MalwareBytes 2.0.1 taking forever to scan

Britton30 said:

UsernameIssues said:

jonnyhillow said:

~~~
Your response about purging older samples as they are unlikely to be active I would think may raise an eyebrow in the underworlds domain and may entice the old to resurface but I understand your situation.

By the time the older samples are purged, they should be handled by your antivirus app*.

Mbam has used this "purge model" for years.


*assumes the AV product considers the file(s) worthy of flagging.

And does not take new users into consideration who may have "older" malware. This is nearly a deal breaker.

There has been no change to that policy now for at least 4 years so if you have older malware that is still there that your antivirus is not detecting or removing then you really need to take a look at using something better as every major antivirus program out there should detect anything we remove from our list.

I for one expect a scan for rootkits to take longer. I think we all do.
Then their is longer and waaaay to long.

My system is very fast and not much on it; so my test are short compared to many other members. (See My Specs)
I have 60 Gb's on the C drive being scanned.
As most members that read my post will know I run my computers clean, lean and mean. No garbage. Two programs at Start up, Malwarebytes and MSE. One Non Microsoft Service, Malwarebytes. Of course the Windows 7 built in firewall.
This makes me believe their isn't a bunch of trash getting in the way of the Malwarebytes scans.
Half of the scan time is hung on Windows 7 pictures. That must also be a problem with others members systems. If that could be taken care of I do believe every bodies scans would be shortened greatly. This picture problem happens on Windows 7 Home Premium/64 and Professional/64

If the new beta version address this picture problem I will gladly give it a try. If it doesn't I will wait.

I have removed some pictures and found out that sfc /scannow doesn't like that at all. I will probably have to do a repair install or a clean install to get a clean sfc /scannow.
sfc /scannow wants those pictures installed and can't put them back no mater how many times I run it.
I do not run these test on a VM. The test are done on the computers just like I run it every day.

Mellon Head said:

Mellon Head said:

Overall, the performance of MBAM 2.0.1.1004 is significantly worse that its predecessor with the rootkit option enabled. I haven't had the opportunity to run the full scan without the rootkit option enabled yet, but I am doing so as I write this. I'll report on the length of time it takes tomorrow.

Ok, so it finished:

Attachment 314727

Eleven hours and forty six minutes to do what two weeks ago took around four and a half hours. And that's without the rootkit scan enabled. Hopefully, this new version they're coming out with is going to be faster.

Note that nothing else was running during the scan.

By 2 weeks ago I assume you mean using version 1.75 which did not have a text parser engine, did not have an Anti-Rootkit scanner, did not scan for or remove variants of redirects due to configuration file changes in other browsers.

Please note as reported on the site here and by UsernameIssues there is a new beta that was released this morning that corrects many previously reported issues. I would certainly recommend trying it out and providing feedback on our site. Upper management and Developers are reading that stuff daily but most of them do not visit other forums with any regularity.

https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showforum=145


Thanks again

Just as I thought. Malwarebytes is going to get it fixed and it will not take long. Keep the faith; I will.

Just an FYI another user complaining of issues that the new version was able to correct for them as well.

https://forums.malwarebytes.org/inde...owtopic=147163

Thanks for the information AdvancedSetup.

Does anyone know for sure how long 1.75 will continue to be supported (receive updates)?

AdvancedSetup said:

Just an FYI another user complaining of issues that the new version was able to correct for them as well.

https://forums.malwarebytes.org/inde...owtopic=147163

Is nearly 2 hours for that type of scan going to be considered normal? And a correction?

Golden said:

Does anyone know for sure how long 1.75 will continue to be supported (receive updates)?

I'd like to know as well, I may go back since I installed Ver 2 something.