Malwarebytes Anti-Malware 1.50

[NewsBot]

Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware is a full-blown anti-malware program that has recently left the labs and can be considered the next step in the detection and removal of malware. Malwarebytes Team put together a host of new technologies that were specially designed to quickly detect, deter and destroy any malware that could reside in your computer.

Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware monitors every process and actually stops malicious processes before they even start. It uses an impressive technology that is in fact a completely novel way of heuristic scanning and it is the teams response to the increasingly complex malware threats. And, as they did with Malwarebytes' RogueRemover we also have added a threats center. You can simply check online which pests are removed the most and thus are the most prevalent.

Download: Malwarebytes Anti-Malware 1.50

Screenshot: Image Preview

Homepage: Malwarebytes

View the full article

[0_0]

great, the stupid link is for 1.46 - the idiots at malwarebytes should add the version to the file name

[0_0]

thankfully FileHippo has the correct file - Malwarebytes v1.50 size: 7622112 // md5: C0F516A550B9FC6891909C5DB20F4EE7

[Capman]

Just update it from within the program, you can't go too far wrong then.

[0_0]

Yeah, easy for you to say - I'm stuck with dialup and now (I'm assuming lightning is the cause) my connect speed is 9 out of 10 times 26.4 kbps.

I could never get all 7 MB without being disconnected at least once and then I start all over again, even the updates which used to be about 3 MB have grown to 5.5 MB and I'm sure they will get so large I will have to find a direct link for them.

Anyway, I did a clean install of 1.5 and updated moments ago - only took 2 1/2 hours and three downloads to complete an otherwise pretty simple task. Still, put the freakin' version number on the file, I knew it was 50/50 when I moused over the link and saw nothing more than the generic file name - only 2+ hrs of my time.

[James_A]

... - the idiots at malwarebytes should add the version to the file name

I happen to agree, especially as Malwarebytes don't actually provide a download, they just redirect you to cnet, techspot, betanews, majorgeeks or anywhere else that takes their fancy.

But at bleepingcomputer, if you get redirected there, you end up with mbam-setup-1.50.0.0.exe but not if you go to bleepingcomputer first, then you get just mbam-setup.exe

.

[Tarun]

I can't really say I agree. Version numbers in filenames are a pain and it definitely makes updating things like news, my Anti-Malware Toolkit and other things far more annoying and more work than necessary.

Here's all the changes for this version.

Overall Improvements:

• Dramatically improved scan speed: up to 5 times faster.
  
• Dramatically improved stability of both the scanner and protection module (paid version only).
  
• More responsive: program loads up to 3 times faster, and protection module has lower impact on system resources (paid version only).
  
• New internal detection algorithms enable detection of more real-world malware.

New Features:

• You can now add files and folders to the ignore list manually.
  
• Ability to schedule and unschedule scans and updates from the command line (paid version only).
  
• Notifications of blocked malicious websites now include additional details such as type, port, and process on Windows Vista and higher.
  
• Ability to include or exclude potentially unwanted programs (PUP), potentially unwanted system modifications (PUM), and peer-to-peer software (P2P) from scans and protection module detections.
  
• Dramatically improved flash scan (paid version only) -- designed to determine whether a more in-depth scan is needed, in less than 10 seconds on many machines.
  
• One-touch easy-to-use option to keep protection up-to-date automatically (paid version only).
  
• "Warn if database is outdated by:" option now warns if the database is far out-of-date (7 days by default), including for protection (paid version only).
  
• Ability to scan system startup locations for improved detection and to target persistent malware that may be obstructing removal.
  
• Right-click context menu scans now use heuristics.

Issues Fixed:

• Improved compatibility with antivirus software.
  
• Fixed issue with "Recover if missed by" setting in scheduler not working correctly on Windows 2000 and Windows XP.
  
• Fixed issue with "Recover if missed by" setting in scheduler not working for scans and updates scheduled to run 'Once'.
  
• Fixed issue with Heuristics.Shuriken causing the program to freeze or crash.
  
• Fixed issue with certain infections going undetected by the protection module in 64-bit Windows versions.
  
• Fixed issue with silent scans not creating logs in certain scenarios.

[0_0]

I would like to apologize for my Malwarebytes comment - they do good work, it came across in a way I don't like. I should have made my point without resorting to the typical internet persona - no one knows me so I will be a jerk, anyway, my premise still stands.

