Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 35

Thread: MalwareBytes

  1. #1
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Evergreen, CO, USA
    Posts
    6,624
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 60 Times in 60 Posts

    MalwareBytes

    Does anyone have experience with this product? I discovered it on one of our client's computers, and I see numerous links to it when I do a Google search or a Live search, but very little reference to it by the general public. I always tend to distrust these sort of tools until I've talked to others who have used them. <img src=/S/flee.gif border=0 alt=flee width=25 height=25>
    Wendell

  2. #2
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    10,550
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts

    Re: MalwareBytes

    It seems to be quite popular with loungers, just try searching this forum for malwarebytes.

    StuartR

  3. #3
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    84,353
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 29 Times in 29 Posts

    Re: MalwareBytes

    I've been using the free version for 4 months or so, and on the whole it seems a solid product; it has gained a good reputation for battling nasties such as WinAntiVirus 2008. I can't really tell you how accurate/dependable it is since my computer never gets infected <img src=/S/crossfingers.gif border=0 alt=crossfingers width=17 height=16>

    Unfortunately, many people have reported scans "freezing" recently. This happened to me for the first time yesterday, after installing a new version (1.33). Completely uninstalling then reinstalling cured it.

    (I'm using MalwareBytes now instead of LavaSoft AdAware and Spybot Search & Destroy, because those two had become slower and slower. Last time I tried a "quick scan" with AdAware, it took over 1 hour; I don't like to think about the time a full scan would take...)

  4. #4
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    England
    Posts
    378
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: MalwareBytes

    I second what Hans says, seems to work ok though I very rarely have infection problems. Likewise, although I still use Adaware, Spybot seems to have fallen out of favour with me, taking ages to scan and freezing quite often.

  5. #5
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Doorn, Netherlands
    Posts
    311
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: MalwareBytes

    On my Vista HP laptop (200GB HD, 100GB used) a full scan with Malware Bytes takes about 1.5 hr, Spybot about 1 hr. Both programs work perfectly, i.e. never had any freezing problems.

    Regards, Teunis

  6. #6
    Uranium Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Posts
    9,508
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts

    Re: MalwareBytes

    To echo others comments, I now use MalwareBytes and Spybot S&D (with ZA free and Avast free), and have removed AdAware. I have not had freeze problems with either product, though Spybot takes a loooong time on the Bride's two drive machine. I experienced a lot of update freezes with Ad-Aware, which prompted me to dump it.
    -John ... I float in liquid gardens
    UTC -7±DS

  7. #7
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    12,107
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: MalwareBytes

    Lots of support responses but nary a link. To save someone another search: Malwarebytes.org

  8. #8
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    12,107
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: MalwareBytes

    This isn't necessarily directed at you, John, but ALL Loungers who are using this program. I'm looking for advice and counsel. I too have been disappointed at the LONG times that AdAware and Spybot take to run their scans and they never find anything on my machine but alleged "tracking cookies." I guess I'm a "good boy" surfer, plus I also run SpywareBlaster to watch for bad guys trying to install themselves on my system and I'm sure that helps too.

    After reading the positive comments in this thread, I downloaded and installed MalwareBytes this morning and am STILL running it as I write this post. I was surprised that the "quick scan" took only minutes, so I decided to run a full scan of my three drives (partitions) containing XP, Vista and the new Win7 Beta. After almost THREE hours that scan is still working on the last drive and hasn't "found" anything yet. Is this a routine that most of you do? And if so, how often? Is there a way to get the so-called quick scan to also look at those other two drives?

    I suppose if one PAYS for the product, you get to schedule the full scans and could run them in the middle of the night, huh? Comments and opinions welcome!

  9. #9
    4 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Griffith, New South Wales, Australia
    Posts
    507
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: MalwareBytes

    >never find anything on my machine

    You must be a safe surfer. I see plenty of machines where people are less careful. Spybot still finds all the nasties for me.

    Johanna

  10. #10
    Uranium Lounger viking33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Cape Cod, Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    6,308
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: MalwareBytes

    Al,
    I think that the initial first scan takes a lot longer than any subsequent ones.
    At least, that's the the way it appeared to me.
    BOB
    http://lounge.windowssecrets.com/S/flags/USA.gif http://lounge.windowssecrets.com/S/f...sachusetts.gif


    Long ago, there was a time when men cursed and beat on the ground with sticks. It was called witchcraft.
    Today it is called golf!

  11. #11
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    12,107
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: MalwareBytes

    Boy, I hope so! I think the next one I do I'll choose just ONE drive to see how different the time it. The C: drive (XP) took "just" 53 minutes, and the bulk of the time was for the Vista AND Win7 drive.

    I can say, since this was a first-time run and I stayed pretty close to watch the progress, that the longest time for all three drives was on the WindowsWinsxs folder which is present in all three operating systems. The whopper is Vista, where that folder has almost 32,000 files in more than 7,000 subfolders. In <post:=750,043>post 750,043</post:> Joe Perez pointed out this article ( The Secret Of Vista's Winsxs Folder. ) which pretty conclusively points out that there isn't anything you can do about this "side-by-side" business.

