How safe is malwarebytes for Mac?

[Silly John Fatty]

We're said to be careful what we download, and then we're recommended to download Malwarebytes on our computers … isn't that ironic? How do we know what this app does in the background? Is there a way to verify or track this?

And in the end, if the app is so safe, why is it not available in the Mac App Store?

I find the app suspicious … it's not open source either if I recall correctly. I don't think I would trust this app. I think it's much more likely that an app like this will install some malware.

 

[Cyby-CyberDog]

It’s not ironic.
Malware can ‘infect’ system files not accessible for ‘normal’ apps. To check for malware MalwareBytes needs access to these files. For security reasons App Store regulations do not allow this access.

if you only use apps downloaded from the App Store, MacOS’es built in security tools GateKeeper et al, will be suffucient.

 

[HDFan]

As with any download it is a matter of trust. Do you trust the vendor? Last I heard Apple was still using Malwarebytes when diagnosing problems. If you trust Apple then you can probably trust Malwarebytes.

 

[bogdanw]

For security reasons App Store regulations do not allow this access.

That is false, user can give permission by selecting any folder, including the System one.
Try
Intego VirusBarrier Scanner https://apps.apple.com/app/intego-virusbarrier-scanner/id1200445649
Bitdefender Virus Scanner https://apps.apple.com/app/bitdefender-virus-scanner/id500154009

Malwarebytes can not even protect itself from malware https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/malwarebytes.2305923/post-31342099

 

[Cyby-CyberDog]

That is false, user can give permission by selecting any folder, including the System one.
Try
Intego VirusBarrier Scanner https://apps.apple.com/app/intego-virusbarrier-scanner/id1200445649
Bitdefender Virus Scanner https://apps.apple.com/app/bitdefender-virus-scanner/id500154009

Malwarebytes can not even protect itself from malware https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/malwarebytes.2305923/post-31342099

Please read my reply in context: the reply you are mentioning is about the AppStore rules applying to the acceptation of new apps to the store. Not about installing apps not downloaded from the AppStore.

 

[splifingate]

We're said to be careful what we download, and then we're recommended to download Malwarebytes on our computers … isn't that ironic? How do we know what this app does in the background? Is there a way to verify or track this?

You can use something like Little Snitch, and monitor each and every call out, or in.

And in the end, if the app is so safe, why is it not available in the Mac App Store?

I find the app suspicious … it's not open source either if I recall correctly. I don't think I would trust this app. I think it's much more likely that an app like this will install some malware.

I can guess that Malwarebytes (MB) just likes to have complete control of the distribution of their soft, and undoubtedly enjoys not having to forfeit their potential share of App Store profits

I've been using MB for as many years as I can remember, with many of those paying for a Premium subscription for multiple comps (to use the Real-time Protection (RP), both with Mac and PC). Never have I really had a problem with anything other than feeling like I pay too much $

RP has found a few malicious things in my past, but (IIRC) mostly on the Win installs. I cannot attest to exactly how comprehensive and efficacious MB is as a protector/monitor (you'll find that there are detractors), but I do enjoy another level of protection.

I used to monitor the outgoing/outgoing calls with Little Snitch on just about everything, but have since stopped allowing my self to spend as much time as I once did nurturing my inherent paranoia.

In the end, one has to find some level of trust in the intent to use any software.

Using MB is really no different than using other closed-source offerings, such as BBEdit, Photoshop or Microsoft Word.

 

[bogdanw]

Last I heard Apple was still using Malwarebytes when diagnosing problems.

Any source for that?

Please read my reply in context: the reply you are mentioning is about the AppStore rules applying to the acceptation of new apps to the store. Not about installing apps not downloaded from the AppStore.

Apps do not need to request for Full Disk Access in order to scan for malware.

Malware can ‘infect’ system files not accessible for ‘normal’ apps.

Big Sur, Monterey and Ventura have a “cryptographically signed system volume that protects against tampering.” https://www.macrumors.com/roundup/macos-big-sur/
What system files are you referring to?

 

[Cyby-CyberDog]

Apps do not need to request for Full Disk Access in order to scan for malware.

Malwarebytes may require full disk access permission in macOS in order to scan the entire system and detect and remove malware.
Full disk access permission allows the software to access and scan all the files and directories on your system, including the system volume, which is necessary in order to detect and remove malware that may have infected the system.
To grant full disk access to Malwarebytes, you'll need to go to the System Preferences and then the Security & Privacy section to make the change.

