Malwarebytes or CounterSpy v3 ?

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by Jean Marc, Jan 7, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Balatsokas

    Balatsokas Former Poster

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    Posts:
    86
    Location:
    Land of NoWhere
    If you have to select between these two, I prefer CounterSpy.
    SUPERAntiSpyware Professional Edition is another option to consider!

    If you don't want a Real-Time AntiSpyware protection, install
    A-Squared Anti-Malware 4.0 Free
    -OR-
    SUPERAntiSpyware Free.
     
  2. egghead

    egghead Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Posts:
    443
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    I have installed counterspy.

    For their real time scanner to run you have to disable any other real time scanner (including the one of your AV). :rolleyes:

    What do I gain with this? 1 step forward and 5 steps backward.

    This was a very short triail.
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2009
  3. Perman

    Perman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2005
    Posts:
    2,161
    Hi,

    Which one of AV's realtime scanner ?
     
  4. egghead

    egghead Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Posts:
    443
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    If there is any real time scanner running you have to disable that one (if you want the counterspy real time scanner).

    e.g. if you have an AV running with a real time scanner, you have to disable that one (if you want the counterspy real time scanner)
     
  5. Perman

    Perman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2005
    Posts:
    2,161

    Hi,

    I happened to run McAfee Virus Scan 8.7i Enterprise version with antispyware module AND with its real time (on access scanner ON all time), no problem.

    I like to hear someone HAS to disable AV real time just because of Counter Spy's presence (realtime). o_O
     
  6. egghead

    egghead Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Posts:
    443
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    During installation counterspy tells this.
     
  7. ambient_88

    ambient_88 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
    Posts:
    854
    CounterSpy should install without having to turn off your antivirus. If it didn't, no one is going to use it.

    Maybe VIPRE is the one you tried to install.
     
  8. TopperID

    TopperID Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,527
    Location:
    London
    That is incorrect, please see here:-

    https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1380846&postcount=15
     
  9. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
    It advises it, but most av's will still work if u enable counterspy on acess scanner after installation
     
  10. egghead

    egghead Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Posts:
    443
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Nope.

    No it is not: see attachment. But thanks for the workaround. I have reinstalled it.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Jan 8, 2009
  11. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,751
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    MBAM is updating their data base several times a day everyday since I downloaded it. I've also used and highly recommend CounterSpy.
     
  12. Max Zorin

    Max Zorin Former Poster

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2008
    Posts:
    103
    MBAM detects 1465 nasties - thats it. End of story.

    MZ
     
  13. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    erm no it does not, are you really soooo in-experienced? :rolleyes:

    we really dont mind teaching you a little, but making such comments with zero truth doesn't help anybody.
     
  14. ambient_88

    ambient_88 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
    Posts:
    854
    It might not detect as many malware as other products, however, MBAM is very good at cleaning, especially the nasty ones (ie. Vundo). Also, MBAM's definitions are updated accordingly; it doesn't stay at 1465. If it did, no one would be using it at all.
     
  15. Max Zorin

    Max Zorin Former Poster

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2008
    Posts:
    103
    Erm, yes it does. If Im inexperienced, then so is the author of MBAM as that is how many he lists it as detecting on the MBAM website.

    You were going to teach me something?

    My comments have zero truth?

    Suggest you check your facts before making an idiot of yourself in future.

    MZ
     
  16. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    i know the site says 1466 in the detection list, but i cant see this as being true, can you?

    their heuristics alone will (should) detect more than just 1466.

    of course, i just cant see this as being true.

    if it is, i will hold my hands up and join you in saying its a piece of crap, but i really cant believe what the website says to be true, dont they even have generic signatures, 1 signature should detect more than just the 1466.
     
  17. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
    i wouldn't just blindly go on what it says, why would ANYBODY use an app that culd only detect 1466 malwares out there? just use some common sense.
     
  18. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    thats what i was thinking? :doubt:

    it seems weird to me that 1466 would be the detection rate, heuristics should detect more than that, and dont they have generic signatures, 1 signature alone should detect more than 1466.

    of course, if im wrong.. i will completely agree with you, but i cant see it to be true, if it is, i will be woefully shocked. o_O
     
  19. Someone

    Someone Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    Posts:
    1,106
    I'm guessing they count all variants as 1 signature? But MBAM is designed to complement other software, not as a full AV or AS.
     
  20. QBgreen

    QBgreen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Posts:
    627
    Location:
    Queens County, NY
    As I've posted earlier, those of us that use MBAM to clean machines deluged with malware know its worth. Sniping over tests, stats, and so on is useless!
     
  21. Max Zorin

    Max Zorin Former Poster

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2008
    Posts:
    103
    You were saying earlier how I did not know what I was talking about and how you were going to educate me.....

    Im sure, if MBAM detects more than the 1466 individual pieces of malware listed on the MBAM site, the author will come here and tell us / update his website. If he does not, Im sure you will be true to your word and joion the enlightened among us and say "its a piece of crap"

    There are many sites where you can download compressed files containing many hundreds of current malware samples - PM me if you want some. Try it for yourself, MBAM detects next to nothing - it cant possibly be any good as Malwarebytes is not an organisation - it is ONE person, working at home - with occasional part time help from another person.

    Wake up and dont fall for the b******t

    MZ
     
  22. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
    by that quote, would you also say that SandboxIE or Defensewall or other apps such as those that are basically one man projects are "crap"? i wouldn't judge the program by that and 2nd, There are A LOT of users of MBAM, and im pretty sure the millions who use it aren't complete idiots, i prefer the opinions of thousands and thousands over one guy who thinks he knows all.

    plus i know from personal experience that MBAM does a fantastic job at detecting and cleaning malware.
     
  23. Max Zorin

    Max Zorin Former Poster

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2008
    Posts:
    103
    Sandboxie etc does not rely on signatures which require resources to update.

    Your logic is flawed - no, Sandboxie etc are all fantastic apps. Its just MBAM that is crap. They have got away with it because most so called "security experts" are idiots, who jump on the bandwagon and have no ability to look at facts.

    Anyway, I have proved what Im saying - if you and the other pretend experts want to pretend MBAM detects more that the website says its up to you. I wont be saying any more on the matter.

    MZ
     
  24. LoneWolf

    LoneWolf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Posts:
    3,675
    Promise? :rolleyes:
     
  25. hayc59

    hayc59 Updates Team

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Posts:
    2,843
    Location:
    KEEP USA GREAT
    If those were my only choices
    Malwarebytes for sure :)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.