MalwareBytes or SpyHunter

[kb5zue]

Hello everyone, I have tried running both MalwareBytes and SpyHunter and can't decide which one provides the better service.  Of course, I am not running them both at the same time but I have used both of them at separate times and just can't decide which is better.  Would really like to read some other opinions and points of view on this situation.  I never really thought much about it until yesterday when I came across the so-called "Zeus" virus while browsing the internet with the Google Chrome browser.  I was using MalwareBytes at the time and that took care of it but I would like to know what other people think.

 

So, which one?  MalwareBytes or SpyHunter by Enigma Software.

[Tabs]

1 minute ago, kb5zue said:

Hello everyone, I have tried running both MalwareBytes and SpyHunter and can't decide which one provides the better service.  Of course, I am not running them both at the same time but I have used both of them at separate times and just can't decide which is better.  Would really like to read some other opinions and points of view on this situation.  I never really thought much about it until yesterday when I came across the so-called "Zeus" virus while browsing the internet with the Google Chrome browser.  I was using MalwareBytes at the time and that took care of it but I would like to know what other people think.

 

So, which one?  MalwareBytes or SpyHunter by Enigma Software.

I am very untrustworthy of a piece of software trying to do so many things. 

 

MBAM used to purely be a partner program for a real antivirus. Ever since the developers tried to make it something more, I can no longer recommend it as a sole provider of computer protection. It's still useful as an offline malware scanner.

 

Spyhunter is something I've barely heard of, not since my early days of working with computers. I vaguely remember it helping me clean up a Windows XP laptop with a Pentium 3... and nothing since. Take from that what you will. It may be a regional thing.

[Enderman]

Never heard of spyhunter before.

[kb5zue]

1 minute ago, Tabs said:

I am very untrustworthy of a piece of software trying to do so many things. 

 

MBAM used to purely be a partner program for a real antivirus. Ever since the developers tried to make it something more, I can no longer recommend it as a sole provider of computer protection. It's still useful as an offline malware scanner.

 

Spyhunter is something I've barely heard of, not since my early days of working with computers. I vaguely remember it helping me clean up a Windows XP laptop with a Pentium 3... and nothing since. Take from that what you will. It may be a regional thing.

So, from what I read, you are basically saying don't use either one.  I can understand that but if I'm not going to use either MalwareBytes "or" SpyHunter, what do you recommend?  What are you using?  I do use Windows Defender full time but Defender did not catch that stupid Zeus thing yesterday so I am a little hesitant to carry it further.

[HunterAP]

IMO I use MBAM and SuperAntiSpyware, I'd get the Pro version of MBAM since it comes with some nice features (at least from what I've seen when using the free trial of the pro version). No anti-virus is perfect, and they each have their own quirks and issues.

 

I also never heard of spyhunter before.

[kb5zue]

Hey guys, thanks for the help.  Looks like I will give MB a shot and see how it goes.  Thanks.

[Tabs]

4 minutes ago, kb5zue said:

So, from what I read, you are basically saying don't use either one.  I can understand that but if I'm not going to use either MalwareBytes "or" SpyHunter, what do you recommend?  What are you using?  I do use Windows Defender full time but Defender did not catch that stupid Zeus thing yesterday so I am a little hesitant to carry it further.

I'm not telling you not to use either one mate, I'm telling you I don't use either one.

 

I use a modicum of common sense in what I do online, and I have Windows Defender to scan files I download from trusted sources. I've found that antivirus and antimalware suites cause way more problems than they solve. In my opinion, they also lead to a certain lack of respect - a kind of "if it's there, I can do whatever" attitude. I haven't cleaned a single computer of malware that didn't already have an antivirus suite on it. It seems to make regular people think they are impervious to threats and disengage their brain when using their computer.

[Jimkirk363]

I Use malwarebytes and Spybot.

[kb5zue]

1 minute ago, Tabs said:

I'm not telling you not to use either one mate, I'm telling you I don't use either one.

