Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Malwarebytes Offers Pirates Its Premium Antimalware Product For Free

Posted by samzenpus on from the our-bad dept.

An anonymous reader writes: If you have a cracked or pirated version of Malwarebytes Anti-Malware (MBAM) product the company has debuted an Amnesty program for you. Venturebeat reports: "If you pirated Malwarebytes Anti-Malware, purchased a counterfeit version of the software, or are having problems with your key in general, the company is offering a free replacement key." CEO Marcin Kleczynski explained the program and his statement reads in part: "When I started Malwarebytes, I absolutely had no idea how successful we would be today. I am extremely grateful for all of the support from everyone and how fast we’ve grown. That being said, I picked a very insecure license key algorithm and as such, generating a pirated key was, and is, very simple.

The problem with pirated keys is that they may collide with a legitimate key just by the sheer numbers. For example, Larry may generate a pirated key that matches the exact key that I already bought. Yes, this is silly, and yes, this is literally the first thing a professional software company thinks of when building license key generation, but when you think you’re building a product for just a few people you don’t hash out these details.

Now we’ve grown up, and we’ve got a new licensing system that we’ve rolled out in stages. The only problem is that we have millions of users that we’ve sold keys to, or a reseller has sold keys to, or we’ve given out keys to without keeping track. It is a mess, and you as a consumer have every right to be upset.

111 comments

  1. Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 0

    It's pretty easy to lock down these things via hardware. In fact, I have a working model that's (theoretically) infinitely scale-able on any given server, ignoring file number restraints from the hosting provider. http://www.tot-ltd.org/WMSDK.h...

    1. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You ignored many things.

      (nearly) crackproof DRM - all it takes is one crack

      How much does Widowmaker SDK cost? Nothing, other than the total cost of hiring a developer to maintain the code, and subsequent additional features. - Yeah "nothing" haha

        (theoretically) infinitely scalable - oooookay ...

    2. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: -1, Troll

      Yeah, nearly. I didn't say it was FULLY crackproof, but you have to know what you're doing in order to bypass it. Which is why server authentication is BUILT IN. So, unless you've got a direct proof-of-concept exploit, such as faking burned in MAC address codes, along with simple bios info (which amazingly, can be brought up via windows commandline), I would make the educated guess that you're upset in regards to me further maintaining already solid code which someone else can build on.

      That's why it's free. If someone doesn't want to use it, I don't lose any sleep over it anyways.

    3. Re:Hardware Locking by sexconker · · Score: 2, Informative

      Burned-in MACs? My nForce 2 motherboard's NIC (the nVidia one, not the Realtek one) has a MAC that's user-definable in BIOS.

    4. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: -1, Troll

      Again, MAC spoofing has been around for a while. That's why there is static information brought up beyond just a MAC address, which if you have a motherboard that has the capability to change the MAC address, good for you. Now, if you'll go back and read a little, you'll notice that there is a function for server-side verification. If the idea is that you're going to fake information for an entire system through windows CLI, good luck with that, bruh.

    5. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VB?

      Is this a joke?

    6. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      If total overhead increase of 200KB for compiled application size, and ~3-5MB memory overhead for non-invasive DRM is a joke, then yes. But not as much as MS extending support until 2024 to allow for the "migration to .NET". At that point, I'll have moved onto other things.

    7. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, keep learning, because you have lots of it to do.

    8. Re:Hardware Locking by sexconker · · Score: -1, Troll

      What, exactly, is "Windows CLI"? (Hint - there is no such thing.)
      Further, you can fake any and all responses to such queries. It's not too hard if you're admin on the box. Or you can take the easy way out and run the thing in a VM.

    9. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1, Informative

      CLI = Command Line Interface.

    10. Re:Hardware Locking by sexconker · · Score: 1

      If total overhead increase of 200KB for compiled application size, and ~3-5MB memory overhead for non-invasive DRM is a joke, then yes. But not as much as MS extending support until 2024 to allow for the "migration to .NET". At that point, I'll have moved onto other things.

      Hopefully you move onto something you understand.
      Do you REALLY think you're the first person to think they've got good DRM?

    11. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 0

      Well, that's generally the idea when it comes to refining specific skill sets.

