MalwareBytes for Mac

[keysofanxiety]

Good morning/afternoon/evening all,

I hope this thread finds you in jolly spirits. So it looks like MalwareBytes for Mac has been released and we're in two minds whether to update our OS X image with this software.

Normally malware issues on OS X are few and far between (well, compared to the myriad of issues we get on Windows computers), and in each instance we run Avast & AdwareMedic which always seems to get rid of any infections. It looks like AdwareMedic has now joined the MalwareBytes family so that's immediately promising.

My question is mainly:

- Does MalwareBytes for Mac pick up both Windows & Mac infections?
- Is it a case of you just run a full scan and it fixes everything (as there are far less points of infection to scan for on OS X), or in your experience are there some things it doesn't pick up?
- Does it get rid of PUPs like MacKeeper or will they still have to be manually removed?

I appreciate it hasn't been out for long, so feedback may be limited. Nonetheless, I'm itching to try it out, and I'll definitely update this thread with my opinion of the software, if I get any calls about an infected Mac -- though that's highly unlikely to happen any time soon.

Any reviews or personal experiences that you can offer would be most helpful!

Thank you all for your time.

 

[maflynn]

I don't find the need for such apps on my Mac. My only opinion is that at this stage, these applications only slow down the computers and do not provide any benefit

 

[MisterMe]

Good morning/afternoon/evening all,

I hope this thread finds you in jolly spirits. So it looks like MalwareBytes for Mac has been released and we're in two minds whether to update our OS X image with this software.

Normally malware issues on OS X are few and far between (well, compared to the myriad of issues we get on Windows computers), and in each instance we run Avast & AdwareMedic which always seems to get rid of any infections. It looks like AdwareMedic has now joined the MalwareBytes family so that's immediately promising.

My question is mainly:

- Does MalwareBytes for Mac pick up both Windows & Mac infections?
- Is it a case of you just run a full scan and it fixes everything (as there are far less points of infection to scan for on OS X), or in your experience are there some things it doesn't pick up?
- Does it get rid of PUPs like MacKeeper or will they still have to be manually removed?

I appreciate it hasn't been out for long, so feedback may be limited. Nonetheless, I'm itching to try it out, and I'll definitely update this thread with my opinion of the software, if I get any calls about an infected Mac -- though that's highly unlikely to happen any time soon.

Any reviews or personal experiences that you can offer would be most helpful!

Thank you all for your time.

You are correct that MalwareBytes for Mac is the new name of AdwareMedic. To the best of my knowledge, adware is technically not malware--except that it is. You tend to get adware [often] from [formerly] legitimate sources like c|net. In the case of c|net, it wraps legitimate software in proprietary adware-laden installers. Knowing that each installer also installs adware by default gives you the option not to install it. Most users are unaware of what c|net has done and are likely to be victims of its scheme. Once you are aware, then you may avoid installing adware and may manually remove it if you know that adware has been installed.

The way adware works is platform-specific. Unlike a virus, adware does not self-propagate or self-duplicate. The bottomline is that the ability to detect Windows adware on a Mac would serve no useful purpose.

I recommend AdwareMedic will probably recommend MalwareBytes for Mac. If you don't want anti-adware utlities on your Mac, then restrict yourself to downloading software from the Mac App Store or directly from the developers' website. Do not download software from third-party websites. Period.

 

[Dark Void]

Do people really use Avast for Mac? I thought the detection rates were horrible.

 

[keysofanxiety]

Do people really use Avast for Mac? I thought the detection rates were horrible.

Better than Sophos, believe it or not. Plus Sophos keeps getting bricked every time there's an OS. We're legally obliged to supply antivirus and we've found Avast is the lightest on resources and doesn't conflict with any assistive technology (and it's free), so that's what we use. It seems to detect quite a few things whenever there are viruses/malware on people's Macs. However Sophos & VirusBarrier X6 have been the only alternatives we've used, so I can't speak for how good other AV applications are.

You are correct that MalwareBytes for Mac is the new name of AdwareMedic. To the best of my knowledge, adware is technically not malware--except that it is. You tend to get adware [often] from [formerly] legitimate sources like c|net. In the case of c|net, it wraps legitimate software in proprietary adware-laden installers. Knowing that each installer also installs adware by default gives you the option not to install it. Most users are unaware of what c|net has done and are likely to be victims of its scheme. Once you are aware, then you may avoid installing adware and may manually remove it if you know that adware has been installed.

