FredW 
news:5b7r8bl3ng427n506flp5g282196q4779u@7ax.com Wed, 06 Jan 2016
23:11:36 GMT in alt.comp.anti-virus, wrote: 

> /Malwarebytes Anti-Malware catches threats that antivirus
> doesn't./ 

While it's a true statement, it's mostly marketing FUD and PR 
nonsense. Honestly. SAS catches things MBAM missed, BugHunter caught 
things MBAM missed (yes, it did), MBAM caught things both of the 
previously mentioned ones missed. None of this remained consistent. 
Sometimes, within hours, one or more would trade places on who 
scanned what first and detected it. It's no different than various 
antivirus programs. It's been ongoing since more than one antivirus 
was presented to the world. :)

The PR team doesn't take into consideration what the other depts are 
telling them the program does, so they describe it in ways that on 
the surface sound fantastic, but, to those more knowledgeable amongst 
the customer base, it seems disingenuine, at best.

This also applies to the certification awards the program has 
received. Malwarebytes is not and never has been intended to be an 
antivirus program. For some reason, it has been certified as such and 
no effort has been made to correct this untrue claim. I believe it's 
a bit dishonest of the website administrator to keep the AV 
certification present without a more detailed explaination concerning 
it. It's telling the potential user who doesn't know much about 
antivirus/antimalware that MBAM deals with viruses and scores well 
doing it; which it can't possibly do as it doesn't do much at all 
with viruses. Next to nothing, actually.

 
> MBAM is not an antivirus (see -anti-malware- in the name).
> Kaspersky is an antivirus.

True. MBAM provides an additional layer of possible! security by 
detecting things that your present Antivirus may/may not be aware of. 
Likewise with MBAM- The antivirus may be aware of new malware that 
MBAM doesn't presently have definitions for. 

Additional security usually doesn't hurt, so I can't tell you not to 
bother running it. I wish I could tell you and others that a single 
av/am app will cover you in all cases, but, it's just not true and 
would be extremely unethical of me to advise as such.

I do advise users to keep a copy of SAS (Super Antispyware) as well 
as MBAM. Register one or the other, or both if you feel you've gained 
a benefit, can afford it, and wish to show your support to the 
authors/companies behind the programs, but, don't run both resident 
at the same time as this will usually result in conflicts and system 
stability issues down the road.

They also compliment each other. It's also prudent for many general 
users to run one AV resident and keep another available as an 
ondemand only scanner. Be sure to disable the resident monitoring 
av/am apps you're using when running one of the ondemand scanners. 
You can re-enable them after the scan(s) are completed.

Not only will this significantly speed up your scan times, the chance 
of a file locking issue/denied access and resulting missed chance to 
identify a potential bad guy will practically be non existant. You do 
not want the resident one interfering with the on demand ones.

Also, it's worth noting as I explained previously in overly boring 
detail - As David Lipman has also explained in a much more condensed 
version - If you're using v1.75, the additional security layer has 
holes and you *must* update to the newer v2.x engine. You're doing 
yourself a disservice to do otherwise at this point. I don't mean you 
specifically Fred, I know you keep on top of this :) I mean the 
others who may be reading this reply and are using v1.75 because they 
prefer the interface (I did as well) over the newer one.

For general users, just to be extra cautious depending on their 
activities (that I know of), I also recommend the utility created by 
David Lipman. It's excellent for once a week/biweekly/monthly scan 
that the user can perform when they have personal downtime and won't 
need the computers services. It can be productive in another way 
during this time, a quick 'security audit' :)

It's easy to teach someone how to use it, instructions are clear cut 
and very concise. While the entire process can take some time, it's 
not too likely that actual malware would still remain undetected once 
all of those scan(s) have been completed with uptodate definitions. 
Possible, but, not likely. 

Malwarebytes was at one point very honest and straight forward 
concerning the abilities as well as the limitations of the program. 
Now, they seem to be okay with the PR dept writing what amounts to 
horse ####, praising abilities the program doesn't really have. Such 
as AV certification by West Coast Labs. 

https://www.malwarebytes.org/awards/

Some of the PR comments concerning the awards is very arrogant 
considering how the program actually works under the hood and how 
technically LIMITED it is from a coding point of view. 

-- 
Hey listen...
On your way back up, bring some popcorn...With salt. 
--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2