Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Other PC Software' started by rondom, 2018/03/17.
Is malwarbytes still a favorite program?
Yes, I would say so. I've used it for quite a number of years. Broni (Malware Specialist) usually gets members with Malware to use it during his recommended diagnosis and clean up.
Log in or Sign up to hide this advert.
Hi rondom. Yes, its one of my go to malware removal tools for cleaning up malware infections and the real time protection features including the anti-exploit protection is great to have enabled on your system. As long as you don't mind paying about $40 dollars per year for one PC, I think this is one program that is actually worth paying for but you can still use the free version as well.
I would say it is again a favorite program. It fell out of good graces with many when Malwarebytes (the company) clearly pushed out Malwarebytes 3.0 (the totally revised program) without adequate beta testing and clearly before it was ready just before the 2016 holidays. And sadly, it took well over 6 months to work the bugs out as many of the "fixes" and patches either didn't work, or made things worse for a lot of users.
I think what hurt Malwarebytes was their own stellar reputation. Version 2.x (Malwarebytes Anti-malware or MBAM) was a stalwart cornerstone security program since its inception over 10 years ago. The new Version 3.x (now just "Malwarebytes", not Malwarebytes Anti-malware) was totally rewritten from scratch and combined their separate Anti-Malware, Anti-Exploit and Anti-Ransomware security programs into one big program or "suite".
Probably what saved it from total demise is, for most people experiencing problems the program only "reported" those critical protection features were disabled when in reality, those features were working and still protecting users. But it left users without confidence in their security. It was like driving your car with the brake warning light on and glaring in your face.
But the dedicated developers at the company stuck with it and through all the problems and criticisms worked out all the kinks. IMO, the latest version, Malwarebytes 3.4.x restores their stellar reputation.
I recommend everyone have at least the free Malwarebytes on hand for "on-demand" supplemental scanning just to verify their primary scanner or the user (ALWAYS the weakest link in security) did not let something slip by - and that is regardless their primary scanner of choice.
For those looking for real-time protection, Malwarebytes "Premium" is now the only security program that is not free that I routinely recommend users buy. And the great thing is, Malwarebytes plays well along side other real-time scanners, including Windows own Windows Defender providing very robust security. Windows Defender and Malwarebytes is what I use on all my systems here.
My only complaint is they no longer ofter a one-time lifetime license option for the Premium version - but that's just me as I don't like subscription plans.
If looking to use Windows Defender with Malwarebytes, make sure in the Malwarebytes control panel, you go to Settings > Application tab and scroll down to Windows Action Center and tick the "Never register Malwarebytes in the Windows Action Center" radio button. If you don't do this Windows Defender with disable itself and step out of the way when Malwarebytes is detected.
ONLY available in the "PREMIUM" version.
But that makes sense since only the Premium version has a real-time component and I was talking about the Premium version.
I would agree with what you said retiredlearner. It could provide safety with the antivirus, anti-spyware and anti-malware.
Neil I did not know about Malwarebyte and MS Defender, now attended too. In part Exclusion, find sites marked so, are still being blocked by Malwarebyte and can't find a way to stop this. I have the Premium version as bought several years ago.
Bobby, in MBAM > Settings > Exclusions > uncheck the program if you want to allow it.
Bill, it is the opposite, I require the program is ticked as allow it to be excluded from being blocked by MBAM.
I have never ever had to add any site, file or program to Malwarebytes exclusion list. If you have a file, program or website you know to be legitimate and a security program is tagging it as malicious, that is a "false positive". Instead of adding it to an ignore or exclusion list, the correct thing to do is to report it so the problem can be resolved, not ignored.
To me, adding something to ignore or exclusion lists is like putting a piece of black tape over the Engine Warning light on your car's dashboard instead of having the problem investigated. It could just be a glitch and needs to be reset. Or the warning could indicate something serious. Either way, it needs to be investigated by an expert.
In this case, if the item is malicious, you need to get rid of it, and/or stay away from that site. If not malicious, it needs to be reported as a false positive so the experts can identify the fault, and correct it.
I realize false positives are a nuisance. And for sure, too many false positives can make us complacent. But like "The Boy Who Cried Wolf", if not properly checked out every single time, there will not be a happy ending.
See False Positives at Malwarebytes.
Bill, agree in what you say, but why then does Malwarebytes include an Exclusion facility if in turn then blocks it. In future I will take note of such Web addresses. Not a regular occurrence but Web sites in question, that I personally used for many years are periodically blocked by Malawarebytes. I seldom use this Exclusion facility.
I would have to see the file, program or site in question to answer that. I can only assume something changed with the excluded item and is being tagged again as malicious. Since it is not uncommon for malicious code to morph frequently, that would not be a surprise.
You might also verify these sites are safe using one (or all) of these tools:
Google Transparency Report
Is This Website Safe | Website Security | Norton Safe Web
Also, you say you have visited these sites for years, make sure their address has not changed - especially if you are clicking on shortcuts you have used for years. I note years ago, SSL (secure socket layer) was not required so many sites only used http in their address. But in recent years, SSL is required so most have moved to https. So make sure any url you enter also uses https.
Bill good point, thank you.