of your settings?
@142395 yep Although a few friends have MBAM life time licenses and are very happy running win 8.1 out of the box with WD+MBAM
There is no product that will please everyone for one reason or another. There are many programs and no matter what good points it has there are bad points as well. Don't forget there are now well over 1.5 billion computers connected to the Internet now days and many of us have varying opinions. Probably little one can do to sway or change someone's mind if they don't like product X for one reason or another. I'm not here to sway anyone's mind on the subject but want to provide some feedback. If you're having an actual issue either software or hardware with MBAM that cannot be resolved then by all means don't use the Protection Modules. On the other hand if you've not given us the opportunity to actually help you get it working then (IMHO) you're short changing yourself. But if you paid for the program and are not having said issues then I just don't understand why one would not keep the protection modules running. I have it running on quite a few systems and do not notice any resource issues with it. Please refer to the following post which shows that resources used are very low. If you don't use it because you don't like the new GUI well refer to above - no one will probably be able to sway you on that so the choice is yours. https://forums.malwarebytes.org/ind...ng-from-earlier-addition-of-malwarebytes-pro/ Please note that there are still file infector viruses in the wild that if they bypass your antivirus they will damage your files and in some cases depending on infection make data recovery difficult to impossible if you don't have an external backup of your data. There are also newer encryption viruses that currently cannot be decrypted (again without external data backups you will lose your data) I see so many users post they only use MBAM as a secondary scanner. Well if you get hit by one of the above it won't matter as you will have already lost your data when it's quite probable that by using your antivirus in conjunction with the MBAM protection modules that infection would have been stopped. I still highly recommend having external backups of all important data. For me (IMHO) if you don't have an external backup of your data then it simply must not be important to you as sooner or later either by software, hardware, infection, etc given enough time you will lose your data but having a backup you'll easily be able to copy it back. There are things I don't like about our 2.x GUI either but not enough to not use it. The protection and detection of 2.x is night and day different between 1.75 and 2.x - There are things the 1.75 version cannot detect or remove that 2.x can. If you're that stubborn that the safety of your computer and data comes secondary to the fact you just don't like the GUI then that's up to you but you're not doing yourself any favors by using the older technology. As always if you do need technical support for our products please contact us on the forum or help desk and we'll be happy to assist you as best as possible.
Reputation is build on personal experience, image is based on trust build by the collective experience of other people we trust, identity is what the company itself communicates to the market. @AdvancedSetup So why not increase the credibility of MBAM and let AV-test or AV-comparatives test MBAM against only latest threats (< 4 weeks old) or test it in combination with Windows Defender (as explained in Is Malwarebytes still useful)
As I said. If you don't like product X there is probably nothing one can do to sway you. We don't own or control these test sites and how they test one product over another but I can say that none of these tests alone make product X better than Product Y. I'm not here to sway you or make sales. If you don't like our product or don't trust our product then I believe you're educated enough to make that decision for yourself if you want to use it or not. Hopefully my post was designed to help bring to attention the fallacy of doing "after the fact" scans that will be useless if your data has already been compromised and was more so pointed to those users that do have a paid license but don't use the protection modules.
From your reply only this was relevant response to my question, so I will rephrase and might get a more concise answer: (b) It is not about better, it is about trust and ease of which this the (relative) advantage can observed and communicated (a good read on consumer adoption for IT-products is Everett M. Rogers "diffusion of innovation"). That is why I mentioned the ïndependant" test (what others say about MBAM). But let's drop this, I am positive towards MBAM and your the one responsible for managing opinion building on forum communities. (a)I am aware that MBAM does not own or control these sites. Behind these sites are companies and people providing test services. AV-comparatives for instance does special product tests. The problem with security is when all is well, you don't notice it being there. It is after an incident you know it was not enough. So for a home user it is very difficult to assess the quality or relative advantage of product X versus Y. Did you ever try to contact AV-test or AV-comparatives and discuss the inclusion of MBAM so it is tested on its intended purpose for the Home market B2C (an AV companion product)? Regards Kees
I personally don't see much value for MBAM to participate in AVC/AVT real-world test. While it is not designed as principal defense, once it participated most people won't understand such difference and will interpret results as they naively do most times. Though I feel MBAM is quite effective, still it don't have luxurious many layers other AV/IS have, besides depending on test scheme there can be other disadvantage to MBAM such as threat from email attachment (AV may block them when they detected exploit code in word file, tho they may miss subsequent malware if proceeded.). This is not actual flaw in MBAM, it's just design principle. I think that participation will be big gamble, and it's not free.
An AV test would at least prove that MBAM picks up the "viruses" (using the same tests) that traditional AV's miss anyway, wouldn't it? Having said that I don't take a lot of notice of these tests, it seems most people think they are questionable unless the AV they're currently using comes out as best
I've been wondering if MBAM was effective against the CryptoWall variants. Can you confirm that MBAM with real time protection running can block CryptoWall from executing and prevent the encryption of data? And by the way, can you say when we may see a new build of MBAM that continues to address various issues with the UI, etc? TIA!
Well said ^^ MBAM is an outstanding product with great support I just lol when I see people posting they would rather run 1.75 over 2.x, the protection don't even come close.
Who needs to see this demonstrated in an AV test to believe it? I've been using MBAM for a long time "in the field" where it consistently detects and removes adware/malware that AVs typically cannot. It's blatantly obvious to anyone who uses it on infected systems. It's not the only thing I use, but it gets most if not all of the job done.
I'm unlucky compared to you guys, I haven't had an unexpected infection in 6 years...I've used various AV's, all the popular well known versions....I've settled with NOD32 now.....I've used Hitmanpro since day one along with MBAM and online scanners and never detected anything aside from a few URL warnings several of which were false positives....Still I'd like to see it put to some independent test nonetheless...Aside from anecdotal evidence what proof is there that V2 is so much better than 1.75?
The OP already has a lifetime license and has it installed. Is it a resource hog? No. Sure, the typical herd of sheep will want to moan and groan about new GUI glitches and bail on an app that's possibly saved their arse for free in a bind for the last ten years. Never mind that Malwarebytes has remained the go to app for testers/reviewers of wanna be premier antimalware (e.g. on youtube.... i know.. guffaw, guffaw) and beyond. Toss in the fact that Malwarebytes is aggressively pursing an anti-exploit application. Is Malwarebytes head(s) buried in the sand and apathetic? Hardly. Back to the OP. I'd fire up that Malwarebyres with real time protection on and leave it at that unless there's a conflict with your other rig. Short of conflicts, you could do worse. A lot worse. And most people here espouse "a layered" approach. And if that dills your pickle, go for it!
I haven't seen any infections on any of my systems either Wilders users are generally a lot more aware of how to keep their systems clean and so the security software they use rarely has any real work to do. I do cleanup for typical users who don't know how to identify bogus email links, prevent PUPs from installing, etc. That's were I see the effectiveness of MBAM. Hitman Pro is also excellent, but it doesn't have a real time shield (unless you also use Hitman Pro Alert).
