Malwarebytes Reviews

Malwarebytes is typically used as a second opinion. If there is something bothering me, it is not working. My involvement with Malwarebytes is centered on its tools. I run Malwarebytes on their tech bench. I lack the operational experience that I have with Sophos and FortiClient.

For example, I had a client who had been the victim of a phone scam in which someone called him from one of these 800 numbers to tell them that they had been monitoring their computer and discovered that it contained malware. And for the small fee of $200, they would be able to repair it for them. 

After paying the $200, they realized they had been part of a scam. They had me come in, I used Malwarebytes to enter their machine and ensure that there were no hidden or unknown packages, as well as a strong lesson in cyber security awareness on why you shouldn't accept those phone calls.

It's very versatile and thorough.

It keeps up with the various threats it faces. It has a good analysis package and good reporting.

It basically tells you if you have anything on your machine that shouldn't be there. I have just discovered it to be exceptionally good at finding that stuff.

From my use case with it, it works fine. 

I am not going to comment on its ability to integrate with other solutions that are not strictly endpoint protection. They now have the capability of centralized management. When I first started working with Malwarebytes, they didn't have it. 

It's adaptable, as are all of the products I work with. They are compatible with the major platforms I encounter, which are Windows and Mac, as well as mobile devices such as iOS and Android.

I don't have much opportunity to customize it other than to write a rule here and there to try to find something. And I have never been in a situation where I was forced to do something I couldn't.

Malwarebytes, Sophos, and Fortinet, in fact, any product I will gravitate toward, will have a consistent development release cycle. 

Strictly in terms of cyber security, the release cycle should be quarterly, at most. It shouldn't be more frequent than that because, for one thing, keeping up with tech support is difficult. You are more likely to receive an incorrect response from the support team. It should not be any more frequent. 

In my opinion, the quarterly release cycle is ideal. This allows them to keep up with the market and the threats that exist in the market, as well as have enough time to run a reasonably developed test and release it to the public.

I have been using Malwarebytes for the past year.

I have not had any issues with the stability of Malwarebytes.

Scalability does not apply to Malwarebytes. 

My experience with technical support has always been great.

Malwarebytes is convenient because I can carry my USB thumb drive along with a copy of Malwarebytes on it and plug it in. If I have local admin access to the machine and can run the product.

If your organization is large enough, you can divide that and best practices in security. Say you should divide it up so the fox isn't watching the chicken house.

I am a small organization, and it's one thing if the company has enough employees. However, the majority of the businesses I work with are extremely lean. In many cases, if they're lucky, they'll have someone with even the most basic cyber security skills.

I believe the retail price is between $40 and $50 per copy. 

It is a yearly subscription.

My company provides cybersecurity consulting services. I have partnerships and mutual respect with both companies Sophos, and FortiClient.

I would also be involved in potential resell.

I go through the technical training they provide to become certified to support it. And I actively use both products with various customers that I work with.

I believe my use case is ideal because I'm using it as a backup set of tools. That basically allows me to go in and see if something doesn't seem to be working properly. We can see what Malwarebytes discovers. That is my primary use case.

10 would indicate that I am absolutely certain that 100% of the problem has been solved. And in security, nothing is ever guaranteed.

I would rate Malwarebytes an eight out of ten.

Malwarebytes is more of an Endpoint Protection Platform inside a NextGen AV solution. We use it to do, it does real-time protections, but our primary use for that product is compliance scanning. So traditional threat monitoring plus daily scans, full scan, system scans, etc. And it covers the signature and heuristics gap for us.

The fact that the agent is SaaS-based is a major improvement. So with COVID and the new permitter being the endpoint itself out in the wild, Malwarebytes allowed for protection and communication 100 percent of the time. So if it has an internet connection, we're connected and protected. So that was one of the biggest benefits. We were running Windows Defender before, which if an asset wasn't on VPN or went off-network, it was essentially out in the wind. We didn't know what was happening to it from an AV perspective.

Malwarebytes is easy to use. There's not a lot I like about it, but I will say that they have some of the best signatures out there. As far as traditional AV technology and detection solutions go, that's probably what I'd like about them the most. They have some of the best signature writers out there.

Malwarebytes is too simplistic. From a SOC IR perspective, it doesn't give you very much data around it. It doesn't tie things or provide SHA-1 and SHA-256 detection information, which makes it hard to do an additional investigation. It should give you more hash information, IOC-based information, etc. It also gives a lot of false positives. That's one of our biggest beefs. 

I've been using Malwarebytes for three years.