    12. Re:Hardware Locking by vidarlo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, nearly. I didn't say it was FULLY crackproof, but you have to know what you're doing in order to bypass it. Which is why server authentication is BUILT IN. So, unless you've got a direct proof-of-concept exploit, such as faking burned in MAC address codes, along with simple bios info (which amazingly, can be brought up via windows commandline), I would make the educated guess that you're upset in regards to me further maintaining already solid code which someone else can build on.

      Or what happends if the software is modified, with a neat little jump instruction where it wants to run the verification? Or what if you just write an API wrapper that gives the desired input?

      --
      Assembling etherkillers for fun an profit
    13. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      Look, if you're upset that it's written in VB6, fine, whatever. Unless you've actually got something like a direct proof of concept exploit, you have nothing to bring to the table. As for other things, I'm well aware of my own skillsets and limitations. That's why I don't just limit myself to programming. Unfortunately, I would have to make a moderately (un)educated guess that the extent of your interest in this discussion is simply to bitch because you can.

    14. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      Also, you might want to look into this, since it doesn't exist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    15. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you shrink the font size on your website a bit more? I think some people with amazing vision can still read it.

      Your web site's design is bad and you should feel bad.

    16. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      That's generally the idea to bypass most types of DRM. External/Internal patching is not a new thing. However, even disassemblers still have problems with truly decompiling P-Code, since most of the internal routines are technically "undocumented" and have been for quite some time. More than that, code obfuscation techniques aren't new either, and by definition, anything can be cracked. It just depends on how much work you want to put into it.

      As for an API wrapper, considering that most of the code is a direct result of CLI scripting, the actual workaround would be to modify/fake batch scripts on the fly. The only way to do that is to either rewrite portions from the source code itself, or do an internal jump/patch (internal or external, doesn't really matter), which defeats the purpose anyway.

    17. Re:Hardware Locking by vidarlo · · Score: 4, Informative
      We're upset because you're peddling snakeoil. Here is an excercept generating the hardware ID:
      If Dir("gethwi.bat") "" Then Kill "gethwi.bat"
      Open "gethwi.bat" For Append As #1
      Print #1, "w32tm /stripchart /computer:us.pool.ntp.org /dataonly /samples:5 >gtime.dat"
      Print #1, "systeminfo >gsys.dat"
      Print #1, "getmac >gmac.dat"
      Print #1, "exit"
      Close #1
      Shell "gethwi.bat", vbHide

      You use this information to generate an ID. But you don't even hash it with a one way hash, which means it's possible to forge a reply to give an desired result. A good one way hash would at least make that impossible. It is also not scaling very well - you will need a lot of support for pissed customers who changed parts of their computer or changed timezone.

      Furthermore, you do no authentication of the answer from the server. Anyone can send the response, and be accepted. You do not have any security. It would be trivial either remove your DRM by jumping over it, or supplying the very wrong values. A race condition would also work - overwriting the gsys.dat, gtime.dat, gmac.dat before your program reads it. Or simply replacing the code snippet above with a batch file which state echo "Desired values..." > gsys.dat.

      So take an evening, think about how you can bypass your system. Try my suggestions. Fire up an debugger, and have a look at the software.

      --
      Assembling etherkillers for fun an profit
    18. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      3/10 - Ctrl + Mouse Scrollwheel = Zoom in/out.

    19. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bingo. The same methods used against virtually all DRM solutions can be applied just as effectively to this OP's. If the code is running on a local machine, all it takes is some time and a little asm flim-flam to neuter it. The ultimate goal is not to appear legitimate by spoofing hardware or server-side auth, but to remove the checks entirely.

      The only difference between OP's DRM and any other is the smoke is a different color and the mirrors are turned differently.

    20. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      I'm glad you left the rest of the source code out that generates the inital hardware spec. If someone wants to add additional layers of modified hashing they can. The stuff you're complaining that's lacking is already in there. Each system will generate a unique 24-digit hardware ID code.

      QED

    21. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How are you going to handle legitimate users who decide to buy a new PC, or upgrade their bios, or install a new NIC? Do you realize that any sane cracker would simply patch your client-side code to allow access without it even trying to reach the server?

    22. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      As is every other piece of DRM. Nothing is crackproof, which is why I used the term "(nearly)". With this type of DRM, the more important part is to make sure the authentication server isn't easily compromised.