Big Sur, Monterey and Ventura have a “cryptographically signed system volume that protects against tampering.” https://www.macrumors.com/roundup/macos-big-sur/
What system files are you referring to?

The system volume can still be infected by malware in macOS.
The system volume contains important system files and directories, and if it becomes infected, the malware can spread to other parts of the system and cause significant damage.
It is important to keep your system updated with the latest security patches and to be cautious when downloading and installing software from the internet to minimize the risk of infecting the system volume.

 

[bogdanw]

Malwarebytes may require full disk access permission in macOS in order to scan the entire system and detect and remove malware.

Malwarebytes does not scan the whole hard disk. Last time I tested, it didn’t even scan the default downloads folder (~/Downloads).

The system volume can still be infected by malware in macOS.

How can malware infect the read-only cryptographically signed system volume?
Do you have any example of malware doing that? Why would malware even do that? It doesn’t need to.

Please stop spreading misinformation.

"The Mac Malware of 2022 👾 A comprehensive analysis of the year's new malware" https://objective-see.org/blog/blog_0x71.html
"The top 20 most notable Mac malware threats of 2022" https://www.intego.com/mac-security-blog/20-top-apple-malware-threats-in-2022/

 

[Cyby-CyberDog]

Malwarebytes does not scan the whole hard disk. Last time I tested, it didn’t even scan the default downloads folder (~/Downloads).

A quote from support.malwarebytes.com:

The following macOS versions require you to provide Malwarebytes with Full Disk Access:

• macOS Catalina 10.15
• macOS Big Sur 11
• macOS Monterey 12
• macOS Ventura 13

How can malware infect the read-only cryptographically signed system volume?

I stand corrected there!
This is obviously no longer applicable in recent MacOS versions!
(sometimes quickly using a not updated source bites one in the tail)

 

[Fishrrman]

"How safe is malwarebytes for Mac?"

EGADS...

MalwareBytes is fine.
If you haven't used it, try it.
It runs for about 30 days in demo mode.
Then it gives you an option:
- register for the paid version with real-time scanning
or
- convert to "free" version (only scans when you run it).

The free version works well enough for me.

 

[bogdanw]

Once again, proof that Malwarebytes does not scan your hard drive, although it asks and has Full Disk Access. Malware samples in /Applications ~/, ~/Documents, ~/Downloads

 

[Silly John Fatty]

It’s not ironic.
Malware can ‘infect’ system files not accessible for ‘normal’ apps. To check for malware MalwareBytes needs access to these files. For security reasons App Store regulations do not allow this access.

if you only use apps downloaded from the App Store, MacOS’es built in security tools GateKeeper et al, will be suffucient.

I think so too.

As with any download it is a matter of trust. Do you trust the vendor? Last I heard Apple was still using Malwarebytes when diagnosing problems. If you trust Apple then you can probably trust Malwarebytes.

I kind of 50% trust them, but if you're saying Apple uses their software, then it definitely boosts my trust. Where did you hear that Apple was using Malwarebytes? I'd think they have their own software.

That is false, user can give permission by selecting any folder, including the System one.
Try
Intego VirusBarrier Scanner https://apps.apple.com/app/intego-virusbarrier-scanner/id1200445649
Bitdefender Virus Scanner https://apps.apple.com/app/bitdefender-virus-scanner/id500154009

Malwarebytes can not even protect itself from malware https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/malwarebytes.2305923/post-31342099

In that (MacRumors) link, are you saying that Malwarebytes doesn't react because Apple reacted first and that there's therefore nothing to react to from Malwarebytes' side? I've never seen that window pop up by the way, so that's a good sign I guess. Probably didn't have any malware.

You can use something like Little Snitch, and monitor each and every call out, or in.



I can guess that Malwarebytes (MB) just likes to have complete control of the distribution of their soft, and undoubtedly enjoys not having to forfeit their potential share of App Store profits

I've been using MB for as many years as I can remember, with many of those paying for a Premium subscription for multiple comps (to use the Real-time Protection (RP), both with Mac and PC). Never have I really had a problem with anything other than feeling like I pay too much $

RP has found a few malicious things in my past, but (IIRC) mostly on the Win installs. I cannot attest to exactly how comprehensive and efficacious MB is as a protector/monitor (you'll find that there are detractors), but I do enjoy another level of protection.

