i dived into SB forum 2009 but i am using sandboxie at least since v2 (my docs show up v2.86 and 2007). i had earlier builds, not sure why they got lost. i have no idea when forced programs/forced folders was introduced but THATS the best feature ever (when having a license). so sandboxie never failed here like mbam - as i expected more or less results.
Please explain what you mean by "failed here like mbam". Are you saying MBAM or some of its featured stopped working for some reason, or that it failed to stop malicious software from infecting, compromising and damaging your computer? And if the latter, then it was the paid Pro/Premium version with real-time scanning and not the free, on-demand scanner, right.
both never failed, sorry. i can have mbam* free and premium running, not the same time ofc, depends of the license-conf file. all did as expected. * v2, not v3 i also tried windows defender with adware block - did as expected. not as expected for some testing candidates in the box.
Okay, thanks. But the key point being is your computer stayed secured and was not infected when running with just Windows Defender and MBAM, right?
@bill - my last "virus" (not sure if so) was determined 23 years ago in windows 95 (boot virus), meanwhile that system may be recycled.^^ i use another concept which dont rely on antivirus or behavior blocker. i had those but had none installed for the last 7/8 years. mbam is running in a special environment. WD running also by purpose, only win10. as many times written i have spend my money on other things than AV and i investigate another way round for unknown software. no specialist but experienced.
I don't see the need to spend money on AV either - especially if they require periodic renewal fees. That's what is nice about Windows Defender, it is free, no extra junk, toolbars, search engines or homepage redirects, and no nags to upgrade to some pro version that requires annual renewals.
I installed it again on Friday and have not seen any problems this time around. I did uninstall the previous 2.2.1.1043 version, then rebooted before installing MB3.x. So it seems they have worked the bugs out, at least from here, for now. If you have a pro/premium license and don't want to see your money go to waste, I recommend you try a complete uninstall of the old, then try the new again. Just make sure you know your license ID and key so you can easily activate it again. FTR, I went with the latest public release version (Malwarebytes version 3.0.6.1469 with Component package version 1.0.50). But if you are adventurous, they have a new "Beta/Preview" (Malwarebytes version 3.0.6.1469 with Component package version 1.0.69) available here that others have reported works without problems too.
Yes! I have. Do note that link I provided came from their forums. Also note I specifically said, "it seems they have worked the bugs out, at least from here, for now." I thought I made it pretty clear that I was only talking about my own experiences, and the experiences of others that I have talked too. Sorry if I was not clear. But that said, look at the most recent created new threads reporting new problems over there. A very few have anything to do with the program failures that were first encountered when MB3.x was first released. So I still contend, it seems they have worked the bugs out. Of course, with millions and millions of users, there will always be some with problems. That's inevitable. You can't judge a product by looking at the product's own support center. If you go to a Toyota dealer's service center, you might think Toyota's are lousy cars because the service center if filled with nothing but Toyota's waiting service. And how many of those are there for routine oil changes and tire rotations vs those waiting to fix something that actually broke?
Out of idle curiosity, what is your definition of "Fortress system"? I'm outspoken about certain things, particularly given the apparent shiftiness with some AV test labs and chronic performance issues with a popular but beleaguered anti malware suite. Is there some confusion between interest and paranoia/FUD? Oh my.... Perhaps some other readers have the same interest/concern but don't voice it for fear of bully fanboys afflicted with tunnel vision. Insofar as anti malware is concerned, yeah, it's useful for on-demand now and then. Amen!
Seeing users in security forums having more security apps then they do productive ones. Locked down to the point every time they do open a productive app they need to allow it several times over to do so, or spending most of their time on their systems tweaking all of that security to run those apps. I fully believe in a balance of security and usability. This can be achieved quite easily, mostly by learning safer habits, which is not preached enough in these forums IMO. Then you have your "In Theory" pushers, constantly driving the fear mongering with their posts that most likely will never happen, especially to home users, also pushing Developers to constantly waste time on these theories instead of fixing issues that do need tended too. Most home users now days on Modern OS's. are likely to see mainly PUPs/PUA's/Scareware. ect. Now and then you will see one find something a little nastier, and if they follow one golden rule of security I like to rehash, and that is to always perform regular backups "system and personal", even this would not be a big deal to fix. I'm not one to care about fanboys opinions or being bashed about my comments along these lines, as what I speak is direct and honest.
