Is Malwarebytes good enough to replace Windows Defender?

[Kaby]

Is Malwarebytes good enough to replace Windows Defender? As in: with Malwarebytes Premium, can or even should I disable Windows Defender?

[sefton22]

yes, its much more user friendly. i find Windows Defender is too temperamental and can't fully be disabled

[wolfie]

IMHO - No.

 

Windows 10 Defender seems to be pretty robust these days and free. I install the trial version of something like Malwarebytes if I think there's a problem - run it, clean out gremlins and then uninstall Malwarebytes. I really don't think it worth wasting money on anti-malware because unless you really dwell on the dark side, Windows Defender works pretty well these days. I really can't understand people who don't like it, it's perfectly easy to configure and use.

[Kaby]

19 minutes ago, wolfie said:

IMHO - No.

 

Windows 10 Defender seems to be pretty robust these days and free. I install the trial version of something like Malwarebytes if I think there's a problem - run it, clean out gremlins and then uninstall Malwarebytes. I really don't think it worth wasting money on anti-malware because unless you really dwell on the dark side, Windows Defender works pretty well these days. I really can't understand people who don't like it, it's really pretty easy to configure and use.

 

I got it for free from a good member of this community. 

 

What I meant to ask is it really better overall?

It's much more aggressive - instantly deleted my SBI uTorrent cheat mod, and although it said that it's in quarantine there was nothing to restore ;]

[Alanon]

12 minutes ago, Kaby said:

What I meant to ask is it really better overall?

It's much more aggressive - instantly deleted my SBI uTorrent cheat mod, and although it said that it's in quarantine there was nothing to restore ;]

 

Really depends on what you need. Defender is a set-and-forget type of solution, and that's also the main problem. The implication being that, if you're careful, it ought to provide you with just enough protection for you to get by. If you find yourself compromised, or believe you might be compromised, you'll still have to install some other software just to make sure you're safe. For me, that defeats the point of having it at all – if I can't trust it, why not install something that gives me assurance that my system is clean if reported as clean? I've also found that in cases when there's a false positive, it's much more difficult to get through the slog of Defender's exceptions than almost any other solution. When I'm setting up Windows for friends and family, often it's WD that slows me down with flagging medicines. I prefer to not use it even for other people, if a more reputable option that fits the user exists.

 

That being said, WD can still be a part of a system setup, as it can be amplified without much effort. For more control and better security I would always recommend supplementing any anti-malware setup with something like Binisoft Firewall Control to replace the default Windows firewall. That little program can still work with the anti-virus module in WD or with virtually any other AV-only package on offer. (Incidentally, Firewall Control was recently bought by Malwarebytes and I suspect it will be integrated in some new suite-type product.) Another way to go would be to supplement WD with a firewall and a cloud scanner like Hitman Pro. It can complete a scan quickly, and you can do daily boot-up scans in minutes. Of course Malwarebytes can also be combined with some or all of these for better overall security, and (at least in my experience) almost no hit in terms of performance.

[DLord]

Based on my personal experience I would say no.  My advise is to stick with WD or better option would be to use a more robust anti-virus software. 

If you do not want to pay and also want a top-notch AV I would recommend SEP.

[Kaby]

13 minutes ago, Alanon said:

 

Really depends on what you need. Defender is a set-and-forget type of solution, and that's also the main problem. The implication being that, if you're careful, it ought to provide you with just enough protection for you to get by. If you find yourself compromised, or believe you might be compromised, you'll still have to install some other software just to make sure you're safe. For me, that defeats the point of having it at all – if I can't trust it, why not install something that gives me assurance that my system is clean if reported as clean? I've also found that in cases when there's a false positive, it's much more difficult to get through the slog of Defender's exceptions than almost any other solution. When I'm setting up Windows for friends and family, often it's WD that slows me down with flagging medicines. I prefer to not use it even for other people, if a more reputable option that fits the user exists.

 

That being said, WD can still be a part of a system setup, as it can be amplified without much effort. For more control and better security I would always recommend supplementing any anti-malware setup with something like Binisoft Firewall Control to replace the default Windows firewall. That little program can still work with the anti-virus module in WD or with virtually any other AV-only package on offer. (Incidentally, Firewall Control was recently bought by Malwarebytes and I suspect it will be integrated in some new suite-type product.) Another way to go would be to supplement WD with a firewall and a cloud scanner like Hitman Pro. It can complete a scan quickly, and you can do daily boot-up scans in minutes. Of course Malwarebytes can also be combined with some or all of these for better overall security, and (at least in my experience) almost no hit in terms of performance.

 

Thanks for going so in-depth. Actually I need Windows Firewall and Windows Filtering Platform for WPD to block Windows' 10 telemetry, updates and other "unwanteds".

 

In Windows Defender you can select whole drives for exclusions, f.i. D:\ and everything inside of D partition/drive is excluded.

 

Me myself. I don't need anything. Nothing to be proud of, but I've spent enough time on warez sites, public torrent trackers and suspicious websites, that I just "feel" if something is not right

But on the other hand, fact that I haven't got any virus/rootkit/malware etc... in ages doesn't mean I won't get any in future. I'd say I need something non intrusive, with minimum of false positives, etc

 

I'm trying this Malwarebytes and it seems pretty good on day 1.

