Why do people recommend MBAM over SAS?

I don't get it? I have Kaspersky Internet Security 2012 so I know I am protected against viruses. Occasionally, I run SUPERAntiSpyware Pro and it always picks up about 10-20 harmful/tracking cookies then prompts me to remove them and reboot (don't know why the heck does it need to reboot to remove cookies but oh well )

Now in all the times that I have used Malwarebytes AntiMalware, it has NEVER EVER caught anything. So I run SAS most of the time.

People tell me to use both but I think that's just overkill and a waste of time since MBAM never catches anything and ignored the harmful cookies.

So why do 80% of the people I know online and the forums that I visit, always recommend MBAM as the program of choice next to your Antivirus for removing Malware?

It's either some people are blind to see that SAS goes the extra mile to remove the harmful cookies or I am missing something here

Please explain to teh meh

 

One place to start is the results of the zero day malware flash tests run by MRG:
http://malwareresearchgroup.com/malware-tests/flash-test-results/

 

Because "harmful" cookies aren't really a problem. It's basically just "I couldn't find anything, so I'll clear some useless cookies."

I like them both for on demand but I think historically MBAM has had better results.

 

Ah ok,

But if you had to pick one of the two...which one would you choose bro?

 

I don't regularly scan. If I think I'm infected or might be infected (just visited a site that launched java or acted suspiciously) I'll scan with both and more.

They're both just AVs. In my experience what one finds the other usually finds as well. Realtime protection is a different game so it's not necessarily worth discussing.

 

After trying both, I bought MBAM Pro.

There's also a single product test of SAS at MRG:

http://malwareresearchgroup.com/201...-superantispyware-professional-december-2011/

 

I enjoy using both for the reasons Hungry Man has mentioned. I use both at my work when needed.

 

I would use MBAM. It's proven itself by testing and in personal use. Its one of the best scanners.

 

I would say that there are people who recommend one of the two for a real time scanner and there are people who recommend one or the other or both for the freeware, on demand versions. Without blowing up the thread I'll just say that there is a fairly significant amount of resentment across the internet toward the SAS developer, or former developer, since SAS is now owned by another company. And there is a pretty vocal group of SAS supporters. These two groups usually lock horns in discussions regarding SAS, or especially the abandoned yet still offered for sale SuperAdBlocker. Another issue is the marketing technique of SAS and their $9.99 today only ad which does not sit well with some people in the anti-adware community. On the other hand it now appears that MBAM has it's online downloads coming from CNET which probably deserves criticism in its own right.

As far as the on demand scans and removal of malware ability I imagine most people would say both programs are good. The real time protection most certainly falls heavily in favor of MBAM. I'm not sure anyone has ever even attempted to make an argument otherwise.

 

Cookies in themselves aren't harmful. If I'm not mistaken, they're just text files which can be used to aid site logins, remembering user preferences and shopping cart contents for example. However, they can be used by spyware to track a user's browser session hence their detection by programs like SAS.

Some would argue you can remove all cookies bar the essential ones routinely using other means such as with a program like CCleaner. That way they get flushed regardless.

Although quite a few years old, you might find this article interesting: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2005/11/cookie_monsters.html

 

I have paid licenses for both, and have had essentially since they first came out. Having used both in real time and on demand I have settled on MBAM in real time, and SAS on demand.

The tracking cookies that SAS finds are not dangerous. In a couple of instances MBAM has blocked true malware, and I have never been infected. I run it alongside every AV I have used, and if the AV will not run with MBAM the AV goes.

MBAM is a non-negotiable security program on my computer always.

Regards,
Jerry

 

I use both in on-access......many a times I would scan with mbam and find trojans which would come from my usb flash drive......not quarantining, I would scan with sas......but sas would find nothing...........so now I put mbam ahead of sas.....though I love 'em both.......

 

They both have their strengths. SAS has the ability to fix common registry problems caused by malware. The new version 5 has a "critical points scan" which is very fast and the "bug" tray-icon indicates when real-time protection (RTP) is enabled and updates are in progress (finally). As others have said the removal of tracking cookies is trivial, but SAS has on occasional found and removed serious malware that MBAM did not. RTP is another kettle of fish and I haven't used the pro versions of either program enough to say how effective it is. Regarding your question, if I had to recommend only one I'd have to go with Hitman Pro

 

Simply beacause MBAM >>>> SAS in terms of detection

 

One should delete cookies before running a scan.

