Jump to content
IObit Forum
Top Free Driver Updater Tools Best 25 PC Optimization Software Best 22 Antimalware Best 22 Uninstaller Software IObit Coupons & Discount Offers PC Optimizer

Accusation Thread - Dispute


solbjerg

Recommended Posts

Well Mr. Davis

Have you joined this forum today to make us aware that you have removed IObit from your system???

That does not concern us, we are a user forum dedicated to help users with problems concerning difficulties they may encounter using the programs.

Therefore if you want IObit to delete your credit card number, I suggest you contact the company and not a user forum :-)

Cheers

solbjerg

 

 

Based on Malwarebytes own published findings (go to Malware's website and read it yourself) and my experience in technology and criminal investigations, and other experiences I have dealing with Chinese operators (one in Houston tried to get me to sell her a GPS navigayion system for a cruise missile during the Clinton administration) I conclude that IOBit did steal from MalwareBytes. To that end, I just removed IOBits from my systems, and IOBts, please delete my credit card numbers from yours. Please. Either IOBits is PLA or just an enterprising thief who believes they can operate like pirates from the distance of China.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 573
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Common sense

 

Hi All

People or companies that possess knowledge of a dangerous malware and keep this knowledge to themselves is exhibiting a blatant disregard for the countless people around the world that can easily get infected because they possesses no knowledge of this threat.

Cheers

solbjerg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

with how arrogant, ignorant and just drama-obsessed the dev-team of Malwarebytes is I wouldn't put it past them to make up lies. Even if they did copy some files from their database, so what? Their product is free as far as I'm concerned. The whole point of a anti-malware program is to remove malware from a user's system. if anything, companies should be helping each other advance in detection to help the end user instead of bitching at each other like a couple of high school girls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Iobit isn't guilty until they are proven guilty by law!!!

 

Malwarebytes accusing Iobit publicly is totally unprofessional, by doing this it ruins Iobit's reputation. This is also beneficial to Malwarebytes by boosting their sales and further advertise their products through their customers.

 

 

"Within two weeks IOBit was detecting these fake files under almost exactly these fake names." by Malwarebytes

 

As said by Iobit their malware submission site might have flaws, where Malwarebytes could submit these fake samples to Iobit database two weeks before Iobit update 360.

 

Malwarebytes can't provide any other malware samples that aren't made by them as proof to show that 360 and Malwarebytes show the same database name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope WE ALL post with integrity and honor here.

 

I believe in the integrity of the senior members of this forum. I also believe in the integity of the senior members of the MBAM forum. There is no bashing ot be had anywhere/anyhow/anyway by anyone here or there! This is the position I have asserted and will continue to... because I believe its RIGHT!

 

I see see the abatement of hateful posts here. Let us continue all down that path!

 

Peace to you all!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Solbjerg!

 

That's a handy reminder to all who post here! Those who prejudge and attack on open user forums are misguided and have their own personal agendas. The senior (and most junior) forum members here,stand independently to help one another and improve everybody's situation to the best of our abilities.

 

If we can't help... we sit, watch, and learn.. from those that can.

 

Posting of non-helpful information will be disregarded to the best of our collective ability!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Melvin

Thanks for your support and for the calm reasonableness you bring to the thread.

I salute you!

Cheers

solbjerg

 

 

That's a handy reminder to all who post here! Those who prejudge and attack on open user forums are misguided and have their own personal agendas. The senior (and most junior) forum members here,stand independently to help one another and improve everybody's situation to the best of our abilities.

 

If we can't help... we sit, watch, and learn.. from those that can.

 

Posting of non-helpful information will be disregarded to the best of our collective ability!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I think this thread should be locked as everything that can be posted has been posted. Until something new comes to light, what use is it to keep the posts going. Lets give it a rest and move on, hoping iobit can get out of this situation intact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a likely scenario: Malwarebyes sets up its malware database with fake definitions and submits them to IOBit, then they turn around accuse them of stealing. It's a perfect way to destroy a reputable company, one much more successful and trusted than your own. The truth will come out and Malwarebytes will stick their foot in their mouth. It will be bye-bye to MBAM, they don't realize that they just built their own coffin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi mbamsucks

Let's not lash out with counterattacks!!!

Everything will become clear in due course.

Let us wait for that.

Cheers

solbjerg

 

 

 

Here is a likely scenario: Malwarebyes sets up its malware database with fake definitions and submits them to IOBit, then they turn around accuse them of stealing. It's a perfect way to destroy a reputable company, one much more successful and trusted than your own. The truth will come out and Malwarebytes will stick their foot in their mouth. It will be bye-bye to MBAM, they don't realize that they just built their own coffin.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a likely scenario: Malwarebyes sets up its malware database with fake definitions and submits them to IOBit, then they turn around accuse them of stealing.

