Malwarebytes standalone or w/AV

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by ankupan, Apr 20, 2017.

  1. ankupan

    ankupan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2004
    Posts:
    445
    Hi,

    Thinking to give a trial to Malwarebytes.

    is it supporting AV or replacing AV ?

    Any conflict by using with AV ?
     
  2. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    4,114
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    Personally, I wouldn't trust MB 3 alone on my machines. Adding just about any AV would be a better solution.
     
  3. ozbadcat

    ozbadcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2015
    Posts:
    36
    This is so sad Krusty - I am a long time user/believer of MBAM V2 ..... that unfortunately has only 20 days left on present subscription. I have followed yours and many others on here with installing MB 3 and the seemingly endless list of problems/issues you guys have experienced. I am loathe to give up V2 for as long as possible - and when a reputable company like Malwarebytes has lost the TRUST of users of your expertise then its all over ......
     
  4. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    4,114
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    Hi ozbadcat,

    Disclaimer: I'm no expert. ;)

    Don't get me wrong, MB does still offer some protection especially with its Anti-Exploit component. Since it can be used with other AVs that is what I'd be doing.

    I'm still using MBAM 2 here so you can too if you like until either MB 3 becomes more stable or MBAM 2 reaches EOL. The license is good for either so you shouldn't have any problem either way.
     
  5. Brummelchen

    Brummelchen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Posts:
    2,056
  6. plat1098

    plat1098 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2016
    Posts:
    799
    Location:
    Da mean streets of Brooklyn
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2017
  7. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    18,647
    The biggest problem is there silly marketing department. They claim it 's an anti virus replacement, but people question and performance issues are greet in the forum by the response it's not a replacment. They are correct, and it's the marketing department that needs to get a dose of reality. Doubt that wlll happen.
     
  8. Bill_Bright

    Bill_Bright Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Posts:
    2,638
    Location:
    Nebraska, USA
    The new MB3.x is quite different from the old MBAM. The new MB3 is marketed as a replacement and single app anti-malware solution. And it is! And it works fine! So if that is what you want to use, go for it.

    The problem is, it was rushed out before the holidays before it was properly and fully beta tested. :(:mad::( It had a LOT of problems that took a couple months to resolve. And during these months, very little information about the problems were being released. :mad: This all left a really bad taste in many users mouths because for years, MBAM had been so highly regarded and recommended - by me too.

    But the new version was so flawed (and clearly incomplete too as several features simply did not function at all) that I had even called for Malwarebytes to pull the 3.0 download from their site until they could release a polished product after their developers were refreshed after the holiday break.

    But they didn't and more and more users upgraded then reported the same problems over and over again. So their stellar reputation was badly tarnished and they have done little in the way of PR to restore their shine. :(

    I use Windows Defender as my primary on all my systems. I have a couple lifetime licenses for Malwarebytes Premium that I got dirt cheap during a special promotion several years ago before they did away with lifetime licenses. So I also use that on my two primary computers. For my other computers, I use Malwarebytes Free. That is what I recommend - for now.

    That said, I am not a fan of any software that requires recurring fees. Especially when, contrary to some testing labs, the free Windows Defender/Microsoft Security Essentials is fully capable of keeping our computers secure.

    If you already own a license for the Premium (real-time) version and wish to use it with WD/MSE, I recommend going into Malwarebytes Premium Settings menu, scroll down to the Windows Action Center and make sure the "Never register Malwarebytes in the Windows Action Center" radio button is ticked. This will prevent WD/MSE from disabling itself and allow both WD and MB3 to run together. Now normally, running two real-time scanners simultaneously is discouraged because of potential conflicts (or at least wasting resources). But one of MB3.x better assets is that it does play very well with other scanners. I have had no problems with conflicts or resource hogging. And most importantly, have had no infestations either.

    If you don't already own a Premium license, I recommend using Windows Defender and then run periodic scans with MB3.x Free.

    The fact is, no one anti-malware solution should be relied on to provide complete protection. So regardless your primary scanner of choice, I recommend using MB3.x Free as a supplemental on-demand scanner just to make sure your primary scanner or you (the user and always weakest link in security) did not let something slip by.
     
