Is it okay to have an AV real time protection and Malwarebytes real time protection on at the same time?

jimmysmitty

Distinguished
Moderator
Oct 5, 2007
551
0
19,010
42
You never want two real time AVs running. Uses resources, can create conflicts between what they see as a virus and such.

Better to have one real time AV then use Malwarebytes to scan once in a while as a second opinion.
 
Oct 25, 2014
126
0
4,630
0
So it should be ok to disable malicious website and malware protection on malwarebytes? right?

Also I put hardened mode (agressive mode) on avast, I think that should be enough protection for now
 

MarkW

Distinguished
Dec 7, 2009
196
0
18,710
26
If you read the latest Toms Guide Best Antivirus article, they actually do recommend running Avast free and Malwarebytes together... And I would expect that they did test that before they recommended that.
 

CWEric

Estimable
Jun 13, 2015
171
0
4,710
32
Malwarebytes Anti-Malware is not a primary anti-virus, when will people learn. Malwarebyte Ant-Malware is a secondary security layer design to run along with your primary anti-virus. Also if you are worry about system impact then you shouldn't be putting your anti-virus in aggressive mode. What it does is use more of your system resource inefficient being paranoid double checking everything for viruses. The default normal setting is set as default because its the most efficient plan for normal users.
 
Oct 25, 2014
126
0
4,630
0


True, I just realized that when the moderator stated that MB and Avast free is an antivirus..People these days have got to stop mixing those up
 

jimmysmitty

Distinguished
Moderator
Oct 5, 2007
551
0
19,010
42


No where did anyone state Malwarebytes was an anti-virus. It was only stated as a good second opinion because most anti-virus scanners tend to get most problems, even malware, these days but it is always good to have a second opinion. I always have MBAM, SAS and a handful of other portable versions of AV, Spyware, Malware and other programs ready just to be sure as no one single AV program gets everything.
 
Oct 25, 2014
126
0
4,630
0


"You never want two real time AVs running"

 

jimmysmitty

Distinguished
Moderator
Oct 5, 2007
551
0
19,010
42


Ok I admit I might have flubbed it. However I could just do this:

https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd632948.aspx

Microsoft defines Malware as short for Malicious Software which includes Viruses, Worms, Spyware, Torjans etc. So in the end Malwarebytes is actually an anti-virus program as the company itself defines it as a Anti-Malware so it covers that as well.

Of course who is Microsoft to define anything, right?
 

itmoba

Estimable
Aug 14, 2015
153
0
4,660
23


It's okay Jimmy, I'm a freelance for Tom's, so I know firsthand that definitions can come back to bite you in the rear. Maybe it's because I'm old, but a good example is this is that nowadays people like to define worms as viruses (\shudder\). Why this is the case is beyond me... oh well.
 

jimmysmitty

Distinguished
Moderator
Oct 5, 2007
551
0
19,010
42
Well most normal people tend to consider everything a virus when each sub definition has its own meaning. Malware itself means any sort of software bent on destroying your computing experience. SO that would cover Viruses (typically the ones that stop your PC from working at all), Trojans (just like the horse in the old days made to let other stuff in), Worms (typically deep burrowing into the root of the OS causing havoc), Spyware(self explanatory), Adware (again not need to explain) and even the newer ransom-ware ( these are fun!!!).

The truth is that most people do not get viruses these days. I also rarely see worms. I typically see adware, spyware, junkware and trojans along with a few key loggers but rarely do I see viruses. Most common is ransom-ware TBH.

Still it is best to keep a decent AV, I prefer the built in MSE/Windows Defender, and always keep other types of scanners to give a second opinion from AV scanners to targeted scanners (such as SAS for spyware). But never have multiple scanners running all at once. Even if they are targeting different types of malware they can cause all kinds of issues having two running.
 

itmoba

Estimable
Aug 14, 2015
153
0
4,660
23
The key here, I think, is that the method of delivery and payload has become more ambiguous over the years. Traditionally a virus requires human interaction to spread, whilst a worm requires no human interaction to spread. In the good ol' days, the "nefarious software" was highly specialized, meaning it was either a root-kit, trojan, or whatever it may be. These days, however, they've become wrapped up like a crappy Christmas present of coal (except worse), like, multi-purpose malware tools.

That said, I agree with you about not running two AVs at the same time (concurrently). This is because AV "A" will try to deal with the infected file, which in turn causes AV "B" to respond to "A", therefore causing "A" to respond to "B". The result of this is an infinite loop (i.e., "A" -> "B : A" -> "A : B : A" ...).
 