I used to monitor the outgoing/outgoing calls with Little Snitch on just about everything, but have since stopped allowing my self to spend as much time as I once did nurturing my inherent paranoia.

In the end, one has to find some level of trust in the intent to use any software.

Using MB is really no different than using other closed-source offerings, such as BBEdit, Photoshop or Microsoft Word.

I have Little Snitch in fact, although it's a little bit annoying to set up and everything. But it looks to me like the cleanest solution, although it is (if I recall correctly) also not open source and also sort of "spies" on you.

Also, I'm not doubting that MB can stop malware and protect your system, I'm just wondering if they're not selling some information about you, after all you give them even more access then some hacker would probably have before. And they're a profit-oriented company.

So yes, it's a matter of trust I guess. I ran it and removed it again. Who knows what it really does in the background. And of course that also applies to other apps, like you said.

Malwarebytes may require full disk access permission in macOS in order to scan the entire system and detect and remove malware.
Full disk access permission allows the software to access and scan all the files and directories on your system, including the system volume, which is necessary in order to detect and remove malware that may have infected the system.
To grant full disk access to Malwarebytes, you'll need to go to the System Preferences and then the Security & Privacy section to make the change.

The system volume can still be infected by malware in macOS.
The system volume contains important system files and directories, and if it becomes infected, the malware can spread to other parts of the system and cause significant damage.
It is important to keep your system updated with the latest security patches and to be cautious when downloading and installing software from the internet to minimize the risk of infecting the system volume.

I did exactly that when I ran Malwarebytes yesterday. I had to go to the Security & Privacy section of the System Preferences and had to allow some module to be installed, or something like that. I also installed AdGuard yesterday and it asked me the same.

Do you know if this can be reverted, and if yes, how? I don't even know where it installed these things, it didn't say anything about that. Or are these extensions/modules perhaps automatically deleted when MB is uninstalled?

Malwarebytes does not scan the whole hard disk. Last time I tested, it didn’t even scan the default downloads folder (~/Downloads).


How can malware infect the read-only cryptographically signed system volume?
Do you have any example of malware doing that? Why would malware even do that? It doesn’t need to.

Please stop spreading misinformation.

"The Mac Malware of 2022 👾 A comprehensive analysis of the year's new malware" https://objective-see.org/blog/blog_0x71.html
"The top 20 most notable Mac malware threats of 2022" https://www.intego.com/mac-security-blog/20-top-apple-malware-threats-in-2022/

Do you know if there's a way to make it scan the whole system? Wouldn't it be kind of useless if it couldn't do that? I know that only the Windows version allows you to select specific drives and disks.

A quote from support.malwarebytes.com:


I stand corrected there!
This is obviously no longer applicable in recent MacOS versions!
(sometimes quickly using a not updated source bites one in the tail)

I still have High Sierra, so I guess it is in mine.

 

[Apple_Robert]

I think so too.



I kind of 50% trust them, but if you're saying Apple uses their software, then it definitely boosts my trust. Where did you hear that Apple was using Malwarebytes? I'd think they have their own software.



In that (MacRumors) link, are you saying that Malwarebytes doesn't react because Apple reacted first and that there's therefore nothing to react to from Malwarebytes' side? I've never seen that window pop up by the way, so that's a good sign I guess. Probably didn't have any malware.



I have Little Snitch in fact, although it's a little bit annoying to set up and everything. But it looks to me like the cleanest solution, although it is (if I recall correctly) also not open source and also sort of "spies" on you.

Also, I'm not doubting that MB can stop malware and protect your system, I'm just wondering if they're not selling some information about you, after all you give them even more access then some hacker would probably have before. And they're a profit-oriented company.

So yes, it's a matter of trust I guess. I ran it and removed it again. Who knows what it really does in the background. And of course that also applies to other apps, like you said.



I did exactly that when I ran Malwarebytes yesterday. I had to go to the Security & Privacy section of the System Preferences and had to allow some module to be installed, or something like that. I also installed AdGuard yesterday and it asked me the same.

Do you know if this can be reverted, and if yes, how? I don't even know where it installed these things, it didn't say anything about that. Or are these extensions/modules perhaps automatically deleted when MB is uninstalled?



Do you know if there's a way to make it scan the whole system? Wouldn't it be kind of useless if it couldn't do that? I know that only the Windows version allows you to select specific drives and disks.



I still have High Sierra, so I guess it is in mine.

Why do you think "Little Snitch" spies on you? Do you have any evidence showing such behavior ?

 

[KaliYoni]

I still have High Sierra

I'd say if you are highly concerned about security and privacy, which your recent threads seem to indicate, you should update your Mac to at least Monterey if it is capable enough. Apple is currently only supporting Ventura, Monterey, and Big Sur, with Ventura often receiving security updates days or weeks before the other two.

Your questions about various utilities and applications are legitimate, of course, but a critical line of defense against attackers is the OS itself. Most important, beginning with Catalina, Apple made changes to the built-in macOS malware removal components that have not been carried back to the earlier versions of macOS.

If you're interested, more detail on X-Protect is here:

Everything you need to know about XProtect’s malware protection

All about XProtect, and its new sibling XProtect Remediator, which macOS they come with, what they do, and how to check them and keep them up to date.

eclecticlight.co

Can you rely on macOS Ventura for malware protection?

Samples of four malicious software downloaded and run on macOS 13.1. Could it detect and block them effectively? Or do you need 3rd party protection?

eclecticlight.co

----------
ETA: something else to keep in mind is that open source code is not a guarantee of safety on its own, even with high numbers of users or very widespread adoption. For example, many major breaches of corporate systems have resulted from vulnerabilities in low level, infrequently reviewed or patched components in open source software, such as time lookup functions. These components are considered "boring" by developers so even when a bug is discovered, there can be a lack of interest in writing a patch and/or no clear responsibility for making a fix.

Here's an article with some stats, if you want to know more:

Open source software security vulnerabilities exist for over four years before detection

GitHub research suggests there is a need to reduce the time between bug detection and fixes.

www.zdnet.com

 

[Silly John Fatty]

I'd say if you are highly concerned about security and privacy, which your recent threads seem to indicate, you should update your Mac to at least Monterey if it is capable enough. Apple is currently only supporting Ventura, Monterey, and Big Sur, with Ventura often receiving security updates days before the other two.

Your questions about various utilities and applications are legitimate, of course, but a critical line of defense against attackers is the OS itself. Most important, beginning with Catalina, Apple made changes to the built-in macOS malware removal components that have not been carried back to the earlier versions of macOS.

If you're interested, more detail on X-Protect is here:

Everything you need to know about XProtect’s malware protection

All about XProtect, and its new sibling XProtect Remediator, which macOS they come with, what they do, and how to check them and keep them up to date.

eclecticlight.co

Can you rely on macOS Ventura for malware protection?

Samples of four malicious software downloaded and run on macOS 13.1. Could it detect and block them effectively? Or do you need 3rd party protection?

eclecticlight.co

Thank you! Yes, I've started a few threads in this direction lately, I wouldn't say I'm *highly* concerned, but I'm concerned, as I don't want to give these companies or anyone data about myself that they could use to enrich themselves or who knows what (or even harming my personality and my business if one day I decided to start one).

So basically I'm creating all these threads because I'm occupying myself with this topic this week (it's privacy week you could say), and I hope I'm done fast with all of this so I can move on to other work. I'm a do-it-all-at-once-guy I guess.

I can't have Monterey right now (max. Mojave), so I'll try to update to that one, but my plan is to get a new Mac this year anyway.

Why do you think "Little Snitch" spies on you? Do you have any evidence showing such behavior ?

If I recall correctly you have to give it very deep access to your system and you don't know exactly what it's doing. It may have changed or I may be wrong. I'll have to read the terms and conditions as well as the privacy policy again.

 

[KaliYoni]

So basically I'm creating all these threads because I'm occupying myself with this topic this week (it's privacy week you could say

If you're doing a deep dive into privacy and security, this book is a lot better than a lot of the "advice" you'll find on social media and YouTube:

Data and Goliath: The Hidden Battles to Collect Your Data and Control Your World

Data and Goliath: The Hidden Battles to Collect Your Data and Control Your World

www.amazon.com

----------
ETA: even though Data and Goliath was not published in the past couple of years, the author is a longtime security and privacy practitioner and the concepts, principles, and analysis are still highly relevant to today's environment. Anybody who reads the book–and any of Schneier’s work, really–will be able to make more informed decisions and not have to blindly trust claims from anonymous people on the Internet.

