App Review Bitdefender Traffic Light vs Malwarebytes Browser Guard

[Khushal]

If I’m not mistaken, @Trident mentioned in a post that McAfee was going to use an AI-generated name; perhaps that’s why it’s been named this way.

coming back to my above malwarebytes post there should be no surprise who detected the malware missed by malwarebytes.

VirusTotal

VirusTotal

www.virustotal.com

 

[nickstar1]

coming back to my above malwarebytes post there should be no surprise who detected the malware missed by malwarebytes.

VirusTotal

VirusTotal

www.virustotal.com

but to be fair also the other big names missed it Bitdefender, avast, etc. Kaspersky detects it which is no big surprise. I wish i could still use Kaspersky and wish the USA would reconsider it's ban.

 

[The_King]

For its performance impact and bugs, rather than efficiency.

I discussed this matter about performance impact years ago on here, if you are running any modern CPU with at least 4 cores there should be none.
On my current system I don't even notice that it is installed. Its like I forget its even there.

and it's slow update times

In the past 3 or 4 days I have been receiving updates from BD twice a day.

So not sure what qualifies has slow updates.
Four updates in the last 48 hours

These all seem to be malware and virus security database updates.

 

[Khushal]

I discussed this matter about performance impact years ago on here, if you are running any modern CPU with at least 4 cores there should be none.


In the past 3 or 4 days I have been receiving updates from BD twice a day.

So not sure what qualifies has slow updates.
Four updates in the last 48 hours
View attachment 297236
View attachment 297237View attachment 297238
View attachment 297239

These all seem to be malware and virus security database updates.
View attachment 297240

I was talking about time taken to update compared to its competitors.

 

[nickstar1]

I discussed this matter about performance impact years ago on here, if you are running any modern CPU with at least 4 cores there should be none.


In the past 3 or 4 days I have been receiving updates from BD twice a day.

So not sure what qualifies has slow updates.
Four updates in the last 48 hours
View attachment 297236
View attachment 297237View attachment 297238
View attachment 297239

These all seem to be malware and virus security database updates.
View attachment 297240

I think what most people are trying to say about Bitdefender is that the release of update definitions is working fine. The issue isn’t with how quickly updates are made available, but rather with the performance during installation. The process of actually installing the updates tends to be slow, and that’s what users are trying to point out. However Bitdefender remains very effective even for this downside of the product.

 

[Khushal]

but to be fair also the other big names missed it Bitdefender, avast, etc. Kaspersky detects it which is no big surprise. I wish i could still use Kaspersky and wish the USA would reconsider it's ban.

The point is not about detection, point is that malwarebytes let the machine get compromised. Pretty sure BD won't allow that and maybe I can give some chance to Avast as well.

 

[nickstar1]

The point is not about detection, point is that malwarebytes let the machine get compromised. Pretty sure BD won't allow that and maybe I can give some chance to Avast as well.

They should absolutely do more than just rely on VirusTotal for detection. It’s also unclear whether TLD-based detection is enabled in Malwarebytes during testing. I believe Malwarebytes should enable this option by default. At this point, they’ve had plenty of time to refine their engine and minimize false positives. Enabling it by default would ensure that when testers evaluate the software, it’s configured for maximum protection and performance.

 

[The_King]

I think what most people are trying to say about Bitdefender is that the release of update definitions is working fine. The issue isn’t with how quickly updates are made available, but rather with the performance during installation. The process of actually installing the updates tends to be slow, and that’s what users are trying to point out. However Bitdefender remains very effective even for this downside of the product.

I haven't had that experience with Bitdefender. It updates automatically in the background, and I only realize it happened when the 'Bitdefender was updated' notification pops up. Otherwise, I wouldn't even notice.

As far as system impact goes, it’s been zero for me, even on a 5600X that’s six years old now. Granted, having 32GB of RAM and a decent NVMe probably helps, but it has truly been an 'install and forget' product for the last few years.

I am curious to know how often other vendors update there security definitions? is twice a day too little?