Oct 25, 2014
126
0
4,630
0


Hmm..Very interesting...So what are the chances of getting a virus and sometimes malware on an infected site? Do you have to download something to get it or it just gets into your system?

Also I prefer not using MSE or anyone to use MSE...If you want a light antivirus get BD free
 

jimmysmitty

Distinguished
Moderator
Oct 5, 2007
551
0
19,010
42


Most Malware utilizes exploits in your browser of choice or a plugin like Flash/Java which is why a browser that is purely HTML 5 is the best option right now.

And the thing I like about MSE is that it has a 0% false positive rating. It almost never falsely identifies a good program as a virus. Plus since it is built in it doesn't use many resources and since I know what I am doing I can easily avoid viruses.

There are a lot of malware that are user interactive and require them to click ok or yes on, which most people do, but most are those junkware programs (PC Optimizer Pro) which normally come from a Trojan that got downloaded to your PC without needing permissions due to an exploit and then that opens a hole to allow other Malware in.
 

itmoba

Estimable
Aug 14, 2015
153
0
4,660
23


A lot of evil software finds its way onto the victim's computer as a result of poor practices. For example, one of the most popular ways to get a package to run on the unsuspecting host is to use the shortcut trick, where a shortcut is made and modified to look like, say, a jpeg file. When the poor user clicks on it, however, they unwittingly infect themselves. A good countermeasure for this is to check the magic number (magic cookie) of a file. For example, jpeg files begin with 0xFFD8, whilst exes are 0x4D5A. This countermeasure isn't perfect, per se, and is just one way to approach this dilemma.

Another problem is that user's don't look at the file extension of the file they're opening. By default, hidden files and file extensions aren't displayed. When enabled used appropriately, this kind of information can help act as an early warning device for cautious (or learning to be cautious) users. This is compounded by the fact that most people simply let applications autorun without their input. You should never arrange it in a way that you let your browser automatically open files just downloaded. You should always be asked if you want to download the file you requested, where to place the said file, and to never automatically open it, regardless of whether or not you just downloaded the said file from Microsoft, Apple, the Dalai Lama, your pastor/priest/rabbi/imam/other, parents/relatives/friends/lover, zombie Abraham Lincoln, etc.

Some evil "h4x" can be "injected" rather easily without the user's knowledge. The way this works is by using a vulnerability in widely distributed software. Doing this is almost purely founded on the principles of statistics. People don't write specialized hacks for money unless they're getting a lot of money by their contractor. If not, they go about their business in a calm and logical manner which is premised on statistics. (Note: the following statistics aren't real; the numbers used are simply to provide a hypothetical example.) If 65% of users use Windows 8.1 and of those 65%, 50% use Chrome 3.14159265358979323846264338327950..., then 32.5% of the people are susceptible to an attack which leverages an exploit in Windows 8.1 (assuming the exploit hasn't been fixed or the computer hasn't applied the security patch) who also use Chrome π (assuming the same as before). This is how this kind of nefarious software is conjured.

NOTE: THE EXAMPLES USED ABOVE ARE PURELY FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND SHALL NOT BE USED FOR SELF-GAIN. THE AUTHOR MAKES NO CLAIM OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR INDIVIDUALS WHO USE THE KNOWLEDGE DEMONSTRATED FOR THEIR OWN BENEFIT, MATERIAL OR OTHERWISE.
 
Oct 25, 2014
126
0
4,630
0


So does google chrome have html5 inbedded into their system right now?

So does getting a virus is the same thing as the malware stuff as you said

You seem like a high tech savvy person (its a compliment don't worry), so it would make sense for you just to have just MSE and thats it....For me I'm not tech savvy and may need a good AV to protect me as a backup just in case I may make a mistake in the future
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Y Antivirus / Security / Privacy 0
T Antivirus / Security / Privacy 4
F Antivirus / Security / Privacy 4
D Antivirus / Security / Privacy 2
E Antivirus / Security / Privacy 2
T Antivirus / Security / Privacy 6
C Antivirus / Security / Privacy 5
D Antivirus / Security / Privacy 3
S Antivirus / Security / Privacy 1
A Antivirus / Security / Privacy 5
L Antivirus / Security / Privacy 4
G Antivirus / Security / Privacy 0
A Antivirus / Security / Privacy 1
M Antivirus / Security / Privacy 4
D Antivirus / Security / Privacy 3
S Antivirus / Security / Privacy 7
L Antivirus / Security / Privacy 2
L Antivirus / Security / Privacy 1
mangaman Antivirus / Security / Privacy 19
B Antivirus / Security / Privacy 8

ASK THE COMMUNITY