MBAM

Is it really possible that you make the QuickScan any faster?
Or are you talking about the complete scan?

 

Both should be faster .

Quick will be slightly but full should be a good deal quicker .

 

RubbeR DuckY,

Any news on when the feature to exclude specified folders from the full scan will be implemented? I've not been able to carry out a full scan yet because it takes hours to scan my FD-ISR snapshots. With all the other scanners I use, I can exclude the ISR folder from the scan.

 

True update cut my full scan time to almost half the time as before. Thank you very much for the update

 

I'd also like to see an exclusion feature, but nosirrah has stated that the MBAM is optimized for quick scanning and will detect 99+% of what would be picked up in a full scan.

 

Yes, I did know that the Quick Scan was more than good enough for malware detection. However, there is a Full Scan option and I would like to use it from time to time. There have been a few program updates since I asked the question on MBAM forum and I thought it may have been implemented in one of these. I do appreciate that the fight against malware takes priority but it would be nice to know that it is in the pipeline.

 

I know GUI changes are not the top priority of MBAM developers but it would be nice in a future release to have a scan progress bar or some other indication of how far along the scan has made it.

 

Scanning with MBAM today I noticed Windows/tasks/destop.ini and also sa.dat activity. I don't think it is malicious, but just curious.

Is this activity occuring because of the checking by MBAM?

Is this anything I should be concerned about?

 

I hear you, and I'm also a FD-ISR user but as it stands now, I cannot or refuse to, do do a full scan (not enough time in the day). The addition of the exclusion feature would benefit many users; I would for one would benefit from it. If the full scan is not really needed, I ask myself "why is it available?"

Any scanner that has the option to do a "more" complete scan, I would think, should be used. To me, this is just common sense. It needs to be customizable by the user of course.

Yes, I do like MBAM and is included in my top choices; just not with multiple partition and/or "hidden boot" systems. I hope the inclusion of this option will be considered by the developers.

 

Without going into much detail with cleaning up a pc yesterday/today.

Norton Inet security corrupted by malware.

Had to use Norton Removal tool.

Bitdefender found one infection but still probs.

SAS found some more infections.

IE would start once then be corrupted on a second startup.

Repair IE and the same, start once then corrupted.Had a hunch what the culprit was but couldn't get at it manually.

Tried MBAM and it found and deleted the cause of the IE corruption.

 

Kinda makes me wonder what would have happened if you used MBAM first.

 

MBAM is one of several I would consider using if I had the need. But I do not seem to have the need.

 

The best of British luck to ye.