    23. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If InStr(List1(0).List(List1(0).ListIndex), " - Expired") > 0 Then
      MsgBox "Your license key for this particular module has expired. Please contact SoundHealth to renew your subscription."

      WM_SETTEXT ...yeah

    24. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, unless you've got a direct proof-of-concept exploit, such as faking burned in MAC address codes

      You should be exceptionally careful in using MAC addresses.

      Our previous ERP vendor at work tied to a MAC as well, without taking into account bonded ethernet where multiple physical network interfaces, each with their own MAC, are joined together and the bond interface assumes the MAC of a working interface under it.

      Every time we rebooted a switch and caused the server to fail over to one of the other three switches, the bond interface changed its MAC and locked out the license server.

      After refusing to provide a work around, the company sued the vendor for violation of contract.
      We got our quarter million dollars back and another two million in damages on top of it.
      Apparently a bit later another lawsuit was filed due to threats to send us to collections over invalid monthly maintenance fees, and their bank was ordered to freeze their accounts used for customer payments.

      They went out of business a few months after that.

    25. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      Yep, that would be for checking individual expiration dates for different modules, if the developer is going to use it to manage software content. That's what it's for.

    26. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The more important part of cracking it would be to make sure the authentication server isn't even part of the equation. You skip right over all of it. Server side auth is hardly crackproof, see literally every version of Adobe Creative Suite, Windows activation, Steam games, etc. All of them rely on some sort of server side authentication. Minecraft is another example; not only is it easy to bypass the server side auth code, it's equally easy to emulate the auth server.

      Can you point to any example of software that uses your DRM?

    27. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, no, due to the NDA I signed with a previous company I worked for. The entire software archive they had totaled around 2.5GB, which with this, along with rewriting major parts of their main application, reduced the total disk space requirements down to 398MB. And instead of having 20+ keys (in some cases 150+ keys) for each user and application, each user ended up only having 1 key to deal with.

      The only reason they didn't implement the new system was because they were "afraid they would somehow screw things up making new user accounts", despite the fact that a 5 year old can handle the server-side/administrative end, along with documentation. I wouldn't put it up if I knew it wasn't fully functional. So as far as I'm concerned, their source code is something I'm not giving out. The code I developed, however, is a different matter. If they don't use it, then it's mine. Plain and simple.

    28. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no error checking in the shell script, I think one can simply put read-only files with desired content in the correct place.

    29. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wasn't asking for code, I was asking for a target. Having the code would be cheating, so I haven't even looked in the SDK you linked to.

    30. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      Ah. The target vector would be emulating not only the server, but the actual files that are distributed FROM the server itself. When the user would access their profile (autoloading from 24-digit HWID, based off of hardware identification), the data that dictates expiration dates, hardware codes, modules, modulenames, etc, is where secondary encryption comes into play. Even emulating server side authentication using VMs is a lot more difficult than it would seem, since the actual content HAS to be copied in order for the crack to actually work. This is well above the skill level of most seasoned devs, so again, the weakest point would be the security of said authentication server. It's not crackproof, but it's extremely difficult to actually work around, even using external patching and disassembly. During my tenure at said company, I did months worth of testing, debugging, cracking, etc, to make sure that altering the compiled code would NOT be a simple cakewalk like other applications that are easily vulnerable to an external patching crack. Internal disassembly, once compiled, obfuscated, and compressed isn't exactly anyone's idea of a fun ride at a waterpark.

      The reason I left wasn't because I peddled some kind of snake oil, the code works. I gave several live demonstrations in-house, and for their costumer base. The reason I left was because I suffered a secondary fracture to a knee that had been fractured at a different location less than 10 years ago, which was due to negligence on the part of the company and the property management. Not exactly something one can just bounce back from. However, that's really beside the point.

    31. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      Less than 2 years ago*

    32. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      There doesn't need to be, but in order for that to actually work, you have to know the exact make of another user's computer, along with the resulting hardware ID code. It can be done, but it's not as easy as you think.

    33. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      They call said company, give them the old hardware ID code, then the new hardware ID code. From there, the administrative side takes less than 5 minutes to do, which the old profile is copied to the new server-side hardware identifier, and the appropriate adjustments are made to the encrypted profile. They restart the application, and the software automagically works. As I said earlier, a 5 year old could do it.

    34. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      Also, they would need to know the following 1) Another client's hardware ID 2) location of every module/software they plan on downloading while directory views on the server are disabled. The cracking part is a lot easier said than done.

