So MBAM is really doing nothing innovative, its just using its small size and therefore low exposure to implement a highly risky (and highly effective) technique that the big boys have known about for years but I suspect are too scared to implement. As you can see from the False Positives Forum, there are a lot of FPs. Called side-effects scanning, where one looks tell-tale signes in the registry and file system instead of looking at the file contents itself. The comment about "We believe that there is no point in doing the same thing that everyone else is doing, and we fight to take out the malware that everyone else has trouble with" is more about using a highly risky though highly effective technique against certain classes of malware that the other guys have trouble with. MalwareBytes due to its small size in comparison to Tier 1 vendors can afford to take certain false positive risks in its detection that other AV vendors wouldn't dream of taking. I dont know about a comparison between Kapersky and Malwarebytes since I haven't used Kaspersky but I would like to comment on MalwareBytes vs other antiviruses in general. We don't expect to be the only tool that you use, but our team works hard to ensure that MBAM is the tool that experts turn to in areas where everyone else fails. Created by Malwarebytes, Junkware Removal Tool specifically targets adware and potentially unwanted programs that the other software we have used sometimes miss. This focus on the toughest and hardest malware allows us to spend more time on it, and often come up with better solutions to detect and eradicate it. We believe that there is no point in doing the same thing that everyone else is doing, and we fight to take out the malware that everyone else has trouble with. Our researchers and developers dive headlong into the things that anti-virus software has difficulty with and where their detection rates are not strong or consistent. Towards the ends of complementing good anti-virus software, we focus less attention on things that anti-virus software is already good at. We seek to complement their protection, but not to replace it! We focus on being strong where good anti-virus solutions like Kaspersky are weak. But, at the same time, no anti-virus is good against things like rootkits, and they tend to lag behind a bit on the random trojans that drop other malware (such is the bane of signature based detection). how it compliments Kaspersky's design and intentions. I"m curious to hear back from Malwarebytes how their product differs from Kaspersky. Endpoint Detection & Response for Servers
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |