mbam4ever
Honorary Members-
Posts
22 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Reputation
0 NeutralRecent Profile Visitors
1,242 profile views
-
I stand corrected. It doesn't jump on the eyes but you are absolutely right. (...)I have tried Malwarebytes 3.0 but want to go back to MBAM 2.2.1 If for whatever reason you want to downgrade to MBAM 2.2.1 and wait for a new version of 3.0, you can do so easily. Simply uninstall Malwarebytes 3.0, reboot and then download and install MBAM 2.2.1 from here.
-
What have I gained with MBAM 3
mbam4ever replied to Peter2150's topic in Malwarebytes for Windows Support Forum
^The gain in bugs got me back to 2.x... Nevermind running faster, I'll give another try to 3.x once it learned how to walk without falling -
Hi there, Having known and already reported issues with 3.0 I decided to revert back to 2.X I couldn't find the previous version on Malwarebytes site. If it's there... It's not obvious to find. Reverting back to 2.X was not a simple install over. I'm not backed up running 2.x and happy again. Can you add to the 3.0 FAQ a download link to the last stable 2.x version and maybe a small description of the procedure to downgrade to 2.X? Thanks
-
Problems with start and web protection
mbam4ever replied to Mystery's topic in Malwarebytes for Windows Support Forum
Add me to the list of affected users. :-( Web Protection in the GUI stays at STARTING and never starts. Then Real-Time Protection Layers turned off shows up in the notification tray. -
Thanks for your reply Durew, I know EMET and 3.0EP are not using signatures, that's why I used "Module" as even libraries could have been also confused with Signatures. I'm curious to know more about how to run them both without conflicts. As of now EMET prevented launching every processes enabled in both EMET and 3.0EP. I didn't research much about the levels of protection offered by 3.0EP. Its GUI only provide a single ON/OFF per process/programs. Compared to EMET that has a checkbox for every of the 14 types of attacks. EMET is more tweakable when it comes to misbehavior with a given process/program.
-
News flash... EMET does not let me open WinWord when 3.0EP is enabled for WinWord. Disabling EP for winword solved the problem. Which partially answer my question. ie EP and EMET (option 3 above) is not a good idea at least when they are both monitoring the same processes. I guess I will opt for the one that is updated the most often and includes more current attacks. EMET is updated more or less once a year. What about the Malwarebytes EP module? (I know malware signatures are updated almost everyday)
-
Hello guys, Sorry if it's a repost, I searched the forum "Malwarebytes 3.0" for EMET and the search engine returned most of pre 3.0 results. I'm a long time EMET user currently running 5.51, now that 3.0 comes with some sort of EP. I wonder. I had very little issues with EMET. Since I installed 3.0 (yesterday) I now have EMET who wants to sends a report to MS. WinWord is not even running. -<Exploit Code="7"> <App>C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Office\Office14\WINWORD.EXE</App> <Module>C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Office\Office14\WINWORD.EXE</Module> <Registers ESP="e2f3d0" EBP="e2f45c" EDI="e79a68" ESI="1" EDX="0" ECX="b0c78311" EBX="6df7f1c3" EAX="0"/> (...) </Exploit> So what's is the best bet for the better blend of performance, stability and security. 3.0EP without EMET EMET without 3.0EP or EMET + 3.0EP I'm not a fan of running real time protection from different companies in parallel... Always a good recipe for conflict and instability.