I suppose you have proof of this ? Unless you do, all it is is a supposition or an unfounded accusation.

I'm sure there a folks on both sides of this dispute a whole lot smarter than you that are trying to get to the bottom of this.

Right now, the only looser is the public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't see that this article I found today

has been mentioned since Nov 8, when it's dated.

 

On the statement I excerpted,

today I still see download links on Iobit.com;

Download.com still shows 5 star Editors' rating,

4.5 star average user rating

and 3rd most popular Spyware Remover;

MajorGeeks does seem to now host only offline database.

 

I trust you find this interview informative.

I guess I could post my observation to MalwareBytes forum,

but I haven't used their product for a few months now

(have been satisfied Iobit products user for at least a couple of years).

 

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Malwarebytes-Accuses-IObit-Plays-Dead-126389.shtml

<snip>

Marcin Kleczynski: As we mentioned above, CNET Download.com and MajorGeeks.com have both removed IObit files from their servers. Softpedia has removed them as well. These are the major hosts we and IObit use, and we view these removals as constructive first steps. IObit have also themselves removed the installer for IObit Security 360 from iobit.com.

<snip>

 

That's a handy reminder to all who post here! Those who prejudge and attack on open user forums are misguided and have their own personal agendas. The senior (and most junior) forum members here,stand independently to help one another and improve everybody's situation to the best of our abilities.

 

If we can't help... we sit, watch, and learn.. from those that can.

 

Posting of non-helpful information will be disregarded to the best of our collective ability!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at your post, I reverse the IOBit database once again and compare it to the MBAM one.

 

Source

http://www.malwarebytes.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=29772&st=80&p=154444entry154444

 

IObit Security 360

 

OS:Windows XP

Version:1.2.0.10

Define Version:1273

Time Elapsed:00:00:12

Objects Scanned:1857

Threats Found:367

 

367/1857 = 19.7%

 

Versus

 

IObit Security 360

 

OS:Windows XP

Version:1.1.0.30

Define Version:1269

Time Elapsed:00:00:10

Objects Scanned:1857

Threats Found:1427

 

1427/1857= 76.8%

 

Further reinforces what many of us has already suspected.

 

The previous IOBit database was 4.562.334 bytes. The new one is 2.392.696 bytes.

This is not about compression or cleaning the base by removing the "old definitions".

IOBit has removed all reference to the MBAM database. There is no more MBAM definitions in the new 1.2 version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe in the next version of IObit 360 (1.3 maybe?) they will include MBAM's database, but rename everything and try to make it less obvious of their theft? Just a thought. lol

 

If IObit is stealing from MBAM, who else could they be robbing? Maybe ASC is comprised of CCleaner, Glary Utilities, ASO etc. Just speculation on my part. Now I have to get rid of Smart Defrag because IObit has lost my trust. :evil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi twigler

Your preference!

But I notice that almost all your previous post has circled around submitting malware definitions to IObit. From your debut in this forum.

Why is that?

Cheers

solbjerg

 

 

Maybe in the next version of IObit 360 (1.3 maybe?) they will include MBAM's database, but rename everything and try to make it less obvious of their theft? Just a thought. lol

 

If IObit is stealing from MBAM, who else could they be robbing? Maybe ASC is comprised of CCleaner, Glary Utilities, ASO etc. Just speculation on my part. Now I have to get rid of Smart Defrag because IObit has lost my trust. :evil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi twigler

Your preference!

But I notice that almost all your previous post has circled around submitting malware definitions to IObit. From your debut in this forum.

Why is that?

Cheers

solbjerg

 

Before posting in this thread I had 5 posts. Two of which dealt with submitting malware definitions. For the record, 2/5 is not almost all. My hobby is playing with anti-malware applications. So, when I tested Iobit 360 I decided to try and help the product and ask/make suggestions about the submission process of malware. This is because I found a few rogues that IObit missed and the submission process seemed to be a pita for me. So I suggested adding a way to send samples through the application itself. Is there a problem with that?

 

However, after hearing the news about IObit and MBAM my views on the product have changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi twigler

No problem. Just curious

Goodbye then

Cheers

solbjerg

 

 

Before posting in this thread I had 5 posts. Two of which dealt with submitting malware definitions. For the record, 2/5 is not almost all. My hobby is playing with anti-malware applications. So, when I tested Iobit 360 I decided to try and help the product and ask/make suggestions about the submission process of malware. This is because I found a few rogues that IObit missed and the submission process seemed to be a pita for me. So I suggested adding a way to send samples through the application itself. Is there a problem with that?