 

[Silly John Fatty]

If you're doing a deep dive into privacy and security, this book is a lot better than a lot of the "advice" you'll find on social media and YouTube:

Data and Goliath: The Hidden Battles to Collect Your Data and Control Your World

Data and Goliath: The Hidden Battles to Collect Your Data and Control Your World

www.amazon.com

This is the kind of thing I was thinking about, thanks for the recommendation! (altough it's from 2015, who knows what has happened since then or what the actual state of things is. I don't know how much of that book is still up to date and if anything crucial is maybe missing)

 

[HDFan]

Any source for that?

I kind of 50% trust them, but if you're saying Apple uses their software, then it definitely boosts my trust. Where did you hear that Apple was using Malwarebytes? I'd think they have their own software.

1. Told by a support engineer maybe a year ago to run it when I had a problem. I was told that it was the one they used.

2. There are other posts which mention that Apple has customers use it. Not finding them right now.

Don't have any current data points.

Here's an old reference:

"She then asked me to install malwarebytes to scan for malware."

Apple Support - Malwarebytes and Cleanmym… - Apple Community

discussions.apple.com

 

[splifingate]

....Little Snitch...also sort of "spies" on you.

Hmmm . . . like (for example) storing my name, email, address, phone, license key, and payment method . . . or in other matters?

Care to elabourate?

I really appreciate--and understand--your vigilance John. I go to great lengths to enforce and maintain the security of my little network, and it's become almost a part-time job. *sigh*

One strategy I developed was to find a homogeneous level of trust in the things that I use to learn other things. These are all just basically tools.

A hammer can help hang a beautiful painting, or it can (as it did this past weekend while in the process of installing a new dishwasher) smash my finger. I just used it the wrong way this weekend!

One could, I presume, modify the filters in Little Snitch (LS) to actively allow all sorts of malignancy to have it's way, but that's really not what the Devs intend/ed.

It is in my trust that they wrote the soft to prevent such things <smile>

wrt MalwareBytes (MB), the granularity of the analysis that one finds in LS is really not there, and another level of trust is needed to become developed: is it doing what it says it will do? You'll have to be the judge of that.

Your mileage may vary on that matter, but there's little reason to believe that the effort that went into such a thing was driven by data harvesting. If MB becomes as large an institution as, say, Microsoft, or Facebook, it may very well slippery-slope into the data-collection space, but it is in my trust that we really don't have to worry about that far-fetched possibility with such a small, specific tool <s>

Best of luck in your pursuits, John

 

[Silly John Fatty]

Hmmm . . . like (for example) storing my name, email, address, phone, license key, and payment method . . . or in other matters?

Care to elabourate?

I really appreciate--and understand--your vigilance John. I go to great lengths to enforce and maintain the security of my little network, and it's become almost a part-time job. *sigh*

One strategy I developed was to find a homogeneous level of trust in the things that I use to learn other things. These are all just basically tools.

A hammer can help hang a beautiful painting, or it can (as it did this past weekend while in the process of installing a new dishwasher) smash my finger. I just used it the wrong way this weekend!

One could, I presume, modify the filters in Little Snitch (LS) to actively allow all sorts of malignancy to have it's way, but that's really not what the Devs intend/ed.

It is in my trust that they wrote the soft to prevent such things <smile>

wrt MalwareBytes (MB), the granularity of the analysis that one finds in LS is really not there, and another level of trust is needed to become developed: is it doing what it says it will do? You'll have to be the judge of that.

Your mileage may vary on that matter, but there's little reason to believe that the effort that went into such a thing was driven by data harvesting. If MB becomes as large an institution as, say, Microsoft, or Facebook, it may very well slippery-slope into the data-collection space, but it is in my trust that we really don't have to worry about that far-fetched possibility with such a small, specific tool <s>

Best of luck in your pursuits, John

Thanks!

I will at some point re-read the privacy policy as well as the terms and conditions of LS and will report here! You're probably right about what you say, but if I remember correctly, LS had access to a lot of critical stuff. Doesn't mean they do something with that of course. But we don't know it exactly, because it's not open source as far as I know.