The Malwarebytes agent has a design flaw that impacts performance. They built it on top of ClamAV, which is okay, but they run into some problems excluding certain locations or dealing with high-performance impact solutions. If you exclude it, then it's excluded completely, and you lose telemetry on it entirely. Again, we have experienced some problems with their agents breaking in their own update processes.

Scalability's fine. We never ran into any issues, and we're a large company with 17,000 users. So I think that Malwarebytes can scale just fine. But that's probably due to the solution's simple nature. The more data you're pulling back, the more complex it gets, which creates a greater load on the backend systems that they're hosting. However, Malwarebytes is pretty lean right now, so performance has never really been a problem from a console perspective.

I'd say that Malwarebytes support is fine, but they lack maturity when it comes to enterprise-class security solutions. 

We were running Windows Defender, but we switched to Malwarebytes because it is a cloud-hosted SaaS solution that is as effective on the cloud as it is on-prem.

Straightforward. We're a very large environment, so it took us a couple of days, but technically, you could begin deployment almost immediately. As is the case with any AV product, you have to fine-tune it to deal with false positives and performance issues. Aside from that, the deployment itself can be done very quickly. You can use SECM, PDQ. They even have their own deployment tool that you can use. It's pretty easy to get it out there. 

We did the implementation ourselves. My security department partnered with our patch management and asset deployment team. We gave them the packages and the switching, then they began deployment from there. It doesn't need a lot of maintenance. About three people should do it. Whoever deployed the solution will occasionally need to redeploy or fix an agent. You also need one or two frontend security staff to operate it.

I would say that it's affordable. It costs much less than Sentinel One, CrowdStrike, or anything of that nature. But, at the same time, you are getting what you pay for. So I would say it's one of the best when you're comparing traditional NextGen AVs like Webroot that aren't the best in the bunch. McAfee and some of those other ones bring a lot more different options to the table. But if it's just straight AV technology, I would put Malwarebytes at the top of the heap in terms of value for the money.

I would rate Malwarebytes eight out of 10 if I'm judging it by the standards of traditional endpoint protection or NextGen AV solution. When it comes to frontend protections, it has some of the best definitions. In addition, they do traditional signature and heuristic detection a lot better than Microsoft and some other players in that space. But if you're lumping it in with other EDR solutions, it's a zero. 

If you plan to use Malwarebytes, I suggest utilizing its auto-patching mechanism as much as possible and aggressively keeping it up to date.

We use the product as an antivirus for browser security.

The product's stability needs improvement.

We have been using Malwarebytes for 15 years.

The platform is stable, and we haven't encountered any issues. However, there is always room for improvement. I rate the stability an eight.

I previously used Windows Defender. Numerous assessments indicate it catches around 80% to 90% of threats. However, Malwarebytes achieved a higher success rate.

The platform is straightforward to install. Its automation functionality runs updates seamlessly in the background, requiring minimal user intervention.

We deploy and maintain the platform with the help of our in-house team.

The platform pricing is competitive with other antivirus products. Also, one license allows you to run it on up to two devices simultaneously.

Malwarebytes offers robust security features and implements innovative functionalities. For instance, it allows users to check if their email addresses are mentioned on compromised sites.

It has a user-friendly interface. I recommend it for commercial organizations. For non-commercial organizations, Microsoft Defender is more suitable.

I rate it an eight out of ten.

I use the product primarily to detect and diagnose threats and enhance security within my organization. It helps detect and investigate potential threats in real time, allowing us to block malicious files promptly.

The most valuable features are its user-friendliness and the ease of use of the user interface. Additionally, its robustness in detecting and diagnosing threats is highly beneficial.

The product could be improved in blocking malicious traffic, such as communication with known malicious IP addresses.

I have been using Malwarebytes for about six years.

The technical support services are good. The response time depends on the severity of the issue.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward. Depending on pre-installation tasks, we deployed it across about 400 endpoints within minutes. It required a small team, typically security engineers and IT admins. Mostly, it involved updating the agents, which can be done through the console for maintenance.

The product generates a return on investment in terms of cost-effectiveness and efficient security features. 

Malwarebytes is a cost-effective product.

The solution helps by blocking potential malicious files and allowing us to conduct on-demand scans. I recommend it for organizations looking to deploy on client machines. I rate it an eight out of ten.

Our company deals with EPP EDR, MDR, patch management, DNS filtering, and vulnerability assessment of Malwarebytes. They have two products, one for businesses and one for home use. If you use the one with EPP, it is meant for businesses.

Malwarebytes is a good product for SMBs since it provides malware and ransomware protection, allowing SMBs to secure their endpoints.

The most valuable features of the solution are malware scanning and malware removal.