 

However, after hearing the news about IObit and MBAM my views on the product have changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi All

People or companies that possess knowledge of a dangerous malware and keep this knowledge to themselves is exhibiting a blatant disregard for the countless people around the world that can easily get infected because they possesses no knowledge of this threat.

Cheers

solbjerg

 

This I do agree with but until a standard is set and companies work together in sharing their data (which is what I have been questioning for many years, why they can't), you have to abide by copyright laws and accept that what is one persons data is not necessarily anothers to exploit. This, in the modern age of today is called business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok IssViews

Let us work together then to try to get that standard set!!

Copyright is also a grey area in my opinion.

Who should have the royalties for inventing the spoon or the fork and plate?

We are all standing on the shoulders of giants -and some then cry out -look how big I am! :-)

Cheers

solbjerg

 

 

This I do agree with but until a standard is set and companies work together in sharing their data (which is what I have been questioning for many years, why they can't), you have to abide by copyright laws and accept that what is one persons data is not necessarily anothers to exploit. This, in the modern age of today is called business.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly how signatures could have been implanted.

 

Everybody cried about how this feature or that couldn't be part of the free release. Nobody wanted to pay for the pro.(or the pro ASC... or anything!) I take that back some paid and have quit/deleted/mad/believe the first allegation/first to download/???. The mistake is rush to market... not maliscious thieves. Iobit couldn't afford the staff at the time to thoroughly inspect all submissions... got invaded, seeded, and looks like homeless. I hope "johnny appleseed" is happy. Betcha got a nice paycheck Johnny!

 

Peace and love to you all!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok IssViews

Let us work together then to try to get that standard set!!

Copyright is also a grey area in my opinion.

Who should have the royalties for inventing the spoon or the fork and plate?

We are all standing on the shoulders of giants -and some then cry out -look how big I am! :-)

Cheers

solbjerg

 

Copyright is still copyright and I dont believe there is a grey area. I am sure many a legal person would agree however I gave up Law a long time ago and have lost touch.

 

You could then say that this data was aquired therough immoral purposes or by invasion of another person computer system/network or software. Regardless of this issue, I am not here to cause more arguements or make matters worse. This is for the two companies to sort out and perhaps their legal executives.

 

Now, I did ask the same questions on the CA forum (which I help moderate) last year why this data could not be centralised as I felt that the naming of one infection was so diverse as each company virtually chose their own tag. This, in my opinion did not help a person who was trying to disinfect their machine using a name that was given in a scan which showed very few results whereas scanning by a different vendor and searching on the new tag showed many more! I never got an answer to this so had to formulate my own opinion.

 

Yes I fully agree with you that there should be more co-operation between AV security comapnies however we have to understand that until these companies define a standard and a central database, any content they use to flag and help remove the infections that their software detects, remains their copyright.

 

If I could get this co-operation I would be overwhealmed and pleased but I am merely a minion in the scene. It will require a lot more people and organisations in support to get this change implemented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To add to my previous post, I understand that the seervices of Virustotal.com and other services like this, is used by many security companies to detect and help add to a database using software and data beyond normal users knowledge.

 

The scanning/removal engine is probably the most crutial part of the security software design and one which determines the products success (appart from the signature database). Any company could quite easilly sit back and relax while pulling in the cash and making little or no contributions to the R&D while other companies do the hard R&D work. This is the only flaw I see in the central database.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi IssView

Yes the scanning/detection engine ought to be the crucial part, and this is where there is a legitimate reason to patent/copyright and protect.

Imagine that one company had some super-genius in their staff that came up with an heuristic - or perhaps a quite new concept for detecting virus and malware, so perfect that it caught everything.

This company would corner the market even if they gave away definitions as fast as they found them.

The problem is that the scanning-detection engines of today aren't perfect, and this in turn gives the companies an incentive to protect the definition files - that they have accumulated in various ways all of them -as if they where their own. Which you say it is in the current legislation - at least in countries that have signed that agreement.

This is a very bad situation for the user.

They say that it is money and greed that runs the world, but I am sure that without compassion and love we would all perish.

Cheers

solbjerg

 

To add to my previous post, I understand that the seervices of Virustotal.com and other services like this, is used by many security companies to detect and help add to a database using software and data beyond normal users knowledge.

 

The scanning/removal engine is probably the most crutial part of the security software design and one which determines the products success (appart from the signature database). Any company could quite easilly sit back and relax while pulling in the cash and making little or no contributions to the R&D while other companies do the hard R&D work. This is the only flaw I see in the central database.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...