 

I would take MBAM and Hitman Pro over SAS.

 

I own lifetime licenses for both.

I stopped using SAS when it ceased serving a useful function.

MBAM is a product that has continuously evolved and improved – and performs admirably in most anti-malware tests.

SAS is a product that underperforms in every test in which it appears. Then we hear excuses for the product…

I hope SAS makes a comeback at some point.

And MBAM keeps marching forward.



-ftp


.

 

I don't have an axe to grind about it, but I'm curious about both the tests and the excuses. I did read one pcmag.com test where SAS performed poorly. I haven't read any excuses from the vendor.

 

I would run or choose neither.

I rely more in common sense than anti-malware.

Keep Windows updated with latest SP and patches, update Sun Java, Adobe Reader, Adobe Flash Player, use FW, keep a BACKUP or your OS in case things go wrong and try to browse the Net as a Restricted User [also known here as Limited User].

I, myself was running a paid AV [ESET], however, when my subscription ran out, I didn't renew and...even when I'm using Symantec Endpoint Client and MSE [mainly because of my kids and wife], I'm thinking about dumping those as well in favor of a lean computer that doesn't need to have real-time AV/AS.


Carlos

 

Good luck with that. These days I think you can be knowledgeable and do everything right and still get bit.

 

You could use the flash player in Chrome, use another reader such as Foxit or Sumatra sandboxed, and not have Java installed.

True, but if you have the right security layers of the quality of MBAM, even without a real-time AV you'd wind up with a small chance of infection, especially if one of your layers is avoiding the well-known risks in the first place. Sure anyone can get bit, but you can be prepared and be back up with a clean system in minutes.

 

Hi Carlos,

There are a few things that are not clear reading your post. Your avatar is the Sandboxie icon which presumably implies you are using the program. From memory I thought you had started using Drive Vaccine. Sandboxie alone is a powerful protection with or without DV. My point is that having Sandboxie you are not exactly running naked.

To remain on topic I don't think anybody is recommending MBAM over SAS, tests results speak for themselves. I personally don't use anything without first checking how they perform in tests, and frankly SAS hasn't been doing well as of lately. It is also true that SAS as a scanner is free and doesn't have any impact on the OS, therefore it won't do any harm to have it.

 

I have to agree a bit with the OP, it does seem that MBAM is generally recommended over SAS. Personally I have used the freeware SAS for around three years. I tend to trust it as it discovered a trojan missed by everything else I was running at the time. I ran MBAM (freeware) for over a year concomitantly with SAS but eventually uninstalled it. I felt that it was a bit surplus to requirements, plus I had several false-positives & some updating problems with MBAM. I too like the way SAS gets rid of tracking & flash cookies.

 

Osaban, you're correct, my friend. I'm not running none of my PCs/laptops “naked” [so to speak]. Yes, I have Sandboxie in all of them and also run Drive Vaccine in 3 of them. Furthermore, even when I have partially disabled AppGuard due to incompatibilities, I still run the MBRguard part of it and I'm finished testing-30 days Faronics Anti-Executable and I strongly believe I will be committing with 3 licenses.

What I'm saying is that Antimalware/Anti-Virus ALONE will not protect you from every threat you come across with, whether it's an Internet borne 0-Day or a USB Drive worm.
That why I was empathizing in common sense and an updated/patched system PLUS a good BACKUP to get you up and running in minutes in the event of something goes wrong.

I would probably keep something on-demand just to check downloaded files because I know that even when downloading from reputable sources such as MajorGeeks or FileHippo, you might end up downloading something which not good. However, you could also check with on-line services such as VT or Jotti and not have anything [whether it's real-time or on-demand] running 24/7 on your PCs .


Hope to have clarified a bit more.


Carlos

 

Ditto on using both...

I know Matt at Remove-Malware still lists them both as a part of his reserved list of tools he cannot live without.

I actually have never used real-time protection from either of the two, but MBAM ha better detection and removal capabilities, while SAS has excellent repair tools and offers a second opinion. I like how they are both free for life and serve as great "second-opinion" scanners as well as cleanup tools!