I can't really say I agree. Version numbers in filenames are a pain and it definitely makes updating... far more annoying and more work than necessary.

Sure, for you - you're only looking at 1/2 of the picture. The bandwidth matters to someone, maybe not you, the files are small (for you) so it is easier to simply use a static link. There is someone at the other end (or in the middle) who may be paying for bandwidth usage (satellite users), or (ISPs) updating hardware to better handle the amount of data passing through their pipes, the wasted data transfer does cost 'somebody' time and money.

Something tells me if you were downloading gigs of data and being charged for the download you would be pi$$ed to know that your new Linux iso wasn't the version you expected, or your download of 'Porky's' was infact say 5 and not 1 - the link was simply porkys.avi, and you had to download it all before you could watch it. This is my Porky's sad to say - it all might as well be gigs of data.

We had an interesting discussion in my A+ class about the overwhelming amount of data traveling through cyberspace, some ISP's are considering limiting (or charging for) bandwidth usage because it is simply clogging the lines - too much information anymore, larger and larger file size. I thought the teacher may have been overstating the problem until I watched an expert on a business network also mention there is simply too much data being shared and like all things someone will pay for managing it, ultimately the consumer ends up paying through higher monthly costs or bandwidth monitoring. Some ISPs have already taken steps (doing away with newsgroups, of course under the guise of anti-piracy), satellite service lives by this and call it a 'Fair Use Policy', in this case - bandwidth limiting.

Beware you always-on guys, I know you pay for the 'speed' of your connection but you may also start paying for how much you hog every month - if you aren't already, then it will matter more that the file you wanted was in fact the file you downloaded :P

[Tarun]

I can't really say I agree. Version numbers in filenames are a pain and it definitely makes updating... far more annoying and more work than necessary.

Sure, for you - you're only looking at 1/2 of the picture. The bandwidth matters to someone, maybe not you, the files are small (for you) so it is easier to simply use a static link. There is someone at the other end (or in the middle) who may be paying for bandwidth usage (satellite users), or (ISPs) updating hardware to better handle the amount of data passing through their pipes, the wasted data transfer does cost 'somebody' time and money.

Something tells me if you were downloading gigs of data and being charged for the download you would be pi$$ed to know that your new Linux iso wasn't the version you expected, or your download of 'Porky's' was infact say 5 and not 1 - the link was simply porkys.avi, and you had to download it all before you could watch it. This is my Porky's sad to say - it all might as well be gigs of data.

We had an interesting discussion in my A+ class about the overwhelming amount of data traveling through cyberspace, some ISP's are considering limiting (or charging for) bandwidth usage because it is simply clogging the lines - too much information anymore, larger and larger file size. I thought the teacher may have been overstating the problem until I watched an expert on a business network also mention there is simply too much data being shared and like all things someone will pay for managing it, ultimately the consumer ends up paying through higher monthly costs or bandwidth monitoring. Some ISPs have already taken steps (doing away with newsgroups, of course under the guise of anti-piracy), satellite service lives by this and call it a 'Fair Use Policy', in this case - bandwidth limiting.

Beware you always-on guys, I know you pay for the 'speed' of your connection but you may also start paying for how much you hog every month - if you aren't already, then it will matter more that the file you wanted was in fact the file you downloaded

I always check my sources when and where I download things. Doesn't matter if the file number is in the name or not. In this case it's hosted on Malwarebytes official server. Not sure why it's not updated but anyone (news hosts like cnet, filehippo, etc) who uses that official server is not at fault, nor is the end user. The problem is on their end and they'll surely have it fixed soon. (n fact, I spoke with someone there and it'll be fixed asap).

The bandwidth issue is more of scaremongering. States are upgrading to fiber optic lines and we're continuing to progress into the future.

[James_A]

... In this case it's hosted on Malwarebytes official server. ...

That's the one place I was unable to find it.

The download page (.../mbam-download.php) doesn't provide a download, it just redirects to another page hosting a script (https://.../purl-mbam-download) which in turn just redirects out of Malwarebytes' site to cnet/techspot/betanews/majorgeeks/bleepingcomputer, etc etc. Each of those runs their own download server. Proliferation is where the problem lies.

.