Malwarebytes 2.0 Still Tough on Malware, Now with a Pretty Face

http://securitywatch.pcmag.com/security-software/322084-malwarebytes-2-0-still-tough-on-malware-now-with-a-pretty-face

Hi Rainbow_2:

 

Thanks for posting a link to this article, although I'm not sure I'm as enthusiastic about the new interface design as the reviewer. :smileytongue:

 

I linked to the full review and noticed the following comment:

 

"Malwarebytes is almost entirely absent from the lab reports I usually rely on. West Coast Labs certifies it for detection of viruses, Trojans, spyware, and malware in general; that's it. However, that will change soon. Later this year, AV-Test will release the results of a months-long test rating products on their ability to remediate malware infestations, and this report will include Malwarebytes."

 

I look forward to reading that AV-Test report.  I'm sure the results will generate some interesting discussions about the benefits of anti-virus vs. anti-malware software.

-----------
MS Windows 32-bit Vista Home Premium SP2 * Firefox 28.0 * IE 9.0 * NIS 2013 v. 20.4.0.40 * MBAM PRO 1.75.0.1300
HP Pavilion dv6835ca, Intel Core2Duo CPU T5550 @ 1.83 GHz, 3.0 GB RAM, NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS

<< Later this year, AV-Test will release the results of a months-long test rating products on their ability to remediate malware infestations, and this report will include Malwarebytes."  >>

 

But probably carried out on V1.75 and not the current different 2.0

 

Presumably not dealing with "live" detection and prevention.

As I said elsewhere, I tried V 2.0 and found the scans unbelievably slow. Back to v 1.75, until MalwareBytes refine this version.


lmacri wrote:

Hi Rainbow_2:

 

[…]

 

I look forward to reading that AV-Test report.  I'm sure the results will generate some interesting discussions about the benefits of anti-virus vs. anti-malware software.

 


Me too.PNG !

 

Cheers!

I found that by running the Threat Scan previously known as the *Quick Scan* ! with the rootkit scan disabled, that the scan time is halved.


F4E wrote:

I found that by running the Threat Scan previously known as the *Quick Scan* ! with the rootkit scan disabled, that the scan time is halved.


Although some earlier said this (including maybe me) looking at yesterday's update of MWB2 it seems clear that Threat scan
is the most intense of scans and what used to be Quick is the one only available on the paid for version?

 

 

capture_04082014_130339.jpg

Hi, Hugh. I have the free version only,and the Threat Scan is what used to be the *Quick Scan*,only it's not so quick anymore !

 

The Hyper Scan IS only available in the Pro version.

 

Depending on the machine, my Threat Scans with the rootkit scan disabled, are taking between 6 and 9 minutes.

That image is from the Free version -- or should be since that's what I downloaded and I disabled the Free trial of Pro.

 

The HyperScan shown is disabled so it is the free version.

 

What I'm saying is that the description of Threat Scan as our most comprehensive does not fit my idea of a Quick Scan .... whereas its description of Hyperscan certainly does......

Hugh,

 

Although it takes much longer on my systems, the Threat Scan replaces the old Quick Scan, the Custom Scan replaces Full System Scan.

 

Dave

 

Edit:  Hyper Scan is the new Flash Scan.

All I'm saying is that that it may replace QuickScan in some way but not functionally while what you add at the end confirms what I said -- that HyperScan now named FlashScan should be the Quicker version.

 

ThreatScan is certainly not quick -- it took 20 minutes on the first release but I've not had time to do a full run with it since the update.

If I include the rootkit scan it takes around that long, but as F4E has said, it halves without the rootkit scan enabled.

Hugh, if you do a Full Scan with rootkit enabled, you'll have time for a vacation, before it finishes.......:smileyfrustrated:

This was before I activated the rootkit element .... on 2.0

 

After I activated the rootkit element I just aborted at bed time ......

I think MBAM should change the text under the threat scan because I ran it the other day and it scanned around 200,000 files which took around 10 mins where as Norton would scan around 400,000 files and take around 20ish mins so I thought something was different!

So this makes more sense knowing custom scan is a full system scan! I’ll probably run this tomorrow.

Thanks a lot for the info!
Regards

Just thought I’d add
I tried a full system scan with MBAM and it took 2 hours and a half to scan 100,000 files so I canceled it!
Was taking fair to long for my liking!

I think if I need a second opinion I’ll just scan using threat scan instead of custom scan

Regards.