App Review Malwarebytes and HitmanPro vs some Worms

[hjlbx]

The bottom line regarding Malwarebytes Anti-Malware, whether by design or not, did not detect the scripts.

Locating and procuring malicious scripts is quite easy... so anyone can very easily test if MBAM detects - or targets, or whatever one wishes to call it - Evil.Scripts for themselves.

You can classify MBAM however you like, but one cannot deny that it uses signatures and heuristics to detect malicious files. That makes its engine no different than most any anti-virus.

@cruelsister's point, at least to me, is that MBAM and HMP have limitations - just like any other security soft. So she shows both aren't good at detecting the specific scripts she used in the test... what's the big deal ? Nowhere does she condemn either one as complete and utter junk...

 

[cruelsister]

hjibx- Well said! For those that use traditional AV protection a second opinion scanner is mandatory, and both MB and HMP (in my opinion) are among the best. But as you said they do have limitations that I'm fairly certain really aren't being discussed elsewhere.

An issue is also with the rise of malware testing on Youtube- typically malware is run against some product or other, then scans are done typically with MB an HMP and if they say the system is cleaned it is assumed by everyone that this is the case; but this isn't the case at all.

There is one further thing that I didn't mention- HMP uses BD and one other engine. It seems intuitively obvious that if HMP misses certain malware that the engines used would also miss them. Surprisingly this isn't the case at all.

Anyway, time for me to change into my Halloween slut outfit and hit the parties.

 

[hjlbx]

then scans are done typically with MB an HMP and if they say the system is cleaned it is assumed by everyone that this is the case; but this isn't the case at all.

Using companion scanners is a valuable security measure, but a negative scan is not proof positive that a system is clean.

Hell, negative scans from every single scan engine that exists, is not confirmation of a clean system.

A negative scan simply tells the user that the engine didn't detect anything. That is all one can assume from any scan engine.

One hopes the system is clean, but there is no guarantee that it is. That's the best AVs can do at this point in time.

 

[jamescv7]

Scripts are somehow are least priorities unless primarily focus to get samples, which why those blog reports of AV vendors generally influence those common threats to be detected.

 

[Solarquest]

...
And finally to Rajat- Power Eraser is of absolutely no value for Scriptors (trust me).[/QUOTE]

What about Zemana?
Can you please rescan with it next time?
Thank you

 

[Andrew999]

So disappoint on both, and i thought HitmanPro can do ways better than Malwarebytes because it used BitDefender and Kaspersky signature. But it turn out both score below 2 which leave user a big vulnerable for blackhat, and they can fix this by just added them to the signature database. Thanks for the video.

Update: I submit this video onto Malwarebytes Community forum and this is what one of Malwarebytes moderator said.

daledoc1 Malwarebytes moderator wrote this.
"Until a Malwarebytes staff member or other forum expert has a chance to reply, no one security application can possibly target 100% of all known malware.
MBAM specifically does not target "historical" malware.
In fact, as explained here in the Research Center, malware samples older than 3 months are not targeted:
Quote
Disclaimer: We apologize, but we will not be adding corrupted files, archived/collections (Old sample(s) 3months + since file creation) or file infectors. Secondly, we will not add key generators, hacking tools, Joke applications, Casino applications or game cheats unless they contain malicious trojan code.
Such malware falls under the purview of the anti-virus/internet security programs, with their much larger databases.
I'm sure our more expert forum members and staff will have some additional feedback.
Thanks for reporting, "

Malwarebytes fail to detect and remove 12 worms. - Malwarebytes Anti-Malware - Malwarebytes Forum

I think hitman pro isn't as good as it used to be Zemana is the best in my opinion

 

[cruelsister]

Hi Guys- I promise to do a run with Zemana Anti-malware this week using the same malware, and will use the same testing format used in this one (pre-infected system and ZAM as an on-demand second opinion scanner) as a way of comparison.

I would have done it today but for some reason am feeling out of sorts...

 

[done]

Using companion scanners is a valuable security measure, but a negative scan is not proof positive that a system is clean.

Hell, negative scans from every single scan engine that exists, is not confirmation of a clean system.

and not confirmation of dirty system either.
they dont even check startup entry. well most of the reviewers. therefore it is useless.