The way adware works is platform-specific. Unlike a virus, adware does not self-propagate or self-duplicate. The bottomline is that the ability to detect Windows adware on a Mac would serve no useful purpose.

I recommend AdwareMedic will probably recommend MalwareBytes for Mac. If you don't want anti-adware utlities on your Mac, then restrict yourself to downloading software from the Mac App Store or directly from the developers' website. Do not download software from third-party websites. Period.

Thanks for the post MisterMe, though the question was more related to how good MWB for Mac is, as we're in two minds whether we should have it on our OS X image (so it goes out on all newly-supplied Macs by default). I myself don't use any antivirus on my Mac, though we're obliged to supply something. Avast is there as the antivirus on our images at the moment (no complaints with Avast, compared to the myriad of issues we got with Sophos), and I'm just curious how people's experiences of MWB for Mac has been – whether it's resource-intensive, or keeps prompting to sign up for the Pro version – anything like that, which cause a client to call with a query/problem. Just to make sure installing wouldn't do more harm than good. Stuff like that really.

 

[Dark Void]

Better than Sophos, believe it or not. Plus Sophos keeps getting bricked every time there's an OS. We're legally obliged to supply antivirus and we've found Avast is the lightest on resources and doesn't conflict with any assistive technology (and it's free), so that's what we use. It seems to detect quite a few things whenever there are viruses/malware on people's Macs. However Sophos & VirusBarrier X6 have been the only alternatives we've used, so I can't speak for how good other AV applications are.

Thanks for getting back to me. I did not want my post to sound like it was from an arrogant point of view as I was asking a genuine question.

I used to use ClamXav but it recently requires payment. Would you recommend Avast, or do you use it because there is basically not much of an option?

 

[keysofanxiety]

Thanks for getting back to me. I did not want my post to sound like it was from an arrogant point of view as I was asking a genuine question.

I used to use ClamXav but it recently requires payment. Would you recommend Avast, or do you use it because there is basically not much of an option?

Hi Dark Void,

Apologies for my belated reply, and honestly no need to worry as your question didn't come across badly

We only supplied Kaspersky for Mac on a handful of older systems (~2010), so honestly we didn't have enough copies out there for me to make a reasoned comment on how good that is. VirusBarrier X6 was paid software, which was extremely resource-heavy and blocked some apps from updating or working correctly. It was more designed with the UI to look sleek and impressive than actually do its job. Sincerely recommend against it.

Sophos was free and light on resources, but constantly had the problem of refusing to update definitions, even after uninstall/reinstall. Their support team was useless as well and their forums were plagued with the same problems we had. So we looked around for a different free AV.

Avast is free, though unlike the Windows version, you don't have to register/subscribe to keep it free. It seems light on resources and I haven't had any complaints about it. No conflicts with AT and no issues with it working consistently. The UI is easy to use and it detected infections that Sophos didn't.

So yeah to be honest, if you're looking to have an AV on Mac, from my experience I'd probably suggest Avast - possibly in tandem with MalwareBytes for Mac, though at the moment I can't personally attest how good or reliable MWB is.

 

[fhall1]

Hi Dark Void,

Apologies for my belated reply, and honestly no need to worry as your question didn't come across badly

We only supplied Kaspersky for Mac on a handful of older systems (~2010), so honestly we didn't have enough copies out there for me to make a reasoned comment on how good that is. VirusBarrier X6 was paid software, which was extremely resource-heavy and blocked some apps from updating or working correctly. It was more designed with the UI to look sleek and impressive than actually do its job. Sincerely recommend against it.

Sophos was free and light on resources, but constantly had the problem of refusing to update definitions, even after uninstall/reinstall. Their support team was useless as well and their forums were plagued with the same problems we had. So we looked around for a different free AV.

Avast is free, though unlike the Windows version, you don't have to register/subscribe to keep it free. It seems light on resources and I haven't had any complaints about it. No conflicts with AT and no issues with it working consistently. The UI is easy to use and it detected infections that Sophos didn't.

So yeah to be honest, if you're looking to have an AV on Mac, from my experience I'd probably suggest Avast - possibly in tandem with MalwareBytes for Mac, though at the moment I can't personally attest how good or reliable MWB is.

