Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

ZEMANA AM VS MALWAREBYTES AM


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 Bull6791

Bull6791

  • Members
  • 124 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  

Posted 15 November 2016 - 10:08 AM

I am looking for an anti malware program. I wanted to hear people's opinions on which program is better. ZEMANA or MALWAREBYTES.
Thanks.

BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 richcbro

richcbro

  • Members
  • 375 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:01:04 PM

Posted 15 November 2016 - 10:16 AM

I have used Malwarebytes for years and never encounters a single problem. It is a good AM but it should be run alongside a primary AV software to provide complete protection to your computer. Keep in mind that there is NO single best AV or AM solution, most of the time the best one is the one that you likes.

 

Edit: Starting Malwarebytes 3.0, MBAM will finally replace your AV and combines Anti-Malware, Anti-Exploit and other technologies into a single product. You can read more here: https://forums.malwarebytes.org/topic/190369-announcing-beta-of-malwarebytes-30-a-next-generation-antivirus-replacement/


Edited by batman1234, 15 November 2016 - 10:20 AM.

CPU: Intel i7-8700K 5.3 GHz ------ RAM: 32GB TridentZ 3600 MHz CL16 ----- Motherboard: Asus ROG Maximus X Formula ----- GPU: Zotac GTX 1080 Ti Amp! Extreme ----- Storage: Samsung 960 Pro 1TB -- Samsung 850 Pro 2TB x4


#3 Bull6791

Bull6791
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 124 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  

Posted 15 November 2016 - 10:19 AM

What anti virus do you run it along side.
Thanks.

#4 Porthos

Porthos

  • Members
  • 27 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:01:04 AM

Posted 15 November 2016 - 12:49 PM

What anti virus do you run it along side.
Thanks.

I just use Defender in Win 10 along side MBAM Premium.



#5 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 51,287 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:01:04 AM

Posted 15 November 2016 - 07:12 PM

They are both very good programs but I have been using Malwarebytes Premium for years.

See my comments at the bottom of Supplementing your Anti-Virus Program with Anti-Malware Tools as to why I recommend Malwarebytes Anti-Malware Premium.
.
.
Windows Insider MVP 2017-2018
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#6 P_Jobs

P_Jobs

  • Members
  • 1 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  

Posted 16 November 2016 - 06:37 AM

I prefer to use ZEMANA. both very good programs



#7 isaccasi

isaccasi

  • Members
  • 145 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:zealand denmark
  • Local time:07:04 AM

Posted 16 November 2016 - 11:39 PM

Hello,I would use Malwarebytes Anti-Malware Premium,to get that real-time Protection,I have used it for 2 years without problems. :guitar:



#8 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 51,287 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:01:04 AM

Posted 17 November 2016 - 06:36 AM

Zemana AntiMalware Premium also includes real time protection.
.
.
Windows Insider MVP 2017-2018
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#9 Mishima

Mishima

  • Members
  • 338 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:12:04 AM

Posted 20 November 2016 - 01:24 PM

From my experience, I have used both for years, and can considerably say that Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware is more professional than Zemana Anti-Malware's GUI, but overall detection seems to be better with MBAM, because they appear to update much more often than Zemana. I have experimented off and on with Zemana versus MBAM, and have seen major differences in performance. Better yet... here's my synopsis on how I feel that they work for me (a review, not a test)...

-MBAM performance wise is more impacting than Zemana
-MBAM updates more often than Zemana and has better detection rates
-Zemana has much more false positives than MBAM, and can even detect harmless add-ons on a web browser. The Zemana team may not have that good of a philosophy on PUPs (potentially unwanted programs).
-Both of them do not invade your computer with notifications, ads on new products, or become paranoid at every turn.

I have used both of them in conjunction with two different antivirus solutions: Bitdefender's Internet Security/Total Security, and Kaspersky Internet Security. Both antivirus have worked very well with them.

That's all for my review for now. :)

Edit: I only use one antivirus and one anti-malware at a time... Always a good idea I hear from the others on this board, especially the helpers. ;)

Edited by Kakuzu, 20 November 2016 - 01:25 PM.


#10 TwinHeadedEagle

TwinHeadedEagle

  • Security Colleague
  • 351 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Serbia
  • Local time:06:04 AM

Posted 22 November 2016 - 07:46 AM

Let me try to answer to answer to some of your thoughts because some of them are debatable and need demystifying :)

 

MBAM updates more often than Zemana and has better detection rates

 

Not sure have you had in mind program update or database update, but Zemana has cloud database and any new signature is instantly available to all customers as the opposite to MalwareBytes database which gets updated every couple of hours. Detection rate is also open to debate because Zemana has its Pandora technology and anything suspicious or new to its cloud should be blocked with suspicious or dangerous warning. For what I've seen Zemana has better protection solely based on how it works with support of AV engine while MalwareBytes does not have such technology. 

 

 

Zemana has much more false positives than MBAM, and can even detect harmless add-ons on a web browser. The Zemana team may not have that good of a philosophy on PUPs (potentially unwanted programs).

