Solved IE Hacker Problem

[Layback Bear]

pappi are you reading our post.
They more than give lay terms of the differences between anti malware and anti virus programs and suggestion.

NOW if you want to know the differences of the inner workings and the differences, well you will have to do years of research and studding.
The firms have hundreds of hours if not thousands of hours with many employes working with professional trained personnel just to create and keep updated anti malware and anti virus programs.

At times their is a overlap in a anti virus and anti malware program on what they detect but it does not make them the same...

Their has never been a perfect way of stopping all infection other than never turn your computer on. Their has never been a perfect program to use and their never will be. To many bad guys.

 

[UsernameIssues]

...what does an AV(like Norton) do that MBAM Pro does not do?...

AV apps catch older bad files.

 

[pappi]

pappi are you reading our post.

They more than give lay terms of the differences between anti malware and anti virus programs and suggestion.

I read all posts including those more meant to denigrate than answer the question relevantly. I also read many blogs on this matter in the internet and got no clear answer until I ran into this article:

The Difference Between Antivirus and Anti-Malware (and Which to Use)

Basically, it delineates what seems to be the difference between what is considered by many as AV and Anti-malware.

In the beginning there was only one malicious invader which was aptly named Virus (for being like human virus... self-replicating). And the resulting products made to combat them and protect users were simply against the virus, hence the name Anti-Virus. Later, malicious ware other than virus cropped up...worms, Trojans, spyware, etc. Together with virus, they are collectively called MALWARE. And so the more modern AV's cover not only viruses but non-viral malware but maintained their name AV. MBAM also covers both viruses and non-viral malware, and never get the anti-virus name. but is considered the best against non-viral malware, hence its distinctive nomenclature, ANTI-MALWARE. The older viruses are considered of less concern (pretty much like smallpox virus) and so MBAM ditched its coverage against senile viruses. Considering that modern viruses are the minority among malware, anti-malwares have concentrated on non-viral malware. In effect, there are so much overlaps between AV's and anti-malwares such as MBAM. The only clear distinction being Anti-malwares such as MBAM have no coverage against senile viruses and AV's not at par with MBAM against non-viral malware. And because no single AV provides protection against all non-viral malware and Anti-malwares have ditched protection against aging viruses, it is recommended that both products are utilized for more comprehensive security measures.

And then there are some pundits who claim, with firewall and intelligent computing, there is no need for either AV or Anti-malware. Good grief!

 

[UsernameIssues]

Maybe if I pose the question differently: If MBAM Pro (not the free version) is all I have against infection, am I considered vulnerable and therefore I need to install another product that everybody calls AV(like Norton)?

If the answer is yes, my next question...conceding that MBAM is NOT an AV, is: what does an AV(like Norton) do that MBAM Pro does not do? And I am not being obstinate. I really do not know. I need an education in plain English....from those who have higher computing skills.

I would say yes... but let's research this together.

Does Malwarebyte's website state that MBAM protects against a file that infects* Operating System (OS) files?

*where the original bad file changes an OS file in a way that makes the OS file do bad things.

 

[pappi]

Maybe if I pose the question differently: If MBAM Pro (not the free version) is all I have against infection, am I considered vulnerable and therefore I need to install another product that everybody calls AV(like Norton)?

If the answer is yes, my next question...conceding that MBAM is NOT an AV, is: what does an AV(like Norton) do that MBAM Pro does not do? And I am not being obstinate. I really do not know. I need an education in plain English....from those who have higher computing skills.

I would say yes... but let's research this together.

Does Malwarebyte's website state that MBAM protects against a file that infects* Operating System (OS) files?

*where the original bad file changes an OS file in a way that makes the OS file do bad things.[/QUOTE]

I have my own experience with malware that did infect my OS so badly that I had to do factory image installation with Recovery discs. This might infer that MSE's real protection failed to detect and block the malware but free version of MBAM detected as two Trojans. However, even after automatic removal of infected files, the damage had been done that resulted in recurrent BSOD's and difficulties in booting, especially cold boots. And I never found out what the BSOD's were about since I could not open the dump files.

I don't know if this experience is relevant to what you suggest we research together. I cannot research what I have no clue about.(In other words, I do not know what you mean.)

That brought to mind a question in hindsight, "Had I employed MBAM Pro, with its real time protection, could this two Trojans been detected and blocked in time to prevent OS damage?"

 

[Layback Bear]

Pappi it's nice to see you have been doing some research.
Does this seem to be a true statement from my post #41?