When ClamxAV went "paid" I did some quick searches and settled on Sophos a couple weeks ago. Didn't know about the poorer detection and update issues - thanks. One thing I'd ask about Avast - can you set it to do a scheduled scan on only certain folders? I like to only scan my Downloads, Documents, and Applications. Also, can you do an "on-demand" scan of a file by right-clicking the file and selecting it as a "Service"? Sophos does both these things - but I'd switch if Avast does them too and is better at updating signatures.

 

[keysofanxiety]

When ClamxAV went "paid" I did some quick searches and settled on Sophos a couple weeks ago. Didn't know about the poorer detection and update issues - thanks. One thing I'd ask about Avast - can you set it to do a scheduled scan on only certain folders? I like to only scan my Downloads, Documents, and Applications. Also, can you do an "on-demand" scan of a file by right-clicking the file and selecting it as a "Service"? Sophos does both these things - but I'd switch if Avast does them too and is better at updating signatures.

Not that I know of I'm afraid, though to be honest if you're not having any update issues with Sophos I'd stick to that. They may well have fixed the update problem in a recent update, yet the issue was an intermittently recurring problem from Lion>Yosemite so I don't have much confidence in going back to it. Where I can avoid a customer complaining, I will - Avast isn't broken so no need to fix.

Sophos really is good however, and it seems to work much better for you so I'd definitely keep it! It's just the update issue that caused us to ditch it. I'd have loved to keep it myself. In all instances the majority of common infections (PUPs, plugins, addons, redirections) that I encountered had to be cleaned by Adware Medic anyway, as Avast/Sophos wouldn't pick up all of them or doesn't normally scan for that sort of stuff. As Adware Medic is now merged with MalwareBytes for Mac, I'd suggest throwing on MWB in tandem with Sophos if you're concerned about protection.

The detection rate with Avast/Sophos is difficult to judge because both of them tend to also scan for Windows infections. However with the common infections (MacKeeper and all that goes with it, etc), I did seem to find that Avast picked up a little more than Sophos. Though that's not to say if it's actively better, because I don't have any sources to back up my experience. For all I know the definitions on Sophos may well be better.

I've got a call on Monday about an infection on a Mac so I'll update this thread then when I've had an opportunity to try MWB and let you know how good it is!

In all instances though, the best virus/malware protection is the squishy thing using the computer.

 

[fhall1]

Thanks for the great response and I look forward to your followup to the infection call. I checked my Sophos logs and (knock-wood) to date it has not had any issues doing auto-updates. It seems to be doing what I need it to do so far, so I'll take your recommendation and stay with it until I run into problems. I also got rid of Adware Medic in favor of Malwarebytes - it seems to be working fine also.

 

[Dark Void]

Hi Dark Void,

Apologies for my belated reply, and honestly no need to worry as your question didn't come across badly

We only supplied Kaspersky for Mac on a handful of older systems (~2010), so honestly we didn't have enough copies out there for me to make a reasoned comment on how good that is. VirusBarrier X6 was paid software, which was extremely resource-heavy and blocked some apps from updating or working correctly. It was more designed with the UI to look sleek and impressive than actually do its job. Sincerely recommend against it.

Sophos was free and light on resources, but constantly had the problem of refusing to update definitions, even after uninstall/reinstall. Their support team was useless as well and their forums were plagued with the same problems we had. So we looked around for a different free AV.

Avast is free, though unlike the Windows version, you don't have to register/subscribe to keep it free. It seems light on resources and I haven't had any complaints about it. No conflicts with AT and no issues with it working consistently. The UI is easy to use and it detected infections that Sophos didn't.

So yeah to be honest, if you're looking to have an AV on Mac, from my experience I'd probably suggest Avast - possibly in tandem with MalwareBytes for Mac, though at the moment I can't personally attest how good or reliable MWB is.

Thank you much for your reply.

I have used both MWB and Avast on Windows and am entirely familiar with both. These two are what most Windows users seem to use as a matter of fact.

Have you tried MWB for Mac yet at least? In regards to Avast, does it run in the background like it does on Windows, and does it therefore have a menubar icon?

 

[keysofanxiety]

Thank you much for your reply.

I have used both MWB and Avast on Windows and am entirely familiar with both. These two are what most Windows users seem to use as a matter of fact.