  9. Trooper

    Trooper Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Posts:
    3,386
    Thanks for the write up Bill it is appreciated. Perhaps I will do this as I have one lifetime license left for MBAM. Are you running this on Windows 10 Creators Update by chance?
     
  10. Bill_Bright

    Bill_Bright Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Posts:
    2,638
    Location:
    Nebraska, USA
    Yes.
    So you can installMalwarebytes 3.0x for free. And if you don't like it, you can always uninstall it. That's another nice thing about Malwarebytes - it uninstalls completely without nags or hassles.
     
  11. Trooper

    Trooper Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Posts:
    3,386
    Ok that is good to know. I hear you about the installation of free. I guess I am just wanting something else on my machines aside from WD as I never felt safe rolling with just that. Thanks!
     
  12. Victek

    Victek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    5,438
    Location:
    USA
    They are marketing MBAM v3 as a standalone solution, but it still gets along fine with other AV. On Windows 10 I use it along with Windows Defender and HitmanPro.Alert. As for the problems you've read about just give MBAM v3 a try and see how it works for you. I used all of the betas with only minor problems and now the latest version works flawlessly for me :thumb:
     
  13. plat1098

    plat1098 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2016
    Posts:
    799
    Location:
    Da mean streets of Brooklyn
    I think that's one, if not the biggest and underrated obstacles to Malwarebytes' getting its product on track and taken seriously as a serious and ambitious anti-malware, which it ought to be. You want robots looming at you on the product page and an "awesome, you're protected" on your interface, OK. It seems the product is actively marketed to a very narrow subset of the population. Those intrigued by the marketing sign on, experience the same problems as everyone before them, it's a vicious cycle. Marketing needs to back off and let the developers breathe.
     
  14. Bill_Bright

    Bill_Bright Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Posts:
    2,638
    Location:
    Nebraska, USA
    And for me too! :)
    I think much of that is simply due to bad, sensationalized, exaggerated press by Microsoft bashers, and wannabe journalists, sadly.

    Microsoft announced years ago with MSE and then WD that they will not be coding MSE/WD to score well on synthetic laboratory testings commonly used by the review sites and test labs. Instead, they will just be keeping MSE/WD updated for today's current threats. This results in MSE/WD scoring poorly against the 1000s and 1000s of threats that are no longer in circulation, or don't threaten W7/W8/W10 - especially when W7/W8/W10 is kept current. But again, Microsoft does not care about those scores. They only care that their users remain secure - and they are.

    Consider this. Only Microsoft has the incentive to totally thwart malware. Why? Because Microsoft the bashers and the biased IT press will blame and bash Microsoft for security issues anyway - even though it is the bad guys perpetrating the offenses (and users failing to keep their systems current).

    What incentive does Norton, McAfee, AVG, Avira, Kaspersky, Comodo, BitDefender or even Malwarebytes have to rid the world of malware? NONE! For that will put them out of business. I am NOT saying the developers at those companies are not sincere. They are - totally. And I totally respect what they are doing, and their need to feed and shelter their families and their desires to do good fighting malware.

    This is a common problem, unfortunately. I believe it was the marketing and executives at Malwarebytes who rushed the developers to release MB3.0 before the holidays - perhaps to increase holiday sales. The problem is the early big security companies failed to stop malware at the source in the early days when they had a chance. Now it's too late.

    Look again at Microsoft. If the developers were not hogtied and sullied by MS marketing and executive business decisions, there would not be so many Windows bashers out there. It wasn't the developers who wanted to shove the W8 "metro" UI on us. It was the marketing dept who wanted to force Windows users to automatically "like" the similar Windows Phone UI so we would buy a Windows Phone instead of Android or Apple. W8 was actually a great OS, but failed miserably because of the UI.
     
  15. amk609

    amk609 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2015
    Posts:
    5
    Note: On my system with the latest Malwarelbytes 3.0 premium updates, it is no longer necessary to unregister MB. It does not cause WD to turn itself off.
     
  16. Bill_Bright

    Bill_Bright Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Posts:
    2,638
    Location:
    Nebraska, USA
    Interesting. I might not have been clear. WD was still present and available for manual scanning. But WD's real-time protection was disabled when MB3.x was installed. I note this was encountered during MB3 beta testing and reported by others too. And in fact, WD real-time protection is designed to step out of the way when another program is installed, as it did on my systems. So not sure why yours wasn't.
     