    We'll see...

    PS Laughingly, that Vista bunch above is about 7.3 gig in size and I just recently installed the Win7 beta and ITS version of Winsxs contains about 6 gig of files ALREADY!

  12. #12
    Silver Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    1,993
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: MalwareBytes

    I use Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware together with some other applications similar to John, though I have AVG (i.e. Spybot S&D, ZA).

    In my case I only wanted a scanner (another) and no real time, and I replaced Ad-Aware with this one (even though the connection to Sweden with Lavasoft and all that <img src=/S/grin.gif border=0 alt=grin width=15 height=15>). I used Ad-Aware up to some 2008 ver. I think, but as some said a bit slower, but for me it was also that they put a running process just for updates; and having processes running on an "on-demand scanner only" just for updates seemed silly. I didn't look closer on the matter if possible to tweak, so away it went. (Now it seems like Ad-Aware Free in some Anniversary Edition, or perhaps all free, offer basic integrated real-time protection.)

    As Hans said, "on the whole it seems a solid product". I agree. But I have not needed it to remove something. Quick downloads of the updates, though they doesn't seem to be "incremental", it downloads a full size file each time (1500 kB something), I don't complain it takes just some second. Also a really small footprint on the HDD.

    It is simple in settings, so compared to anti-virus where one often can set if it should scan inside archives etc, it is two choices as mentioned; all or small (quick), and with that comes of course a limited possibility to improve scan time, not much to do.

  13. #13
    Silver Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    1,993
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: MalwareBytes OFF TOPIC

    Al,
    I haven't read all of the post and its links at winvistaclub about the WinSxS directory that Joe linked to. Further I should say I'm no Vista user (yet, or what one should say. I've helped some with Vista problems etc.), so I don't have day-to-day hands on experience.

    However, I read Michael Beck's post at Engineering Windows 7 - Disk Space some month ago in November, it is mentioned at the winvistaclub post as Update 2, and I think it explains it well/better, directly from the horse's mouth (he's a program manager; core OS deployment feature team). Especially the part about the size. It covers both Vista and Windows 7.

    He says, among other things:
    <hr>But in reality it doesn’t actually consume as much disk space as it appears when using the built-in tools (DIR and Explorer) to measure disk space used. The fact that we make it tricky for you to know how much space is actually consumed in a directory is definitely a fair point!

    In practice, nearly every file in the WinSxS directory is a “hard link” to the physical files elsewhere on the system—meaning that the files are not actually in this directory. For instance in the WinSxS there might be a file called advapi32.dll that takes up >700K however what’s being reported is a hard link to the actual file that lives in the WindowsSystem32, and it will be counted twice (or more) when simply looking at the individual directories from Windows Explorer.<hr>
    [...]
    <hr>
    While it’s true that WinSxS does consume some disk space by simply existing, and there are a number of metadata files, folders, manifests, and catalogs in it, it’s significantly smaller than reported. The actual amount of storage consumed varies, but on a typical system it is about 400MB. While that is not small, we think the robustness provided for servicing is a reasonable tradeoff.<hr>

    Hard links was one of the new features in Vista, I don't have an installation at hand to check now, but have looked at a Windows 7 Beta machine, same there of course.

    Further from Beck at E7:
    <hr>It’s critical that any path expected by an application appear as a physical file in the file system to support the appropriate loading of the actual file. In this case, the shell is just another application reporting on the files it sees. As a result of this confusion and a desire to reduce disk footprint, many folks have endeavored to just delete this directory to save space.<hr>

    That's it. The shell, explorer is just another application looking at all those real and hard links, both or more showing the size of the data.

  14. #14
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    12,107
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: MalwareBytes OFF TOPIC

    You should know that I'm not a hard disk "space" fanatic, especially in today's world of lower storage cost. So, drive space is not my point. Rather the sheer NUMBER of files that are in the "side-by-side" folders seemed to take the most of Malwarebytes time in deep scanning my system. When I come home this afternoon, I'm going to run another scan on only one drive and see if it runs more quickly than it did yesterday. Maybe it is smart enough to bypass files it has already looked at it they have not changed. I don't know.

  15. #15
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    12,107
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: MalwareBytes

    Well, I changed my mind and ran another full scan on the C: drive while I showered and did other chores. It took just under an hour as it did yesterday. So it looks like it doesn't "pass over" any files it's already looked at, at least not in this case.

    However, the embarrassing thing is that I've never timed AdAware or Spybot, so I don't know how long they take. I've always started one running and left the computer for awhile, so I've no idea how Malwarebytes compares in time to run. But I do plan to continue with it and think some more about AdAware and Spybot. Any further observations will be appreciated. Thanks...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •