![[correlate]](/data/avatars/m/79/79653.jpg?1556985072){kind=avatar}
- May 4, 2019
- 825
Malwarebytes 4 Review | Tested vs Malware
- Thread starter [correlate]
- Start date
It is advised to take all reviews with a grain of salt. In extreme cases some reviews use dramatization for entertainment purposes.
- Aug 30, 2012
- 6,598
Nice try Leo, but your reviews are even more subjective than before.
- May 9, 2019
- 349
No scan with other second opinion scanners? I like to know what is Python script really is doing.
I tested it with 2 ransomware simulators. Malwarebytes blocked them all. Is anyone testing the new Malwarebytes in the hub to give a real view of the new product?
I tested it with 2 ransomware simulators. Malwarebytes blocked them all. Is anyone testing the new Malwarebytes in the hub to give a real view of the new product?
- May 16, 2018
- 1,363
Malwarebytes still has some work to do..
Thank you to Solarquest for the testing.
And thanks to SilverSurfer for the samples.
- Mar 29, 2018
- 7,613
It just keeps getting worse. And people buy into what he does. It's sad for them.
- Apr 1, 2019
- 2,868
I agree with this, and it’s very noticeable the biases he has. Oddly he does promote products from competitors to his employers.
Most of you have no clues about him, i was his colleague. I talked with him about his channel and tests. He genuinely doing them without hidden agendas. His channel is independent from his job, and he even doesn't mention it much in the company.
Unlike me, he wasn't in the marketing department so no "strategies" in place; anyway during my time, i never had any request to bash any competitor's products. Me and my coworkers of the Marketing team had only one goal, promote the quality of Emsisoft, not the bashing of others.
Like most of you, he just likes a product which appeared to be the one of his employer, like i did at my time; doesn't mean he is biased or secretly acting against other products enforcing some shady marketing strategy.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Apr 1, 2019
- 2,868
I would imagine none of us have that sort of insight since no one else here was his coworker. Good to know. I never felt he had an agenda for a company, but he sure does seem to bash certain products that he doesn’t like. I know he is focusing on finding the right solution that is set and forget, which is good to know. The problem is rather in how he presents information. For example, the last time I saw him review ESET he terminated the test when a ransomware variant got by, while it otherwise had a detection rate just as high as any other top product. He didn’t present the final statistics he just said it failed and seemed to dump on it. Now maybe he knew more about the specific variant and it’s prevalence, or some other information he didn’t present. But I’m pretty sure there are fresh variants of ransomware that bypass most if not all products at some point. And maybe his channel just isn’t for me, and I just don’t care for how he presents information, which is okay. I’m sure he’s a decent guy and if we actually talked I’d be as aware of his methods and motives as you, which might change how I feel.
This is what is difficult when being a Youtester, if you give all your methodology then eventually some people will copy you.
Also sometimes it is useless to continue the testing further, once a malware was able to run, it doesn't matter what it does next or how the product respond, it is a failure, simple as that.
and you are right, in the past, i had in my hands some freshly made malware who were truly undetectable unless ran for a while in a behavioral sandbox.
remember the philosophy behind Emsisoft, they designed their product for Average Joe, people with limited or no-skills, people wanting a product that does all for them with little or no interactions. So for some, just the fact that a product generate a popup asking for user decision is already a failure (aka PCmag and Rubenking)
Now about color and taste, it is another story.
- Mar 16, 2019
- 3,862
This is absolutely true. He passionately hate some programs and sometimes for little to no reason. His last Windows Defender test is an example of how bias and ignorant he is. He talked about Windows Sandbox a lot in that video thinking it's something similar to Comodo Sandbox. If he just had researched for 5 minutes about that before making the video he could've avoided that but he's so biased that he didn't do so. He also tested Glasswire which is not even an AV and that test was hilarious from start to finish.
- Oct 4, 2019
- 175
I really don't get the hate. He just seems like a dude, who knows what he's talking about, testing software to me. He runs the same script on everything. It is what it is. I wish there were more videos like this.
- Aug 30, 2012
- 6,598
@Umbra then he's becoming something like a rookie without the obvious cause? I mean, just look at his videos
- Nov 15, 2017
- 1,083
In the world of cyber security you all know each other. That's all I wanted to say.
- Mar 29, 2018
- 7,613
This was a particularly glaring example of his presentations since, as we all know, Windows Sandbox has nothing to do with WD. If you look at the comments of that test you can see how misinformed many of his viewers are and how his video only confused them more. His tests may be legitimate, though obviously faulty in re: WD and some others, but his testing methodology is much different than his presentation. I could cite his other tests like SAP and VS where he says repeatedly "I just don't like whitelisting apps". It goes on and on.
- May 19, 2014
- 283
Microsoft is partly to blame here. Having two products both with the term Windows Sandbox in them is probably not a good idea.
Now regarding the test. I don't see any bias. He explained clearly the methodology in the video. This was a prevention test, not a removal test. Honestly if he was truly bias he wouldn't had bother explaining the reason why his program didn't consider the malware blocked.
BTW, didn't voodooshield do very good in his test? Or perhaps it's another video I'm trying to remember?
Similar threads
