Spybot & Malwarebytes

[mara-]

Well, here is how I protect my system (Vista Ultimate x64) and it is clean for months:

- ESS 4.0.424

- Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware 1.36 Free

- SUPERAntiSpyware Free Edition

- Windows Defender with active Real Time protection.

So, ESS ia always active (normally), Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware and SUPERAntiSpyware are used to scan computer once in a week or two, and Windows Defender is used only for Real Time protection (I know it is not very good but maybe it can catch something 8)). I would replace this real time protection with Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware but 64 bit Windows is not supported, SUPERAntiSpyware also don't have full support for x64 and it uses to much CPU with its real time protection.

If anyone don't know which protection would be the best for its system, I highly recommend what I wrote in this post.

And, I also don't recommend Spybot. They used to be good but they are very bad now. They have strange way of classification for malware. While I was on XP, I used program RegistryFix for cleaning registry. This was the best program I ever found for this purpose, and I'm 100% sure that it is not a malware. But, Spybot detected it as malware. I contacted them. They said it is a malware because their company used to made some suspicious tools :) From that point I never used Spybot and I'll never use it.

Cheers :P

[PsychoticxBloodxLust]

that thats somewhat over kill man i mean for malware and cookies i have firefox clear all that out on close, and using spywarebalster for the hostfile is really all ya need i mean if your smart person like myself you can usualy tell waht to click and downlaod and what not 2 but for idiot proofing a system i full verson of malwarebytes

Well, here is how I protect my system (Vista Ultimate x64) and it is clean for months:

- ESS 4.0.424

- Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware 1.36 Free

- SUPERAntiSpyware Free Edition

- Windows Defender with active Real Time protection.

So, ESS ia always active (normally), Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware and SUPERAntiSpyware are used to scan computer once in a week or two, and Windows Defender is used only for Real Time protection (I know it is not very good but maybe it can catch something 8) ). I would replace this real time protection with Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware but 64 bit Windows is not supported, SUPERAntiSpyware also don't have full support for x64 and it uses to much CPU with its real time protection.

If anyone don't know which protection would be the best for its system, I highly recommend what I wrote in this post.

And, I also don't recommend Spybot. They used to be good but they are very bad now. They have strange way of classification for malware. While I was on XP, I used program RegistryFix for cleaning registry. This was the best program I ever found for this purpose, and I'm 100% sure that it is not a malware. But, Spybot detected it as malware. I contacted them. They said it is a malware because their company used to made some suspicious tools :) From that point I never used Spybot and I'll never use it.

Cheers :P

[myidisbb]

i got one better. just make a folder name "security tools" on program files or program files (x86) and see what S&D things about it.

i do wish Malwarebytes support vista 64

[sabrosolatino]

I would replace this real time protection with Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware but 64 bit Windows is not supported, SUPERAntiSpyware also don't have full support for x64 and it uses to much CPU with its real time protection.

Hi Mara-,

your welcome, I have read your PM,

I agree with you about Spybot (aka S&D)

BUT how much CPU do you say SAS v4.26.1000-1002 's "live protection module" use it???

for me in WinXP pro SP3 use only less than 1mb of ram (windows process), but

When SAS make a quick scan it consumes increase upto 87mb of ram and it is a little bit slow to finish the scan.

In the other hand, MBAM have two module running when it start with windows: one is mbamservice.exe use like 3mb of ram

(have no idea of what it do)

and the other mbam.exe use like 39mb of ram (this is the "live protection module").

When MBAM make a Quick Scan the mbam.exe module increase upto 43mb (just like 4mb extra for scan)

and it tooks less minutes than SAS to finished the scan process.

BEST REGARDS

JC.WILCOX (aka SABROSOLATINO)

[mara-]

@myidisbb

You see my point now, Spybot sucks.

@sabrosolatino

For me SuperAntiSpyware constantly used 02-03 CPU and this would increase to 04-05 when copying files. It would rarely drop to 00 and it would last very short. I can't tell anything about the RAM, as I don't have PRO version installed now, but RAM is not so much important for me since I have 3GB. But, maybe they improved it with latest version and reduced CPU usage. And, when they add full support for x64 maybe I'll try it again. BTW, I think that SuperAntiSpyware has more modules then MBAM since some of them are loaded as drivers and you can't see it in Task Manager.

Cheers ;)

[BBs]

My SAS 4.26.1002 Live protection module dont take more then 1mb ram in the Taskman (SUPERANTISPYWARE.EXE) at the moment there is 522mb ram usage....

Now exit SAS and look there 425mb ram in usage...

SAS writes himself to other processes......

But Damn.... It takes more Ram then a Anti-virus :)

[Bizarre™]

what would you recommend?

Of course COMODO (firewall only) :)

[Mo Husen]

Well, here is how I protect my system (Vista Ultimate x64) and it is clean for months:

- ESS 4.0.424

- Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware 1.36 Free

- SUPERAntiSpyware Free Edition

- Windows Defender with active Real Time protection.

So, ESS ia always active (normally), Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware and SUPERAntiSpyware are used to scan computer once in a week or two, and Windows Defender is used only for Real Time protection (I know it is not very good but maybe it can catch something :) ). I would replace this real time protection with Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware but 64 bit Windows is not supported, SUPERAntiSpyware also don't have full support for x64 and it uses to much CPU with its real time protection.

If anyone don't know which protection would be the best for its system, I highly recommend what I wrote in this post.