At times their is a overlap in a anti virus and anti malware program on what they detect but it does not make them the same...

Have you installed the new KBxxxxx from Microsoft for I.E.?

 

[pappi]

It's a bit of semantic matter because both have same coverage (except for senile viruses which are still covered by AV's and ditched by MBAM). And because AV's are better against viruses-old and new, they are called AV. Similarly, because anti-malwares, such as MBAM are far better than AV's in non-viral malware coverage, (despite it being also anti-viral, albeit, just the new ones), they acquire a distinctive name of Anti-malware. But in essence both AV's and Anti-malwares are both anti-virus and anti-malware. So there, it seems I was right all along.

I knew about that update days ago before it went "must-do" installation through windows update.

The moment I got alarmed by homeland security, I visited MS support website in search of possible updates that I might have missed. And there it was among free downloads under Internet Explorer panel...but as I understood it, it was mostly for IT's who do advanced stuffs that I know I don't. And it was released also to correct crashing issues caused by a critical update on April 8th. I am no IT and don't do what IT's do and I was not having crashing issues. Thus, I did not bother to install.

 

[UsernameIssues]

I do not think that you will find any place on Malwarebyte's website where they claim to protect against files-that-infect-other-files (i.e. viruses). Protecting a-computer against that type of bad-file usually requires a type of file-filtering that MBAM does not use. If MBAM did use that type of file-filtering, then it could not be installed along side of AV-tools.

I'm pretty sure that the info stated above is correct, but if you could find a list of the infection names that Malwarebytes protects against, I might be able to confirm the info above for us. Here is one such list for Symantec (Norton). Here is a forum post where a MBAM user asks for a detailed list. If you can find that list or ask the question again on the MBAM forum, then we can know more about the differences between MBAM and AV-apps.


To answer your question about the Trojans: yes, MBAM Pro probably would have caught/stopped the Trojan.

 

[UsernameIssues]

Me too. But this update has nothing to do with the Hacker's red alert, no? I thought this update is to prevent crashing caused by 2929437 update of April 8th.

There were several updates released on 01 May.
They all attempted to fix the same flaw in IE.
Here is some info on one of the patches KB2964358:

Known issues with this security update

• Internet Explorer will crash if you try to install this security update on a Windows 7-based system that does not already have security update 2929437 installed. To avoid this issue, take either of the following actions:
  • Install security update 2929437, and then install security update 2964358. For more information about security update 2929437, click the following article number to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base: 2929437 (Description of the security update for Internet Explorer 11 on Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2: April 8, 2014 )
    Description of the security update for Internet Explorer 11 on Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2: April 8, 2014
  • Install security update 2964444 instead of security update 2964358. Security update 2964444 is intended for systems that do not have security update 2929437 installed.

If you do not have KB2929437 installed, then you should install KB2964444:
Download Security Update for Internet Explorer 11 for Windows 8.1 (KB2964444) from Official Microsoft Download Center

It's a bit of semantic matter because both have same coverage (except for senile viruses which are still covered by AV's and ditched by MBAM). And because AV's are better against viruses-old and new, they are called AV. Similarly, because anti-malwares, such as MBAM are far better than AV's in non-viral malware coverage, (despite it being also anti-viral, albeit, just the new ones), they acquire a distinctive name of Anti-malware. But in essence both AV's and Anti-malwares are both anti-virus and anti-malware. So there, it seems I was right all along.
~~~

We are not finished researching yet. Please don't declare yourself right just yet.

~~~
I knew about that update days ago before it went "must-do" installation through windows update.

The moment I got alarmed by homeland security, I visited MS support website in search of possible updates that I might have missed. And there it was among free downloads under Internet Explorer panel...but as I understood it, it was mostly for IT's who do advanced stuffs that I know I don't. And it was released also to correct crashing issues caused by a critical update on April 8th. I am no IT and don't do what IT's do and I was not having crashing issues. Thus, I did not bother to install.

Can you please find that webpage again and provide us a link?

 

[pappi]

Download Update for Internet Explorer 11 for Windows 7 SP1 (KB2956283) from Official Microsoft Download Center

 

[ThrashZone]

The update is available via the windows update system,
You need not go anywhere to receive it,
Cheers.

 

[UsernameIssues]

Download Update for Internet Explorer 11 for Windows 7 SP1 (KB2956283) from Official Microsoft Download Center

Thank you for digging up that link. It does not happen to be the update that Microsoft released to address the vulnerability that this thread is about. Those patches were not available anywhere that I know of until 01 May. That is why I was so curious about your statement that you found the updates earlier than 01 May.

 

[UsernameIssues]

I tried the Pro version with real time protection on trial basis and found it more effective in picking up and blocking threats/viruses ahead of MSE. I still do not know why it is not considered an AV.

On the other hand, sometimes on scheduled scan, MSE detects and quarantines malwares, including viruses which its real time protection failed to detect and block.

Somebody of more advance PC skill...please explain why MBAM is not considered an AV.

You have asked for our time to try and explain some of the differences between MBAM and an AV app and we have given you a considerable amount of of time on that topic. When I asked you to look for a place on Malwarebyte's website where they claim to protect against bad files that infect other bad files - you replied that you could not research what you do not understand. I understand your position, but I've researched several things that I did not understand. Sometimes I only learned a little bit before giving up (because the info was over my head). Other times, I learned lots of stuff. The more I read, the more I understood the things that were not clear when I started out.

For this topic, you will just have to decide if you want to take our word for it that MBAM does not stop viruses (bad files that infect good files)*. Or you can start reading things in the hopes that someday you will understand why the terms (as poorly defined as they are) and distinctions matter. Lumping all on the types of bad files into one term "malware" causes discussions like the one that we are having now. Those at MBAM have told their users to use an AV tool. So, it would be best if you do that while you learn about bad file classifications.

*horribly simplistic and not universally agreed upon.

Here is a place that you can read more than you ever wanted to know about the topic of bad/malicious files: John Aycock 'Computer Viruses and Malware' (VX heaven)

 

[pappi]

As far as my research took me, I learned MBAM has coverage for recent viruses much like AV's but has ditched coverage for old ones. AV's have coverage against malware other than viruses like MBAM but not as much.. Hence, for protection against viruses-old and new-I employ AV(MSE). And for good measures, I employ so-called anti-malware product(MBAM).

I will always consider MBAM an AV, regardless of current nomenclature designation. In the past, when for some reason (maybe JAVA's fault)I was often infected, MBAM(free version) always picked up viruses (thru on demand scan) that MSE with real protection failed to detect.

And I also consider MSE and all other AV's anti-malware products because, after all, viruses are malware, albeit less common.

 

[pappi]

Download Update for Internet Explorer 11 for Windows 7 SP1 (KB2956283) from Official Microsoft Download Center

Thank you for digging up that link. It does not happen to be the update that Microsoft released to address the vulnerability that this thread is about. Those patches were not available anywhere that I know of until 01 May. That is why I was so curious about your statement that you found the updates earlier than 01 May.

OMG, so it is not. At quick glance, these numbers looked the same. I must have been misled by their connection with the update from April 8th. Thanks for straightening me out.

Now I feel better that I did not install the update I dug up from download center, but did install the one from Windows update on May 1st.

 

[ThrashZone]

Allot of these hot patches are not worth using,
Some actually need to be uninstalled to get the permeate fix via the windows update system,
So the best policy is to only load updates via windows update system,
MSE does not specialize in Malware mabm does,
Cheers.

 

[UsernameIssues]

As far as my research took me, I learned MBAM has coverage for recent viruses much like AV's but has ditched coverage for old ones. AV's have coverage against malware other than viruses like MBAM but not as much.. Hence, for protection against viruses-old and new-I employ AV(MSE). And for good measures, I employ so-called anti-malware product(MBAM).

I will always consider MBAM an AV, regardless of current nomenclature designation. In the past, when for some reason (maybe JAVA's fault)I was often infected, MBAM(free version) always picked up viruses (thru on demand scan) that MSE with real protection failed to detect.

And I also consider MSE and all other AV's anti-malware products because, after all, viruses are malware, albeit less common.

Can you provide a link to a website that makes that claim?

 

[pappi]

"Can you provide a link to a website that makes that claim? "

The Difference Between Antivirus and Anti-Malware (and Which to Use)

 

[UsernameIssues]

"Can you provide a link to a website that makes that claim? "

The Difference Between Antivirus and Anti-Malware (and Which to Use)

The info in that link states the opposite of what you claimed:

Put simply, Malwarebytes aims to protect you against all manner of malware, but common viruses and older threats aren't included.

I was looking for something that backs up your statement the Malwarebytes protects its users against viruses.

 

[pappi]

Apparently some viruses are not common or old. Some are amenable to products that are not commonly known to be AV...like MBAM which claims it detects and removes viruses. Here is a comparative come-on publication from MBAM, straight from MBAM homepage:


Note that both free and pro versions claim to detect and remove viruses, among other malware.