 

I use a modicum of common sense in what I do online, and I have Windows Defender to scan files I download from trusted sources. I've found that antivirus and antimalware suites cause way more problems than they solve. In my opinion, they also lead to a certain lack of respect - a kind of "if it's there, I can do whatever" attitude. I haven't cleaned a single computer of malware that didn't already have an antivirus suite on it. It seems to make regular people think they are impervious to threats and disengage their brain when using their computer.

I'm with you on this and I wouldn't have this question if it wasn't for the Zeus thing I ran across yesterday.  I was browsing for a parts place shopping for new headlights for my 2001 Dodge 3/4 ton diesel truck.  As soon as I clicked the link to the website from a google search the Zeus thing popped up.  Never ran across that before so it was new to me.  Just couldn't figure out why Defender didn't catch it.

 

I guess the wording on my original question was a little off.  Should have read something like "If I have to use an anti-virus, which should I use?"

 

[Tabs]

22 minutes ago, kb5zue said:

I'm with you on this and I wouldn't have this question if it wasn't for the Zeus thing I ran across yesterday.  I was browsing for a parts place shopping for new headlights for my 2001 Dodge 3/4 ton diesel truck.  As soon as I clicked the link to the website from a google search the Zeus thing popped up.  Never ran across that before so it was new to me.  Just couldn't figure out why Defender didn't catch it.

 

I guess the wording on my original question was a little off.  Should have read something like "If I have to use an anti-virus, which should I use?"

 

 

The reason it was "caught" when you were browsing is because these invasive anti-malware programs install extensions in your web browser (and every other part of your operating system) to flag threats that might never ever materialise. The upside of this is that they may - repeat may - find things that your main antivirus never finds. The downside is that your entire computing experience is degraded in doing so. If the Zeus executable never got downloaded and executed on your machine, Windows Defender could never have detected it. 

 

I have had to deal with problems way outside the realm of viruses, malware and other badware and the root cause was the "antivirus" suite that the customer installed on their machine. Problems connecting to certain sites, issues accessing legitimate files, even outright system corruption...

 

If you're careful and forthright enough to be able to run a secure, patched OS and web browser, then using anything more than Windows Defender - which I trust only because I know it would absolutely cripple Microsoft if they ever had a false positive that broke Windows due to Defender - is completely unnecessary. 

 

Edit: It's also worth noting that Windows Defender doesn't use any hidden or unauthorised system calls to scan and detect malware. Third party antivirus use these, to the detriment of users, and it causes legitimate problems. Microsoft has even released a continually-updated support page dealing with these, since January 2018. It was supposed to be a one-time thing in January, and then needed updated in March and April to confirm that they had been "fixed" but that other problems may arise from unsupported products.

 

[kb5zue]

15 minutes ago, Tabs said:

 

The reason it was "caught" when you were browsing is because these invasive anti-malware programs install extensions in your web browser (and every other part of your operating system) to flag threats that might never ever materialise. The upside of this is that they may - repeat may - find things that your main antivirus never finds. The downside is that your entire computing experience is degraded in doing so. If the Zeus executable never got downloaded and executed on your machine, Windows Defender could never have detected it. 

 

I have had to deal with problems way outside the realm of viruses, malware and other badware and the root cause was the "antivirus" suite that the customer installed on their machine. Problems connecting to certain sites, issues accessing legitimate files, even outright system corruption...

 

If you're careful and forthright enough to be able to run a secure, patched OS and web browser, then using anything more than Windows Defender - which I trust only because I know it would absolutely cripple Microsoft if they ever had a false positive that broke Windows due to Defender - is completely unnecessary. 

 

Edit: It's also worth noting that Windows Defender doesn't use any hidden or unauthorised system calls to scan and detect malware. Third party antivirus use these, to the detriment of users, and it causes legitimate problems. Microsoft has even released a continually-updated support page dealing with these, since January 2018. It was supposed to be a one-time thing in January, and then needed updated in March and April to confirm that they had been "fixed" but that other problems may arise from unsupported products.

 

Thanks for the insight.  If there is one thing that I do take care of, it's constantly checking to make sure that my windows o.s. and the windows defender are always up-2-date.  Thanks for the help, really preciate it.