Have you tried MWB for Mac yet at least? In regards to Avast, does it run in the background like it does on Windows, and does it therefore have a menubar icon?

I haven't used it for Mac yet! I've got a call for some malware on a Mac on Monday so I'll be installing it and updating this thread then - hopefully the computer's horrifically infected so we can see how much stuff MWB picks up/cleans

If the Windows version's anything to go off, it should be great.

I'll get some screenshots and stuff too. Speak with you then!

 

[Dark Void]

I haven't used it for Mac yet! I've got a call for some malware on a Mac on Monday so I'll be installing it and updating this thread then - hopefully the computer's horrifically infected so we can see how much stuff MWB picks up/cleans

If the Windows version's anything to go off, it should be great.

I'll get some screenshots and stuff too. Speak with you then!

Thanks very much, please tag me or quote me when you post back, looking forward to it.

 

[fhall1]

Thank you much for your reply.

I have used both MWB and Avast on Windows and am entirely familiar with both. These two are what most Windows users seem to use as a matter of fact.

Have you tried MWB for Mac yet at least? In regards to Avast, does it run in the background like it does on Windows, and does it therefore have a menubar icon?

It does not run in the background, it runs just like Adware Medic did. You execute it, tell it to Scan, then it either finds something or not, then it's done. If you close it, there is no process left running in the background to constantly "watch" for an infection....and even if the window is left open it's not watching files as they're accessed or downloaded.

 

[Dark Void]

It does not run in the background, it runs just like Adware Medic did. You execute it, tell it to Scan, then it either finds something or not, then it's done. If you close it, there is no process left running in the background to constantly "watch" for an infection....and even if the window is left open it's not watching files as they're accessed or downloaded.

Thanks for that information, I understand what you mean of course but should mention that I have never used Adware Medic, only ClamXav in regards to Mac.

 

[Toltepeceno]

I am downloading it right now to check it. If it's like adwaremedic it doesn't slow down anything, on demand, and to me it's worth it. I started having pop up ads and ran adware medic, it hit on a safari extension I had and when I removed it the ads stopped. So while I don't think it's worthwhile to run something constantly on demand like adwaremedic is good. I don't remember what the extension was but I downloaded it from the extension link in safari.

Yep, it's the same as adwaremedic. To me it's a necessity as it finds adware and it's on demand, not a full time scanner.

I have malwarebytes and panda free together on all of the relative's windows. I know, panda went downhill but they are back and the free one now is very good and uses less resources than avg or avast. Had a rash of them getting the moneypack virus on their windows (which is not really a virus), with these two I have not had to remove any more ....or anything for that matter.

 

[MisterMe]

....

Thanks for the post MisterMe, though the question was more related to how good MWB for Mac is, as we're in two minds whether we should have it on our OS X image (so it goes out on all newly-supplied Macs by default). I myself don't use any antivirus on my Mac, though we're obliged to supply something. Avast is there as the antivirus on our images at the moment (no complaints with Avast, compared to the myriad of issues we got with Sophos), and I'm just curious how people's experiences of MWB for Mac has been – whether it's resource-intensive, or keeps prompting to sign up for the Pro version – anything like that, which cause a client to call with a query/problem. Just to make sure installing wouldn't do more harm than good. Stuff like that really.

Your kind words are welcome. However, I note that you are conflating adware removal software and antivirus utilities. Adware is not viral and has almost nothing in common with viruses. ClamXav and Sophos Antivirus for Mac are antivirus utilities. They are advertised to combat viruses, Trojans, and worms. They are not advertised to remove adware.

The takeaway message is that lumping AdwareMedic/MalwareBytes for Mac in a discussion of ClamXav confuses the issue. These are different categories of utilities with different functionality. They should be considered separately. I agree with Toltepeceno's Post #16. There is no downside to installing or using adware removal software.

 

[keysofanxiety]

Your kind words are welcome. However, I note that you are conflating adware removal software and antivirus utilities. Adware is not viral and has almost nothing in common with viruses. ClamXav and Sophos Antivirus for Mac are antivirus utilities. They are advertised to combat viruses, Trojans, and worms. They are not advertised to remove adware.

The takeaway message is that lumping AdwareMedic/MalwareBytes for Mac in a discussion of ClamXav confuses the issue. These are different categories of utilities with different functionality. They should be considered separately. I agree with Toltepeceno's Post #16. There is no downside to installing or using adware removal software.