Agreed no need to spend money on AV, but Windows Defender? Only if you don't care about giving your personal data to MS. in an extra special way (leaving the door unlocked). Now, why do you think it is free?
That's hogwash and paranoia and pure FUD to boot. WD does not send any personal data to MS. It is really sad when the misinformed don't bother to learn the facts before perpetuating the rumormongering. The only information WD sends, if the user allows it, is information on the malicious/suspicious files and activities so it can improve security. And if you think the other anti-malware makers don't do the same think, then you clearly are an unaware user. Not only to they all do it, they all share that information too. And that's a good thing. Plus, it seems clear you don't know the difference between security and privacy. The difference is HUGE. If you are worried because Microsoft might have your personal information, then you need to wake up. Google knows way more about you than Microsoft. Your ISP knows everything about you, including your real name (Microsoft doesn't), your street address (Microsoft doesn't), your billing information (Microsoft doesn't), phone number (Microsoft doesn't) and every website you have visited (Microsoft doesn't - unless you use Edge or IE). Your cell phone carrier not only knows everything your ISP knows, your cell carrier also knows where you are standing within a few feet, including which aisle in which store you are standing in, where you have been, the direction you are going, and how fast you are traveling. They know your contacts, who and what you have texted and emailed. So please, don't talk about Microsoft and personal data when it is clear you don't know what you are talking about. You are simply bashing to bash and to spread more FUD. Microsoft has done plenty deserving bashing. So bash where due and I will defend your right to do so with vigor. Don't spread FUD and falsehoods or I will defend the falsely accused with the same vigor. Simple. Because Microsoft has every incentive in the world to make sure our systems are secure. Why? Because they will get blamed and bashed if not, even when the failure is due to (1) user neglect, (2) failure of the 3rd party security applications to protect us, (3) action of the badguy or (4) those MS bashers who love to spread falsehoods about Microsoft. Ask yourself this: "What incentive do Norton, McAfee, Kaspersky, HitmanPro, and even Malwarebytes have to stop Malware?" They have none! Why? Because if the world was free of malware, they would all go out of business. Well said. As I noted above, the user is always the weakest link in security - most often by being click happy. It is due to bad user habits, a lack of security awareness and poor discipline that socially engineered methods of malware distribution is the most successful. Which means, it is preventable.
@Bill_Bright it was a pleasure to read your post i almost died laughing at the "Why do you think it is free?" if i extrapolate this statement so the biggest privacy threat in the world is... LINUX ! yes ! why ? because it is free (poor Snowden, he is doomed )
To the concerns expressed earlier that Microsoft is delaying critical Flash updates for an entire month, as I noted before Microsoft has released "out-of-cycle" updates when necessary. And as noted, Microsoft is doing just that. As reported by several IT news outlets including Hard|OCP, Microsoft Issues Adobe Flash fixes today. Your Windows Update should pick these up within the next 24 hours.
You're welcome. And for the record, if you want them now and not wait for Windows Update, they are available and you can manually tell Windows Update to fetch and install them. And for those wondering, no reboot required.
Flash update has never been part of the monthly rollup-update, but has always been separate. Flash update does not require a reboot, because Flash is not in use during runtime of the OS. MS has already announced, that the will bury Flash. Google and Mozilla also did. Hope they will do it soon. BTW: Flash update came in, just a moment ago.
It is becoming embarrassing to read about the level of paranoia of some people regarding the amount of information collected by AV companies with their cloud activity. Frankly I’m not supporting the motto that “if you've got nothing to hide you've got nothing to fear”, privacy is sacrosanct, but give me a break, most of the eavesdropping and snooping is done in telephone conversations which with the Patriot Act can be performed without the authorization of a judge. Facebook and Tweeter are social networks giving out tons of private information willingly, spy agencies are having a field day already without having to use AVs data. You want absolute privacy, don’t use telephones, unplug your computer, and send messages using traditional mail channels…
Osaban- Well said. The paranoia shown by a typical (non-uber criminal) user is directly proportional to their ignorance of Security affairs. Dear God, it was hard enough trying to stop the people who wanted to kill you...