The improvements needed in the product depend on the company and its plans, but I think that the product is mostly okay. Malwarebytes has to keep updating as per the market trend in regards to what and where the malware is, which is not a major challenge for other products. If Malwarebytes matches the same intensity as its competitors, it can do good in the market. Malwarebytes needs to keep up with the market updates and release products that align with what its competitors are doing in the market.

I have been using Malwarebytes for more than five years. My company has a partnership with Malwarebytes.

It is a stable solution. I have not experienced any downtimes. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. We can scale up the use of the solution.

My clients are usually SMBs.

The solution's technical support is clear as per the SLA. The support is provided to us immediately whenever needed. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup of Malwarebytes was easy.

The solution is deployed on the cloud. My customers have the tool deployed on their own cloud.

The time for deployment depends on the number of users, which can be a hundred, two hundred, or five hundred users. Depending on your approach, if you have Active Directory and domain controller, you can deploy it centrally from the console itself with the tools that can help you deploy faster. You can also deploy the tool one by one, a process in which you can install the agent and simply install the agent and the machines, after which it will be rest registered on the cloud immediately.

If you look at the pricing of some other products, the pricing of Malwarebytes is pretty much okay since it is neither cheap nor too high, making it fall in the middle.

On a scale of one to ten, where one is a low price and ten is a high price, I rate the product's pricing a seven.

Malwarebytes provides features like device control, scan engine, malware protection, ransomware protection, rollback features, and managed detection and response. The tool also provides features like integrated patch management, vulnerability assessment, and DNS filtering. If any of my customers prefer Malwarebytes, they can have the complete package.

I recommend the product if it fits the budget of those planning to use it. It's a good product. They can have clear visibility on the endpoints since it helps them protect from ransomware and other advanced threats. Malwarebytes is an affordable tool. One can use it, especially if someone doesn't have a high budget, since it helps fulfill the basic requirements.

Malwarebytes is not there in the reports from Gartner or IDC. They have their own labs to test their products. In general, they don't have any third-party reports as of now. Malwarebytes was previously included in one of the reports from Gartner. I think Malwarebytes doesn't participate in the reports from Gartner. If we look at the market trends and the industry, most customers look at Gartner's reports to identify whether a product is a leader, challenger, or a big product, depending on which they choose. If Malwarebytes was included in reports from Gartner, I would have rated the tool an eight or nine out of ten.

Overall, I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

The product keeps our company safe.

Recently, a user tried to open an unsafe link, and Malwarebytes stopped them. They kept trying and trying, but they could not open it. Later, it turned out to be a fake Microsoft account.

So far, we have faced no issues with the product. It is doing what it needs to do. We can set it up and forget it. It is a hands-off solution since it is cloud-based.

The product is a little bit more expensive than the other brands. The product’s pricing must be improved. I would like to see AI enhancements in the product.

I have been using the solution for the past six months. I am using the latest version of the solution.

I rate the tool’s stability a ten out of ten.

Whatever licenses we have, we pay, and we use the endpoints.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We have seen a 50% ROI on the solution.

People planning to use the product must have patience. They must familiarize themselves with the product before they judge it. There’s a learning curve. Overall, I rate the solution an eight and a half out of ten.

Malwarebytes has very limited use cases. 

It was very good. It enhanced our performance in our company. When we replaced it, we used it as an antivirus. It has more than antivirus capabilities yet less than XDR servers. We are very impressed with its antivirus capabilities and it's helped us a lot there. 

I can evaluate it as a very good antivirus, however, not as an EDR.

It is very, very basic.

I got a demo from them. They promised that in the next version they will have all the features they've been lacking a bit.

I was very satisfied with Malwarebytes in terms of its antivirus abilities. It works as an antivirus better than a lot of others.

It was easy to set up.

It's not covering everything as we just started in EDR.

In Malwarebytes, there's no response. The response is very limited, and integration is very limited.

It's not good in search hunting. In fact, it has no search hunting at all and no strict intelligence tools. It offers no account monitoring at all.

I want to see XDR functionality so that I can respond. I want to have some strict intelligence integration with malware attacks, and integration with other tools that I will use to respond to threats.

I was satisfied with the antivirus capabilities originally, however, in my new environment, I was not satisfied. Now, I'm trying to have an XDR. I have to have a complete solution. Therefore, I'm looking into Microsoft, an XDR in CrowdStrike, or Sentinel ONE.

I've used the solution for around one year. 

The solution has been stable and straightforward. It's reliable and the performance is good. We haven't had issues with bugs and glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

I have noticed that there is some scalability. They promised they're adding new modules and it'll be straightforward to deploy them also. It will likely be more scalable in the future. 