And, I also don't recommend Spybot. They used to be good but they are very bad now. They have strange way of classification for malware. While I was on XP, I used program RegistryFix for cleaning registry. This was the best program I ever found for this purpose, and I'm 100% sure that it is not a malware. But, Spybot detected it as malware. I contacted them. They said it is a malware because their company used to made some suspicious tools :) From that point I never used Spybot and I'll never use it.

Cheers ;)

My set-up is very similar,

ESSv4 - all Modules active

Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware 1.36 - Protection Module active.

Not had any problems with virus, spyware, etc & no system freeze or BSOD.

[Sonar]

Didn't think this topic would be so popular.

My Setup now is

ESET Smart Security v3 (Everything Set To Strict Full Protection)

Malwarebytes Anti-Malware 1.36 (Full Protection)

PeerGuardian 2 (Only Run This When Visiting Torrent Related Sites)

Trojan Remover Not Installed but on stand by.

Having no problems at all.

[Marik]

wow Sonar, isn't that a little too much protection? :hi:

[Sonar]

wow Sonar, isn't that a little too much protection? :hi:

I think "Not Enough" - I guess if someone wanted to get details off a home based computer they'd get it.

[mara-]

PeerGuardian 2 (Only Run This When Visiting Torrent Related Sites)

PeerGuardian is not protecting you when you visit those sites. It protect you while you are downloading some torrent, in uTorrent for example, and it needs to be active while you are downloading.

Cheers <_<

[Mo Husen]

PeerGuardian 2 (Only Run This When Visiting Torrent Related Sites)

PeerGuardian is not protecting you when you visit those sites. It protect you while you are downloading some torrent, in uTorrent for example, and it needs to be active while you are downloading.

Cheers :P

Just to add a bit more to mara's post,

PG2 protects you from connecting to Law enforcement sites apart from known fake, malicious & phishing sites.

It does not protect you from downloading virus infected files.

[mara-]

Thanks for mentioning that, since I forgot to do it :D

That's very useful info for those who does not know what for is PeerGuardian.

Cheers :P

[Sonar]

PeerGuardian 2 (Only Run This When Visiting Torrent Related Sites)

PeerGuardian is not protecting you when you visit those sites. It protect you while you are downloading some torrent, in uTorrent for example, and it needs to be active while you are downloading.

Cheers :D

Just to add a bit more to mara's post,

PG2 protects you from connecting to Law enforcement sites apart from known fake, malicious & phishing sites.

It does not protect you from downloading virus infected files.

I'm not that dumb but thanks :P

@mara

I always run PG when visiting the MPAA site and stuff like that *not general internet*

[bob1234]

I always run PG when visiting the MPAA site and stuff like that *not general internet*

What, do you check their blog? =p

[sabrosolatino]

@sabrosolatino

For me SuperAntiSpyware constantly used 02-03 CPU and this would increase to 04-05 when copying files. It would rarely drop to 00 and it would last very short. BTW, I think that SuperAntiSpyware has more modules then MBAM since some of them are loaded as drivers and you can't see it in Task Manager.

Cheers :rolleyes:

Thanks your reply @Mara-

Sorry I don't understand that you where talking about "% of CPU" use it.

Yes indeed in my WinXP pro sp3, with Intel core duo 2 T7200 at 2.0ghz, with 2mb L2 cache and 2GB of RAM,

the SAS v.4.26.1002 use like 01% or less of CPU use it (and less that 1mb of RAM) when idle (active live protection, but not in Quick scan or Full scan).

But when SAS is in Quick scan it rise to 16% to 27% of CPU use (and 87mb of RAM).

How can I identify that modules that SAS load as drive Mara-???

@BBs I have try to see what are you say about RAM consumption but couldn't get your numbers:

When I close the SAS's Quick Scan my RAM goes from 632mb loaded to 545mb (SAS stay in idle mode= active live protection on)

But when I just close the "SUPERANTISPYWARE.EXE" from "idle" to "not run" (not active live protection on)

my RAM goes from 544mb to 535mb (that is 9mb of ram, I only see that one windows process is close the "SUPERANTISPYWARE.EXE")

So As Mara- say it seems to be others module function because "SUPERANTISPYWARE.EXE" module was only using 569KB

and the difference was 9MB (I use the option "end process tree" to close the sas process).

In the other HAND MBAM use:

1.- mbamservice.exe use like 3mb

2.- mbamgui.exe use like 2mb

Both use like less that "1% of CPU" each

When I open the MBAM windows it load mbam.exe that use like 39mb (still in idle mode, active live protection on)

When I start the QuickScan mbamservice and mbamgui keep without change,

but mbam.exe rise to 42mb of ram and 15% to 50% of CPU use.

I can't complain that any AV or ASpyware eat a lot of CPU when they are in a SCAN,

for the ones that have two CPU, that is the hole idea of be possible to use two heavy process in different CPU's nucleos,

one for AV or Aspyware in one CPU nucleo and any other software in the other CPU nucleo.

(I know this is not so the exactly way the CPU's works but it is the general idea I guess, anyone who knows more exact info be my guess and correct me).

So, What will the bottom line of what is the best "Security pack"???

I guess @Sonar in times when Health is again an issue to stay alive (I mean like care about Swine Flu)

Then I guess now health of "the computer is personal again", so ordinary people want to care good about their best friend and not rely on Computer assistances.

(HP team, my laptop is two year old you can give me a good coupon for upgrade mine) LOL