 

Both products have FP detections and you can see it on Mbam forums:

 

https://forums.malwarebytes.org/forum/42-file-detections/

 

 

As for Zemana, we do have them but it is very low amount and mostly based on low reputation or first time seen by our network. We have insignificantly low amount of FPs made by workers in the process of creating signatures. We constantly work on improvements to decrease amount of FPs.

 

Our philosophy is the same or even stronger than MBAMs and we consider PUPs equally dangerous as real malware and remove them. We even remove some PUPs that MalwareBytes does not.

 

 

I'll gladly answer more questions if you have.


Edited by TwinHeadedEagle, 22 November 2016 - 09:06 AM.


#11 Mishima

Mishima

  • Members
  • 338 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:12:04 AM

Posted 22 November 2016 - 12:49 PM

Although you have points about Zemana, which I appreciate; you are just stating opposites of what I said on some points without verifiable data. It would help if you point me to tests and resources that can provide evidence for such things.

 

I was not looking to be countered, nonetheless, but rather, that is my experience, which I noted. I really believe Zemana's products have potential. I was a beta tester for Zemana for three years. I also used MBAM otherwise, and had noted such differences.

 

Per the inference of my experiences, I supposed to just do normal browsing as I would. I did not test any malware, so my experience cannot be calculated as a real test. This makes my experience an ineffective test. Please don't get the wrong idea. I'm glad you are willing to answer to this, but experiences are experiences... what works on one machine might work differently on another. If a user doesn't mind that Zemana's product is more paranoid than MBAM, then that is their decision alone. I believe it is all a matter of decision.

 

Of course, I remember long ago having a paranoid antivirus, to which I answered notifications on all day, but once I went to a better antivirus, I noticed I did not ever have to deal with paranoia. I loved the idea of not dealing with paranoia. Whether or not, I choose one or the other, I am making a choice to protect my PC, and such companies provide the benefit of it: We all work together in unity & harmony! :)



#12 TwinHeadedEagle

TwinHeadedEagle

  • Security Colleague
  • 351 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Serbia
  • Local time:06:04 AM

Posted 22 November 2016 - 03:23 PM

I tried to be as impartial as possible in my answer and by being Zemana employee I should but I am not trying to favor one product over another, so that's why I used to say only the facts that I had a chance to experience by using both products and to try to bring your answer closer to the real shape of things.

 

That being said, I don't wish to and cannot give you any tests or evidences because I truly believe that all of them (with respect to the exceptions) or majority of them are nothing but marketing or unprofessional work. Youtube is full of them. There are too many conditions to take into consideration while conducting such tests and there is a term in statistics called deviation meaning that there has to be some test that will fail (maybe also by human error) and people can fall for it and believe in it. Few months ago one person conducted a test with Zemana and he stated that it missed all of the 7 samples that I later proved to be wrong by showing evidence. It was his mistake or some unpredictable condition.

 

Everything I said is real experience because I know very well how both products work under the hood and what are the advantages/disadvantages of each.

 

There is no paranoia tech thing built in Zemana, because Pandora has many triggers and checks whether to allow some file to be executed or to show it as being suspicious (not know to our network) or as being dangerous (as a known threat). This tech reduces the possibility of zero day infection to the bare minimum unless we talk about some state sponsored malware :D

 

This combination makes Zemana very effective when it comes to protection of zero day threats.


Edited by TwinHeadedEagle, 23 November 2016 - 07:35 AM.


#13 Mishima

Mishima

  • Members
  • 338 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:12:04 AM

Posted 22 November 2016 - 03:58 PM

There are too many conditions to take into consideration while conducting such tests and there is a term in statistics called deviation meaning that there has to be some test that will fail (maybe also by human error) and people can fall for it and believe in it.

I have a similar philosophy. I stated such things because I believed you were stating facts against MBAM, instead of providing a neutral opinion. I provided a neutral opinion, because it was based purely on experience. There was no intention to challenge you. Of course, you may feel partial to the product/services you work for, and I am fine with that... but by no means am I a fanboy of either. All are a work-in-progress, because the realm of computer security is an extremely dynamic one. No one person could ever keep up with the trends going on daily across the world. However, as long as everyone does their part in improving security, they can help change the morale of the battle between villains, victims, and security professionals for the better! Too much infighting only causes less effectiveness, and ruins the intent of the security companies. Companies must be on to competing against the villains instead of competing against each other. No worries here, mate! :) Thanks for your answer... it was civil and polite.



#14 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 51,287 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:01:04 AM

Posted 23 November 2016 - 06:29 AM

Yes...the security community is in a constant state of change as new infections appear and it takes time for new malware to be reported, samples collected, analyzed, and tested by anti-virus/anti-malware researchers before they can add a new threat to database definitions. That's one advantage of using anti-malware products which can detect zero-day malware.
.
.
Windows Insider MVP 2017-2018
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#15 Jakebeany500

Jakebeany500

  • Members
  • 1 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:06:04 AM

Posted 08 May 2017 - 03:10 PM

https://www.mrg-effitas.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Zemana_ransomware_detection.pdf

 

A study done by MRG on the matter






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users