[Alanon]

2 minutes ago, Kaby said:

 

Thanks for going so in-depth. Actually I need Windows Firewall and Windows Filtering Platform for WPD to block Windows' 10 telemetry, updates and other "unwanteds".

 

Me myself. I don't need anything. Nothing to be proud of, but I've spent enough time on warez sites, public torrent trackers and suspicious websites, that I just "feel" if something is not right

But on the other hand, fact that I haven't got any virus/rootkit/malware etc... in ages doesn't mean I won't get any in future. I'd say I need something non intrusive, with minimum of false positives, etc

 

I share both your sentiment and scepticism. If you're like me and only ever go to a couple of "vetted" spots on the internet for any potentially risky material, you probably feel like you've got the bases covered and it would take something extraordinary to get you in trouble. Personally, these days I want a practical security solution that won't get in the way too much in daily use, but that could get the job done in a bind. I've been testing ESET Internet Security on one of my machines and it's been working great. Love me some HIPS! I haven't used Malwarebytes for a while, but it certainly used to be exactly that kind of solution.

 

Windows Firewall Control actually hooks into the default Windows Firewall engine (I guess), but gives you the capability of creating inbound-outbound rules, has pop-ups for unknown apps, learning mode, etc. It's technically still Windows Firewall, only with a useable GUI. On a different machine I use that, and supplement the security with HitmanPro.Alert (IMHO, well worth investigating that option on the forums). Hell, just running daily scans with plain Hitman Pro would probably be enough for a savvy user to secure against extraordinary events, as it truly is a terrific tool.

[spudboy]

Imo Windows Defender is perfectly fine all on it's own. I'm not sure how anyone could have a difficult time adding exclusions to it. All you do is click on the "Add An Exclusion" button to exclude a file, file type, folder, drive, etc. Also as has already been stated, Binisoft/Malwarebytes Firewall Control does not replace the WD firewall. It is only a greatly superior front end for it. It's still running the built in firewall.

[Alanon]

42 minutes ago, spudboy said:

Imo Windows Defender is perfectly fine all on it's own. I'm not sure how anyone could have a difficult time adding exclusions to it. All you do is click on the "Add An Exclusion" button to exclude a file, file type, folder, drive, etc. Also as has already been stated, Binisoft/Malwarebytes Firewall Control does not replace the WD firewall. It is only a greatly superior front end for it. It's still running the built in firewall.

 

Unless you're using a patcher that self extracts, or any SFX archive, or in some cases even unrar things, in which case the original exclusion does no good. Of course 9 times out of 10 the Defender AV just deletes the file or blocks it entirely and you have to exclude it manually. For anything that goes to random temp folders, you have to hunt down precise locations to re-add an entry to the exclusion. If there is a way to restore a flagged file and automatically add an exception for it, I haven't been able to find it. (If you know that feature exists and where it's buried, I'd appreciate a tip.) By this point, if all you're trying to do is get a fresh system up and running with the basics, WD is a huge pain because you have to navigate around it like a tipsy bride. Even when you want to switch everything off just to get the work done quickly, and in peace, WD still switches on after a (short) while, and then it's the same song and dance routine all over again.

 

But that's just my use-case example, which I acknowledge is rather niche. To be sure, all these elements that annoy me to no end make the Defender idiot-proof, and there is a great user-base among the folks disinterested in security, that don't mess around with anything and don't want to or need to. Having Windows Defender on is substantially better than nothing, and there's no doubt that Windows was never so well-equipped from the box. But if and when you have a particular task to accomplish, everything from the interface to the features and their design seems to me to be lacking, and as I've installed fresh Win 10 systems over time, that impression hasn't really improved. As far as the Windows Firewall side of things, I have nothing bad to say about it whatsoever. I think it's quite robust. Too bad the Defender concept didn't include a separate GUI for it, adding the features present in Binisoft's little marvel.

[mp68terr]

Using neither win10 nor wd.

IMHO, leaving all (os, av, fw) in m$oft hands in not too good.

[avmad]

Hallo people. I was asking myself this question yesterday. Had to uninstall free Kaspersky to get windows upgraded, and seeing a few bsod before this thought id try some different setups.

Comodo FW , Sandboxie and Adguard I prefer to keep using btw.

 

So I read this article by Antivirus Don (no clue who he is)  Here's the page anyway.

https://antivirusdon.com/malwarebytes-vs-windows-defender/

 

I decided to go with MBAM  pretty quickly as things were disapearing from my folders, which I found in WD quarantine. Had no notifications about it. I did not approve lol,

 

If you decide to go with Defender a couple of programs that may interest you are Defender Control by Sordum. Easily enable or disable win defender,

And

Theres more settings to Win Defender than they let us have access too apparently, and it might be a decent option if we could get to them. Thats where ConfigureDefender by AndyFul over on Github comes into play. I only had a quick look so no opinion from me. I have used the Sordum one in the past and it worked well.

There may be better out there but thats just what i stumbled upon in a short amount of time.