I fear there may be some misunderstanding, this was a thread about MalwareBytes for Mac and how good it is (as it's just been released so reviews are scarce at the moment).

 

[Toltepeceno]

I fear there may be some misunderstanding, this was a thread about MalwareBytes for Mac and how good it is (as it's just been released so reviews are scarce at the moment).

It's looks like adwarewmedic with a new name, so just go by the adwaremedic reviews.

 

[MisterMe]

It's looks like adwarewmedic with a new name, so just go by the adwaremedic reviews.

Exactly. MalwareBytes for Mac is not the Mac version of MalwareBytes for Windows. It is the new name of AdwareMedic. I have downloaded, installed, and MalwareBytes for Mac to scan for new adware. The utility has a new name and a new icon, but is otherwise virtually identical to the older version [AdwareMedic]. By this, I mean that its UI is unchanged and its functionality is unchanged.

 

[keysofanxiety]

Thanks for the great response and I look forward to your followup to the infection call. I checked my Sophos logs and (knock-wood) to date it has not had any issues doing auto-updates. It seems to be doing what I need it to do so far, so I'll take your recommendation and stay with it until I run into problems. I also got rid of Adware Medic in favor of Malwarebytes - it seems to be working fine also.

Thanks very much, please tag me or quote me when you post back, looking forward to it.

Hello all,

Well slightly disappointing news - I had two calls but neither computer was really that infected. No PUPs like your standard 'CleanMyMac' rubbish so I can't comment on how well it did that.

MalwareBytes does indeed just seem to be a rehash of Adware Medic as confirmed by MisterMe. Pretty much nothing new there. It only found one toolbar. On that same computer I did an Avast scan that found a .dmg infection in the temp/var folder, something that sounded legitimate like 'AppleDiagnostics.dmg'. I could've sworn I screenshotted this but I didn't. The one interesting thing found and I didn't do that. Sorry

On the other computer there were a few email attachment infections found through Sophos (no update issue on this one so didn't change for Avast), that just seemed to be your typical Windows ones. MalwareBytes came back clean on that one.

So I'm a little disappointed, was at least hoping for a fairly infected computer to see what Avast/Sophos detect and what MalwareBytes removes. Normally I use AppCleaner for removing any PUPs anyway so it's not an issue, though I'd be interested to see what MalwareBytes would detect (if any).

Screenshots of the two scans on the different systems, not that there's anything interesting there.

I will definitely update this thread again if I get a heavily infected Mac and we'll see what it detects with what application ... sorry for all the hype and subsequent disappointment guys.

 

[Dark Void]

Thanks for the information and getting back.

 

[ApfelKuchen]

What's the point of comparing Adware Medic/MalwareBytes for Mac and the other programs? It was designed to be complementary, not competitive - to fill a gap that was not being addressed, which it does, admirably. MalwareBytes for Mac admits that it's just a re-hash of Adware Medic - they acquired Adware Medic and Thomas Reed's services, and for now, it is just a repackage. We'll see what future versions have to offer.

If there was a good reason to have Adware Medic on your image, nothing seems to have changed (other than the change in licensing rules, which certainly could make a difference for business users).

I continue to be amazed how often people would rather post a question in a forum than go to the source.

 

[Ulenspiegel]

@keysofanxiety: Thank you very much for sharing your experience with MB for Mac. You are right, it is quite upsetting what the application is capable of. Please, keep us posted.

 

[Ulenspiegel]

...MalwareBytes for Mac admits that it's just a re-hash of Adware Medic - they acquired Adware Medic and Thomas Reed's services, and for now, it is just a repackage. We'll see what future versions have to offer.

If there was a good reason to have Adware Medic on your image, nothing seems to have changed (other than the change in licensing rules, which certainly could make a difference for business users).

This is what the Press Release contains: "...The new product is designed to detect and remove malware, adware, and PUPs (potentially unwanted programs), capabilities that have been repeatedly requested by customers..." (SAN JOSE, Ca., July 15, 2015).

And this is what the official site contains:

"What it does for you

• Removes adware, such as Genieo, VSearch, and Vidx
• Removes malware, including Trojans
• Scans quickly
• Simplifies program management through a clean, lean interface".

I continue to be amazed how often people would rather post a question in a forum than go to the source.

I agree with you. Please, see above.