The primary download link points to BrotherSoft which means it gets instantly blocked by my browser (red WOT rating). That site is a total scam, hosting hundreds of virii/malware/spyware junk, check SiteAdvisor comments and WOT rating. :o >:(
* (FIXED) Problem with update hanging up application on first run.
* (FIXED) Problem quarantining large files.
* (FIXED) Greatly improved memory scan speed.
* (FIXED) Updated zib.dll to latest version.
* (ADDED) Scheduled scanning now creates log files.
* (ADDED) Advanced heuristic detections for multiple trojans.
* (ADDED) Direct Disk Access for enumerating folder contents.
* (ADDED) Direct Disk Access for breaking file headers.
The reason MD5 and filesize is different is because affiliate codes are built into the program. If you download from MajorGeeks and purchase the product, MajorGeeks will get commission.
Well sorry, I’m a free-time Linux developer. We use MD5/SHA256/RMD160 sums for any stuff we distribute, so anyone can check that the thing is what we intended to distribute. How I can check with such nonsensical distribution scheme? I’m not saying the thing actually is malware, but similar things and a horrible choice of primary download site kill trust easily. See my point? :-\
yeah I know they list alternative d/l sites there, but where would an average user click first? Distributing antimalware product primarily via a site which distributes tons of malware? ???
As for the rest - I don’t care about the commission at all, there’s nothing wrong with making money in this way, but the way it’s done ATM plain sucks, especially for security products. If you download exact same version of exact same product from 4 different sites and get 4 different file sizes/checksums for the installer - which one is genuine? All of them? Some of them? None? Can’t check anywhere.
I can understand you… Yes the sites might be malicious and known to have malware products there, But I can tell you now, and so can the people here at Comodo forums, Wilders, etc Malware Bytes’ is a completely safe product with no gadgets or catches!
I understand you… I been in a similar situation. But we just can’t target a product negatively because it is on a malicious site. That’s only one factor, Maybe 2 or more! But we need to research more indepthly to see what the product really is.
Don’t Linux developer’s do that? You can post in the Malwarebytes’ forum too and see if you get a better answer then what I am getting you. PM me and I’ll give you a user and pass to post there.
As I have already said above, I registered @ MBAM forums in order to explicitely ask on the relevant thread - however the activation link never arrived and so I cannot post even though I can log on… I definitely don’t want to post there under other people’s accounts, what’s up with the registration there? ???
As quoted above, the MBAM developer is apparently aware of the BrotherSoft issue and kinda dismissed it with a reasoning that’s plain unacceptable to me (Oh, they offered me to distribute it so why not… Duh, why they wouldn’t offer? Eventually noone will go to a download site which only offers malware/virii-plagued junk, so you need to throw a bunch of trustworthy apps into the bag). At minimum, this shows rather poor judgment on the side of the MBAM developer, I’d say. Getting yourself associated with rogue sites kills trust, as numerous examples have shown over and over again. >:(
Doktormotor has made a valid point there regarding questionable hosts for MBAM downloads,however Marcin Kleczynski (developer) and his team aren’t a large scale commercial operation but perhaps they should look to address this.Brothersoft wouldn’t be the best choice to host this file given the suspect downloads on there but it’s beyond doubt that MBAM and their other Rogueremover application are extremely safe and valuable products that perform to the highest level.
If there are any concerns about downloading the file then it can be obtained from Softpedia,which has excellent credentials: