Latest Version of Malwarebytes

jonnyhillow said:

Has Mbam released a stable version thats newer than 2.04.1028 or is it still a beta ?

Thank you

2.1.4.1018 is now the official latest version (not a beta or Release Candidate).
See post #1 of this thread for details.

See my responses as bolded

ignatzatsonic said:

David:

I note that those pix from Macrium say "detected as a function of real-time protection". I wonder if that necessarily includes downloaded definition updates.

I don't know what this means. Are you asking if a new definition update could be detected as malware ?
As I understand it a new definition update can immediately detect malware that was not detected previously.
Isn't that what happened in 2013 when the bad update treated OS system files as malware (incorrectly) ?

Maybe the ideal config would be to auto-quarantine the "malware detected" classification and not quarantine the "non-malware detected", but that's not available in the controls.

Look in MBAM GUI > Settings > Detection and Protection
In Non-Malware Protection there are drop-down lists for PUP and PUM detections, with 3 choices.
Maybe you want to try the Warn user about detections choice ?
I have always used the treat detections as malware choice.

A 40 second window is so short as to be useless. No one can research anything in that time. It may as well be 5 seconds, to better avoid what might happen in that 35 second differential.

I agree, and this has been discussed a lot on the MBAM forum.

see response in blue:

DavidE said:

I don't know what this means. Are you asking if a new definition update could be detected as malware ?
As I understand it a new definition update can immediately detect malware that was not detected previously.
Isn't that what happened in 2013 when the bad update treated OS system files as malware (incorrectly) ?


I was referring to the text shown in the pix you posted in post 836. Yes, I assume it means that a mere definition update can trigger "real time protection" immediately and that that is what happened in 2013. It just doesn't say so explicitly.


Look in MBAM GUI > Settings > Detection and Protection
In Non-Malware Protection there are drop-down lists for PUP and PUM detections, with 3 choices.
Maybe you want to try the Warn user about detections choice ?
I have always used the treat detections as malware choice.


I'm aware of those settings and have chosen warn for PUP and to treat PUM as malware. I do note that the "non-malware detected" warning in your post 836 apparently applies to both PUP and PUM, per the text shown.

I'm just trying to arrive at best practices, taking into account the possibility of disastrous malware versus the possibility of an unfortunate but not disastrous false positive. Not disastrous in the sense that I can presumably recover via an image. Barring new info, I'd rather be bricked and recover via image than be seriously infected.

I'm aware of those settings and have chosen warn for PUP and to treat PUM as malware. I do note that the "non-malware detected" warning in your post 836 apparently applies to both PUP and PUM, per the text shown.

I'm just trying to arrive at best practices, taking into account the possibility of disastrous malware versus the possibility of an unfortunate but not disastrous false positive. Not disastrous in the sense that I can presumably recover via an image. Barring new info, I'd rather be bricked and recover via image than be seriously infected.

Hopefully if you have selected different choices for PUP and PUM, MBAM will handle PUP and PUM differently, as you chose.
I think the documentation just shows what can happen...and is not as detailed for all possibilities you are asking about ?

I totally agree on using a backup image for recovery, that's what i do, and that's how i recovered in 2013.
Unfortunately not everyone creates backups, and then learn a lesson when any disaster happens.

I too would like to know what is a best practice, and best settings.

A long time ago i tried to find "benign test malware files" so i could test them to see what would happen and make my choices accordingly.
I never found files to test all scenarios, so i make my best guess, and will change settings if anything ever happens and i learn i could handle it better.

Thanks for the responses gentleman .

DavidE said:

I totally agree on using a backup image for recovery, that's what i do, and that's how i recovered in 2013.
Unfortunately not everyone creates backups, and then learn a lesson when any disaster happens.

While creating backup images is clearly desirable, it is not a practical option for everyone - especially for those of us with very little knowledge of computers and just running one or perhaps two computers for casual home use. The various strategies and guides on this forum are excellent, but very complex for those of us with little or no knowledge of such things. I must try and get some sort of grasp on it, however, as while malware may be the number one threat to the stability of our computers, these days the monthly Windows Updates come a close second!

Seffrid said:

DavidE said:

I totally agree on using a backup image for recovery, that's what i do, and that's how i recovered in 2013.
Unfortunately not everyone creates backups, and then learn a lesson when any disaster happens.

While creating backup images is clearly desirable, it is not a practical option for everyone - especially for those of us with very little knowledge of computers and just running one or perhaps two computers for casual home use. The various strategies and guides on this forum are excellent, but very complex for those of us with little or no knowledge of such things. I must try and get some sort of grasp on it, however, as while malware may be the number one threat to the stability of our computers, these days the monthly Windows Updates come a close second!

Thats exactly what i have found also. Most are written by people with an amazing wealth of knowledge and even the most basic and simple things to them can be a real nightmare and total confusion for many others.

They are not as simple as some may think but they are very valuable for sure and much appreciated. Of course some authors make it considerably less confusing than others as well .


I should note that when i first got a computer and read a lot of the tutorials i was completely at a loss , it was just so hard to get through any of them for me .

Nowadays i know considerably more and it has become easier but there are more than a few that are still quite difficult.

On the other hand , without them i would just heave my computer through a window there's no question about that , imo no other site can match Seven forums tutorials , so please keep them and by all means add more if you wish .