In my company, we have more than 100 machines covered with the solution. We have just an agent, or you can say a warden, that communicates with the cloud engine.

It's considered an essential solution and therefore is constantly running. It works in the background all the time on every machine. 

We have contacted technical support. They are very good. 

I'm currently trying CrowdStrike. I found it very, very good. I'm dropping Malwarebytes. I will not renew the license.

I used Microsoft Security Center previously at another company. It included EDR also.

The initial setup is very simple and quite straightforward. 

The deployment process took only one day.

It was on the cloud. That made it all pretty simple.

Some prerequisites I integrated. It was really easy.

It's working in the background. There's nothing to do. Only administrators can do some tasks. For all users, there is nothing to do at all. It is automated.

You only need one person to handle deployment and maintenance. They are in cybersecurity. 

I did the implementation by myself with the help of their technical support.

I have not witnessed an ROI. However, it is worth it to have it as any security consequences not dealt with can destroy a business. 

The prices are public. You can try and get on the internet, however, this is not the real cost. There are some other costs. It depends on how many modules you are buying. If you will activate all modules or just only a few modules the price will be different. 

We have other services. They provide nice services besides your software. The price for those depends on how you contract with them.

In comparison, for example, the Sentinel ONE device is very cheap since you don't have all modules to add on.

While we have Malwarebytes now, we want to replace it with maybe CrowdStrike, Sentinel ONE, or Microsoft. We're looking at all of them.

I am a customer. 

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using. 

It's very good, however, it has not covered all of the areas that I want to cover and make.

I'm a cybersecurity manager. My goal is to detect, respond, and prevent and to do that I need to use only one tool or to minimize the number of tools I'm using and my team is using. I want to minimize the number of team members that will work in cybersecurity as well. I need a solution that includes a lot of modules that can cover most of my requirements.

That said, if you want a very good antivirus and a basic easy functionality, which is a very cheap price, it would be Malwarebytes.

As an antivirus, I would rate the product nine out of ten, however, as an EDR, I'd only rate it five out of ten. Overall, I would rate it seven out of ten.  

I like Malwarebytes, however, I am moving to another product as I need functionality and features, and it's not exactly the right product for me now.

One of the reasons we use the solution is to protect the endpoints. Plus we are also using the EDR facility to protect servers and for emergency response. As for Malwarebytes, they will be able to help us track how the malware activities happened, which can help us in the restoration process. We haven't come across anything where we had to use these services or use the tool to recover anything. We haven't come to that yet. 

Often, the customers had been compromised previously, and, due to that, we propose that solution to them. They like that tracking and restoration options are on the table if they get breached again.

The solution is very good at scanning. 

It's a good product. It does the job. 

It offers good protection. I haven't come across any issues so far, which I need to escalate.

The solution scales remarkably well.

We've had a good experience dealing with technical support.

We have noticed that when the solution is doing the scanning, all the scanning activities make the device heavier. It slows down your machine. Alternatively, sometimes when it's scanning the application fast, you find that your applications will be slow in response. If you compare it to, for example, Trend Micro, this slow down doesn't happen when you use that solution.  

Basically, this solution seems to have issues with CPU and Memory. If you have got a good, high spec machine, then you won't feel it. If you go running SSDs and other stuff, you won't feel that performance issues. We have got customers in Fiji who are using 5,400 RPM hard disks, so they feel the pinch.

The solution is a bit expensive.

I've been using the solution for about two years at this point.

The stability is good. We haven't faced any issues so far.

The solution has a lot of scalability potential. If a company needs to expand it, it won't have a problem at all.

We've been in touch with technical support on a few deployments at this point. On a couple of deployments, we had some glitches where we were not able to deploy it on MacBooks. We hit a few walls dealing with iOS, and they were very good at helping us deploy the product. 

We were lucky in that we had a contact that had an account manager, and they were great on the support side. They really helped us out.

We've been satisfied with the level of service we've gotten

We also work with Trend Micro, Symantec, and Kaspersky.

The solution was not complex to set up. It was pretty straightforward for the most part. We found it to be rather easy.

We typically connect with one of the techs and one of the account managers during deployments. The engineer we connected with was very knowledgeable about the product and made everything ever easy.

The solution really needs to look around at the rest of the market. They're slightly more expensive and it would be ideal if they were more competitive.

We're an official partner in Fiji.

We use both on-premises and cloud-based deployment models. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. That said, I always recommend a POC is done first to see if it will properly fulfill a company's needs.

Overall, I would rate the product at an eight out of ten.