Latest Version of Malwarebytes

ondablade said:

Guess I'd hoped somebody more informed than myself might be in a position to offer a view as to what's happening.

The latest advice I have from MB is to go into Kaspersky to set it up as a trusted application.

Does this seems reasonable?

Yes, this seems a reasonable approach, if you think about the logic of it: If, as stated, Kapersky is "silently" interfering with the normal operation of MB (that is doing its intended job of providing an extra Anti-Malware real-time protection to your system, and possibly some elements of Ant-Virus as well), then as Kapersky is doing ITS job at the same time, it will be looking for anything suspicious (like system traps/hooks into file opens, and anything that a "normal" executable program would not do). So: as YOU installed MB alongside Kapersky as a valid Ant-Malware program that YOU trusted, and there is obviously some overlap between the two, then it IS reasonable for you to TELL Kapersky, that MB IS indeed a trusted program :)

Thanks TDOZ. What's happening may be reasonable from the point of view of a knowledgeable IT tech operating from a 'dog eat dog' or 'you pays your money and takes yer pick' (or even I'm an expert so I'm OK) mindset, but it can't it be good from the point of view of the average user.

MB Premium ran just fine with Kaspersky for quite some time. They seem to have been regarded by the user community as a highly complementary pairing which suggests that something has recently changed. MB have since applied several updates in an attempt to resolve the problem which (in my case anyway) only worked for very short periods and then failed. Which isn't confidence inspiring.

I'm now being asked by MB to make changes to internal settings in KTS which I realistically don't know the implications of, but will for sure be told it was my choice to do so in the event of a problem. Which (sorry) in my world suggests that the companies are likely not co-operating. Or perhaps that K regard setting up MB as a trusted application as a security risk, or maybe as a competitor to be disadvantaged.

More to the point there's not much sign of hard information as to the nature of the situation or the real world risks coming through here either - there's still no clarity about what's happening.

The MB/KTS scenario could (?) be down to KTS taking a more hard line attitude in recent times. I'm for example plagued by several warnings per day from the application to say I'm on an insecure wi fi network. (I know, but I'm miles out in the country/not in a high risk location and will install the new router I've bought just as soon as I get some time) The odd warning would be fine, but (a) there's far too many, and (b) they are clearly designed to sell their Secure Connection/secure server product. Which when I tried it crashed my Windows, and which anyway set up properly is a paid service.

Secure servers may be a requirement in the security environment of 2017, but for the layman there's not much noise from elsewhere to suggest that it's the case - and it's difficult to accept what feels like a hard sell as independent and well meaning advice....

Responses to questions to support on this matter have in both cases resulted in blase stock answers which ignore the underlying issue - which is that any genuine set of security solutions must be holistic. It's not good enough for individual applications/companies to cover their rears/do what they define to be their bit, and after that leave the customer to flounder in what may (or may not) be shark infested waters. There's also a requirement for the security companies to co-operate to ensure that gaps are not left between packages which may give rise to security exposures.

Anyway....

Malwarebytes has released a new Beta 3.1.0.1716

https://forums.malwarebytes.com/topi...bytes-3101716/

Download Link

https://malwarebytes.app.box.com/s/8...quhvls3p0l27sc

Jim

Priority for manual scans option added to new Beta 3.1.0.1716. Also looks like Scheduled scans run at Low priority.

Here are my scan results on my W10 desktop. All scans had every thing checked. 371,000 items.
Ver 3.0.6.1469* Scheduled Scan 2:53 min CPU hit 95%
Ver 3.1.0.1716 Scheduled Scan 9:40 min CPU hit 30%
Ver 3.1.0.1716 Manual Scan Low Priority 9:16 min CPU hit 30%
Ver 3.1.0.1716 Manual Scan High Priority 3:46 min CPU hit 95%
Scheduled Scan must be at High Priority on 3.0.6.1469 and Low Priority on 3.1.0.1716.
I like it like that and if I need a faster scan I can change the Priority to High for the Manual Scan,

Jim*

New Beta released. MB 3.1.1.1722 with one fix.

The main change in this version is an updated version of our anti-exploit protection that fixes an issue where Internet Explorer could freeze.
Please simply install this new version over any previous version of Malwarebytes you may be running, whether earlier beta or officially released version.*

New Download link: https://malwarebytes.app.box.com/s/m...c7qi5ek3x8r8dp

Release Note Link updated to reflect this change. See updated note at bottom of page.

https://forums.malwarebytes.com/topi...-for-download/



Jim

Brink said:

Thank you Jim. First post updated. :)

I think you need some coffee. The ver numbers are messed up. Good try.

Jim