I like open source better for these reasons. It shows there's nothing to hide basically!

And as for MB … I do believe it is already one of those big institutions. Of course not like Microsoft or Facebook, but it is quite a thing I believe, and it's business model is somewhere sort of the business with fear and security.

Best of luck to you too

 

[Apple_Robert]

Thanks!

I will at some point re-read the privacy policy as well as the terms and conditions of LS and will report here! You're probably right about what you say, but if I remember correctly, LS had access to a lot of critical stuff. Doesn't mean they do something with that of course. But we don't know it exactly, because it's not open source as far as I know.

I like open source better for these reasons. It shows there's nothing to hide basically!

And as for MB … I do believe it is already one of those big institutions. Of course not like Microsoft or Facebook, but it is quite a thing I believe, and it's business model is somewhere sort of the business with fear and security.

Best of luck to you too

Unless you can read code and understand what you are reading and how it applies etc., saying you like open source here is rather meaningless.

You seem to be reticent about all options listed in thread. You seem to be on the edge of conspiracy notions with some of the apps out of fear. There is nothing wrong with being cautious. It is quite another to project you're worried biased into privacy statements and functions of parts of the apps, which is what you have been doing. Until you educate yourself and understand how the apps mentioned here work, you are going to be stuck in a state of limbo and that is not a good place to be.

There is no reason to be fearful of LS spying on you on the computer. It has been around for years and has been put through its software paces by many, many people, including security experts. It doesn't security collect data and phone come to some secret cloud to store user data. The reason I know that it doesn't, is because I have done my research and verified its actions and integrity before buying the app.

There is also nothing nefarious about AdGuard, which I have also used and tested.

Asking for suggestions like you have done here is great so long as you do something with the information shared. Time for you to do your own homework and test apps yourself. See which one fits your needs best.

 

[Silly John Fatty]

Unless you can read code and understand what you are reading and how it applies etc., saying you like open source here is rather meaningless.

You seem to be reticent about all options listed in thread. You seem to be on the edge of conspiracy notions with some of the apps out of fear. There is nothing wrong with being cautious. It is quite another to project you're worried biased into privacy statements and functions of parts of the apps, which is what you have been doing. Until you educate yourself and understand how the apps mentioned here work, you are going to be stuck in a state of limbo and that is not a good place to be.

There is no reason to be fearful of LS spying on you on the computer. It has been around for years and has been put through its software paces by many, many people, including security experts. It doesn't security collect data and phone come to some secret cloud to store user data. The reason I know that it doesn't, is because I have done my research and verified its actions and integrity before buying the app.

There is also nothing nefarious about AdGuard, which I have also used and tested.

Asking for suggestions like you have done here is great so long as you do something with the information shared. Time for you to do your own homework and test apps yourself. See which one fits your needs best.

I know that I can't judge the code by myself, but the fact alone it's open source increases the probability that others have verified it and also increases the safety. I think that's a very strong point. I just like transparency in general with these kinds of things. It's like in politics. Sure you can trust, but would you not rather have transparency? It's the exact same thing.

 

[hg.wells]

I know that I can't judge the code by myself, but the fact alone it's open source increases the probability that others have verified it and also increases the safety. I think that's a very strong point. I just like transparency in general with these kinds of things. It's like in politics. Sure you can trust, but would you not rather have transparency? It's the exact same thing.

It all depends on the type of application, would I want my banks application to be open source? Definitely not!

Open source software definitely has it place, but by being open makes it easier to be exploited.

 

[davegoody]

We're said to be careful what we download, and then we're recommended to download Malwarebytes on our computers … isn't that ironic? How do we know what this app does in the background? Is there a way to verify or track this?

And in the end, if the app is so safe, why is it not available in the Mac App Store?

I find the app suspicious … it's not open source either if I recall correctly. I don't think I would trust this app. I think it's much more likely that an app like this will install some malware.

As a seasoned IT Pro, I have been using Malwarebytes on Windows machines for many years. The free version is perfect, doesn't take up the same sort of resources that a typical AntiVirus package would and is amazingly effective at eradicating malware. The occasional manual scan is a good thing. Whilst I know that many people (including seemingly commenters on this thread) only download apps from the App Store, that's not always practical for professional users, and having something that can help keep you clean is only a good thing. I give my Macs a twice-monthly scan just to be safe.