 

 

[Dodel]

One is a Antivirus, the other is a Malware solution, they are not the same, nor is one a substitute for another.

 

[morteza]

Security software is more complicated than choose of MBAM or WD ! 

So many things we must know like :

1- Firewall

2- web protection

3- reputation

4- sonar

5- learning machine

6- user friendly UI

7- Performance

8- software engine

.

.

.

For example :

One of important simple things you must know about that is Reputation in software users so if your software users is little , reputation response is not accurate ! 

 

After all , the most important things in life is your brain and your knowledge about risks 

 

BE HAPPY AND HEALTHY 

[cruelsister]

Kaby- Do not replace WD with Malwarebytes. Contrary to popular belief MB is not all that strong in protection. Common malware today are script based files which MB is almost completely incapable to detect, either outright (on malware run) or in the detection of persistence (meaning the script will come back on every reboot). Also,for whatever reason MB has not added even common vbs based worms to their definition base.

 

Quite frankly I wouldn't suggest anyone even bother to use MB free as a second opinion scanner as better opinions exist such as Kaspersky Emergency Scanner or even Norton Power Eraser.

[mehdibleu]

What you need to know is that no AV or other malware tool can protect you at 100%, you are the only one who can make sure to reduce infections at max in your machine by being responsible, it means that you will have to be careful of all what you are doing on your machine, whether by not clicking on any suspicious link that you find on the net or through pour mail box, by avoiding some torrent suspicious sites which provide dangerous content, etc....

 

Again, a good use of internet is the only way that will prevent you from being infected. I personally don't use Malwarebytes, any AV which can include malware detection will be enough to protect your machine without the need of cluttering it with multiple malware detection tool.

[Reefa]

This is what i do...Download https://www.shadowdefender.com/

 

Activation

========

Site: https://www.upload.ee
Sharecode: /files/12176206/Shadow.Defender.Keygens_all...rar.html

 

Then proceed to make a shadow defender safe folder..Done from there you can scan the files before you commit them...Restart system your done nice clean system state....

[catfish]

8 hours ago, Reefa said:

This is what i do...Download https://www.shadowdefender.com/

 

Activation

========

Site: https://www.upload.ee
Sharecode: /files/12176206/Shadow.Defender.Keygens_all...rar.html

 

Then proceed to make a shadow defender safe folder..Done from there you can scan the files before you commit them...Restart system your done nice clean system state....

 

is there a guide somewhere on how to use shadow defender? I have not yet figured out how to use it effectively.

[kantry123]

29 minutes ago, catfish said:

 

is there a guide somewhere on how to use shadow defender? I have not yet figured out how to use it effectively.

Google kro bhai aasaan h .

 

There's a user guide 

 

http://www.shadowdefender.com/help.html

[pc71520]

On 8/20/2020 at 2:07 PM, Kaby said:

Is Malwarebytes good enough to replace Windows Defender?

I prefer WD over MB.

I've always seen MB as a Complementary product...

[Ragdd]

Hi, why not using Kaspersky antivirus Free version?

Kaspersky anti-virus is one of the best anti-virus on the market and the free version is sufficant for most users.

Malwarebytes is a very good on demand scanner to remove malware, but I wouldn't recommend it as your primairy anti-virus.

[Kaby]

16 hours ago, cruelsister said:

Kaby- Do not replace WD with Malwarebytes. Contrary to popular belief MB is not all that strong in protection. Common malware today are script based files which MB is almost completely incapable to detect, either outright (on malware run) or in the detection of persistence (meaning the script will come back on every reboot). Also,for whatever reason MB has not added even common vbs based worms to their definition base.

 

Quite frankly I wouldn't suggest anyone even bother to use MB free as a second opinion scanner as better opinions exist such as Kaspersky Emergency Scanner or even Norton Power Eraser.

 

Thanks but could you provide a reliable source for MB inferiority? 

[straycat19]

I have been running Windows since version 1.03.  I have seen and done almost everything possible to protect an installation, including running every major AV distribution over the years, and adding third party firewalls.  In the end all I found out  was all AV was good for was using system resources.  I found a much safer and leaner result was using Defender, Binisoft Firewall Control, and Software Restriction Policies.  For many years I downloaded and tested the monthly malware deposits against a test system setup exactly that way.  I quit testing them last year since I retired but not once was any of my systems infected by any malware of any type.  As a certified computer forensics investigator and security analyst I have seen it all over the years and my favorite systems are still Windows 7 SP1 with security only updates installed, BFC, and SRP.  And as an aside, I firmly believe only an idiot would run hacked/cracked AV/Malware software to protect a system.

[BenCart]

I use Malwarebytes Premium + ESET Internet Security for a few years now

[Tux 528]

I fully agree with @wolfie and @mehdibleu. Windows Defender is a lightweight antivirus, yet very effective against most threats, and especially with the protection in the cloud.
Once again, only the user can decide what he runs on his computer. Just because there are all kinds of malware out there these days does not mean that you have to install a third-party antivirus or protection software.
I advise you to read the message I published on the topic "Is antivirus software necessary in 2020?" for more information on this subject.

Best regards