    35. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      That goes without saying.

    36. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're telling me all these things about how hard it would be, encryption here, hardware tie-in there, server auth over yonder. That it would not be a simple cakewalk. I'm telling you I'd like to walk that cake, and all of that icing doesn't make me any less interested. I've walked those cakes before, they all submit eventually. But there's no cake to walk here. There's a recipe, but no cake. That's no fun, and there's nothing for anyone to learn that way.

      I wouldn't say your DRM specifically is snake oil. I would say that all DRM is snake oil. Much like a padlock, it can only deter the casual.

    37. Re: Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck malwarebytes and their personal clusterfuck of bs "keys-lmao", designed to 'protect' you. I respect op's intent, except the very first point of failure is expecting ALL keyholders at all times to gaf about internet access in order to use mwb. Besides if you are that desperate for some piddly soft that bad, give it to em, eh.

    38. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      The whole point of the recipe is for the developer to make the cake. That's what software development is. As for the padlock metaphor NOTHING is crackproof, and I never claimed that it was anyway.

    39. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you believe someone trying to crack your DRM won't have access to this information?

    40. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't seem to understand why I would rather have the cake without baking it myself. There's no purpose in writing a crackme for myself, I'd know exactly where the weaknesses are. Then I could brag on my blog that I cracked a DRM with an ominous sounding name in minutes with one well-placed jmp or a 5kb stub library. In the end, I'd have done something completely meaningless and of no value for anyone (that's nothing new) but I'd get literally tens of visitors to a blog that doesn't actually exist.

      But since there's nothing using your DRM to legitimately test, I'll just waste your time with this last comment and go to the store. All this talk of cake makes me want one.

    41. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      If they do, then there's a bigger problem to worry about, and it's not DRM.

    42. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      I understand why you'd want the cake without having to bake it. I get that, I really do. But the point is, IDGAF either way. I'm not the one wanting the pre-baked cake, and if I did, much like yourself, I'd go to the store and buy one. If someone wants me to bake that cake for them, well, cough up some cash and make the adventure worth my time.

    43. Re:Hardware Locking by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Many MACs are adjustable in the drivers.

      And yet some are not and are hardcoded. I.e. The Surface Pro series has a MAC that isn't adjustable. The registry hacks don't work because the registry keys don't exist and if you use some software to spoof the MAC you end up in a BSOD loop.

    44. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Burned in MAC? thats a 1980s 3com etherlink. last i checked those were in hardware rom.

    45. Re:Hardware Locking by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Can I move my license over to new hardware without having to rely on the software vendor's cooperation?

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    46. Re:Hardware Locking by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Also, how well does your system stand up to NOP?

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    47. Re:Hardware Locking by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      You haven't answer AC's question - do you have some software that uses this, so we can have a crack at writing a... uh, crack :-) Hell, just package something off of github, put the executable on your site and even I'll have a bash neutering the software.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    48. Re:Hardware Locking by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      If total overhead increase of 200KB for compiled application size, and ~3-5MB memory overhead for non-invasive DRM is a joke, then yes. But not as much as MS extending support until 2024 to allow for the "migration to .NET". At that point, I'll have moved onto other things.

      Hopefully you move onto something you understand. Do you REALLY think you're the first person to think they've got good DRM?

      He's been repeatedly asked for an executable we can have a bash at, and he's refused (apparently it's too much work). I've seen this on usenet waaaay too many times in the 90's. Some new aspiring unsung-encrypting-genius will pop up on comp.programming (or similar) and boast about their encryption algorithm without giving any details about it. Suffice to say someone usually managed to decode their ciphertext within a few hours.

      This appears to be more of the same - at least the usenet newbies had the grace to provide something that we could attempt to crack; this poster, as sincere as he sounds, doesn't even want the free crack-testing that we are offering, so yes, he probably *does* think that he's come up with a DRM solution that is better than anything that came before.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    49. Re:Hardware Locking by omnichad · · Score: 0

      There's no such thing as an interface where you can type commands? There are two available (Command Prompt and Powershell). Whether they are any good or not doesn't change their name.

    50. Re:Hardware Locking by omnichad · · Score: 1

      I can read it just fine - but it does appear to be designed for much lower DPI screens (1024x768 @ 17"). So the design is probably over a decade old.