  17. Trooper

    Trooper Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Posts:
    3,386

    Thanks for the insight Bill. I still don't trust it though. :p

    Also installed MBAM and had immediate issues. Back to just WD.
     
  18. Bill_Bright

    Bill_Bright Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Posts:
    2,638
    Location:
    Nebraska, USA
    Not sure what you mean by MBAM. MBAM is MalwareBytes AntiMalware. That is the old 2.0 version that was meant to work along side a full security suite.

    The new version is just Malwarebytes, currently at version 3.0.6.

    FTR, I am a huge fan of Windows Defender. It's already included in Windows. It's free. It's easy. It does not interfere with or hog resources. It's automatically updated at least once, often multiple times a day. And it works. But that does not mean I trust it. So I double check with MB3.x.

    Trusting any one malware solution is putting all your eggs in one basket. Never a good idea.
     
  19. doesntmatter

    doesntmatter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Posts:
    32
    Location:
    Bulgaria
    It has a lot of potential for improving but at the moment:

    1. Its scanning speed is very slow. (although it is very light on resources)
    2. Removing the threats found is slow as well. (although it is very light on resources)
    3. If you open a folder with a lot of exe/lnk files in it while WD is enabled then it will take a long time for the icons to appear.
    4. The detection rate is not that good (but the good thing is that the false positive ratio is low as well). However the latest result surprised me a bit => https://cdn.comss.net/img/012017/2017-04-14_0727.png
    5. It lacks a lot of features (it is a pure antivirus with some cloud abilities). Not always a bad thing but...
    6. Sometimes WD has issues with updating the defs and a lot of malware can disable it but I agree that these problems can affect other antivirus programs as well.

    However I admit that WD is very strong against stubborn malware. Also WD runs at a kernel level which is a good thing.

    The version of WD in W10 (ATP) is probably a lot better. => https://blogs.microsoft.com/microso...windows-defender-atp-creators-update-preview/

    but anyway I would not use it alone on any system. When used with a good combo it could provide decent protection.
     
  20. amk609

    amk609 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2015
    Posts:
    5
    See this link explaining the resolution of the problem of MB 3.0 turning off WD real time protection.
    https://forums.malwarebytes.com/topic/198624-malwarebytes-306-cu41-latest-version/
     
  21. Victek

    Victek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    5,438
    Location:
    USA
    Even with the latest version I occasionally would receive a message in Windows 10 that Windows Defender real time protection was turned off. The solution was to switch MalwareBytes to "Never Register in the Windows Action Center".
     
  22. Umbra

    Umbra Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Posts:
    3,679
    Location:
    Europe then Asia
    Anyway relying only on signature model softs those days is inviting problems. At least add an anti-exe/SRP/HIPS/BB/sandbox is required. unless the user really knows what he is doing and can handle his system efficiently.

    I keep WD because it is built-in and no so bad, and disabling it will create more issues than keeping it enabled. So not worth the shot.

    About MBAM , i have a LFT license and don't use it at all, i lost faith in it, long time ago.
     
  23. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    9,177
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    I must admit that I'm a bit turned off by all of the problems that were reported. I've decided to look for other solutions, and MBAM as a standalone AV is not recommended, based on most AV tests.
     
  24. plat1098

    plat1098 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2016
    Posts:
    799
    Location:
    Da mean streets of Brooklyn
    I commented elsewhere that MB's marketing is the best thing going for it; in retrospect, that could not be more the opposite Based on the malware removal work they also do in the forums, is Malwarebytes tailoring its product to the game-a-holics, seeing as a lot of cracks, torrents, whatever, are downloaded and installed? Like I said, that's a subset, and seeing how sophisticated malware is nowadays, no, you should have your main security suite right there. Problems with the software past and still present, goofy and confusing/misleading marketing hype--makes me think that since the MB 3.0 came out, it's been fueled by the goodwill and loyalty of its longtime users, running on fumes. The public-facing stuff needs a massive makeover, in my opinion.
     
  25. Victek

    Victek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    5,438
    Location:
    USA
    Did you experience those problems?
     
Loading...