      Do you know how zoom works?

    51. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The source code is available from the site directly, and AFAIC, I've answered his questions. The back-and-forth of that is simply one wherein the analogy had been made to having the pre-made cake .vs. the recipe. If you don't want to compile/alter the source code yourself, and then turn around and break it apart, then realistically, that's not really my problem.

    52. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the hardware identifiers used on your new system somehow generate the same HWID, then no. Again, explanation of this has already been provided in previous posts.

    53. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you just need to copy the files from a working machine.

      Amateur.

    54. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You haven't bothered actually looking at the source code if you think that's a possibility.

    55. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoosh.

    56. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The source code is there. It works when you put it together correctly. Clearly, you're one of those paint-by-numbers people, instead of a paint-by-solution person. If you want to test it that badly, you'll do it whether I provide a dummy binary or not. The other part you're not taking into account is the part where the datasets are distributed via ftp. You're gonna have to provide your own ftp server as well.

    57. Re:Hardware Locking by sexconker · · Score: 1

      There is no "Windows CLI". I even told you that when I said "(Hint - there is no such thing.)".
      Windows is a GUI. Windows does not have a CLI. The CLI you are referring to is a faked, extended DOS environment (to various degrees of fakeness depending on your version and bitness of Windows, cmd.exe vs. command.com, etc. ).
      It is not Windows. Windows has PowerShell now, but it's not a core part of the OS.
      In short, Windows does NOT have a true CLI.

    58. Re:Hardware Locking by sexconker · · Score: 1

      command.com and cmd.exe are different, both are NOT DOS, and both are NOT Windows.
      PowerShell isn't a core part of Windows (yet) and doesn't have anywhere near the coverage necessary to be a true CLI.

      These things may be CLIs, but they are not "Windows CLI". There is no "Windows CLI". idbeholda has no idea what he's doing. He seems to think running pulling some strings from some cmd.exe commands let him create strong, hardware-locking DRM.

    59. Re:Hardware Locking by omnichad · · Score: 1

      The only thing required to make either one a "true" CLI is that there be a command line that lets you interface with things. It does not have to be a core piece of the OS to fit the definition. Otherwise, you could say that Linux distros don't have a true GUI.

    60. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    61. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I get that you don't like Windows, that's fine, but windows DOES have a CLI. I don't know what you mean by "True CLI" But at it's very basic meaning, it's a text based interface that processes commands. The Command Prompt, PowerShell, and Windows Server Core are all CLI Technologies.

    62. Re:Hardware Locking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And a *nix Terminal Emulator is? I'm a diehard Linux user, I don't like Windows. But Windows still has a CLI.

    63. Re:Hardware Locking by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      It's actually about 6 years old. Eventually, I'll get around to changing it to a different theme/style.

  2. How stupid could someone be? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

    >> cracked or pirated version of Malwarebytes Anti-Malware

    Really? Could anyone on SlashDot really be this dumb?

    1. Re:How stupid could someone be? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

      On second thought, it looks like the AV company is staffed with idiots.

      >> keys is that they may collide with a legitimate key just by the sheer numbers...when you think you’re building a product for just a few people you don’t hash out these details...

      C'mon guys. Your wrote your own clue in the summary. (Starts with "h" rhymes with "trash"...)

    2. Re:How stupid could someone be? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brilliant, start with a nearly-entirely-free antivirus solution and then go out of your way to get a cracked version from dubious sources. Makes as much sense as antivirus generally.

    3. Re:How stupid could someone be? by sexconker · · Score: 2

      Hash collisions happen.
      The real solution is to NOT use a generation algorithm for keys. Generate strings, then approve only those you actually sell and distribute.
      Software installation/runtime checks locally against the generation algorithm, allowing for offline installations, bundled installers, old version installs, use in 50 years after all the servers are gone, etc.
      Updates ask for your key and the server decides if it's valid (an approved string that hasn't been used by thousands of PCs across the net).
      Allow manual updates from pre-downloaded files for offline use, use after the servers are gone, bundled installers, etc. If you want to be nice, allow anyone to download these updates, perhaps after some time period, or perhaps only when the software is EOL.

    4. Re:How stupid could someone be? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cracked or pirated version of Malwarebytes Anti-Malware

      Really? Could anyone on SlashDot really be this dumb?

      To be fair, I did download it from SourceForge.

    5. Re: How stupid could someone be? by corychristison · · Score: 2

      To expand on this... you should also generate an "Installation ID" upon validation, stored server and client side along with the key.

      This prevents users from trying to activate the key on more than one system, and allows you to offer controlled multi-system installs if you so choose.

      On update you validate both the key, and the installation ID.

      In the event a user needs to move the software to another install, you can contact the licensing dept and revoke the previous installation ID.

    6. Re:How stupid could someone be? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Have you read slashdot commentary lately?

    7. Re:How stupid could someone be? by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      On second thought, it looks like the AV company is staffed with idiots.

      Yeah that pretty much sums it up. I have a legit copy through work and it gave me the 'blahblahblah ur a pr8' bit the other day.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    8. Re:How stupid could someone be? by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      The real solution is to NOT use a generation algorithm for keys. Generate strings, then approve only those you actually sell and distribute.

      Hash collisions will eventually happen. I believe Windows XP suffered from it where the sheer number of installations has meant that there was a good chance a keygen will also make a valid key that's already been issued. Sure you are blocking a good chunk of them at the beginning, but eventually a keygen will stumble upon a valid key that you DID issue.

      I believe it also happened to a widely pirated game - the end result was legitimate users were getting locked out because the publisher created a huge list of keys (and the server checked it was issued!), and the keygen created keys on the list as well, so pirates could play the game, while the key was sitting in the box on the shelf at Best Buy. User comes around and boom, key is used.

      To expand on this... you should also generate an "Installation ID" upon validation, stored server and client side along with the key.

      This prevents users from trying to activate the key on more than one system, and allows you to offer controlled multi-system installs if you so choose.

      On update you validate both the key, and the installation ID.

      In the event a user needs to move the software to another install, you can contact the licensing dept and revoke the previous installation ID.

      The problem with that is users hate calling for support, and how long are you going to maintain it?

      I mean, great, you do this. Now you'll have to handle calls from people calling about a 10 year old version they need moved to a new PC. And forget about offering in-system deregistration because most users, by the time they install it, the old installation is gone - either hard drive died, got corrupted, etc., and there is no way to deregister the key.

      So either you have to deal with users who call to move their 10 year old copy of software (no longer supported) to new PCs (and hell no they will not pay to upgrade) even though it's no longer in production, supported, and bugfixes stopped 5 years ago, or you will end up with a really pissed off user.

      You also have to remember we're talking about $20 pieces of software. If it was a $500 piece of software then maybe you'll have more diligent users who will tolerate phoning software support, but likely not.

      For something like Malwarebyte's product, since it's online only, it's easy to check keys since it will have to get updates always.

    9. Re: How stupid could someone be? by jarfil · · Score: 2

      To further expand on this... keep talking, meanwhile as a client I'll be looking for software with none of that crap.

    10. Re:How stupid could someone be? by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Generation algorithms for software license keys is fine.
      Simple generated keys stop casual sharing of licenses. Nothing stops dedicated hackers.
      Why invest time and money in a very expensive license key system when all you're doing is providing the hackers with a more interresting challenge.
      The problem here isn't generating keys, it's the relatively high chance of colission; it's badly generating keys.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    11. Re: How stupid could someone be? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Please don't try to limit the number of installs. It breaks horribly when you try to do a re-install, or move to a new PC, or run in a VM. The nature of this software is that techs will often install it on customer's PCs, clean them and then remove it.

      Install counters are evil.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    12. Re: How stupid could someone be? by corychristison · · Score: 1

      Really depends on the nature of the software, I guess. For Malwarebytes it probably isn't the best idea, but at the same time it could easily de-reg the install ID upon uninstall.

      There are various ways to do it. My example was one such way, that is all. There is no one-size-fits-all.

  3. It's a great idea by the_Bionic_lemming · · Score: 2

    It's a good marketing move - most people just download the free version and scan. Problems fixed so they won't buy it for the bells and whistles - now they'll get lots of people to try the bells and whistles and might retain future revenue.

    It's better than them canceling the free version and make it pay only for revenue.

    --
    _ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
    1. Re:It's a great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're making the free version less tolerable with every new version, deliberately restricting it in ways it wasn't previously so that you'll take their premium trial just to be able to complete a scan in less than an hour. What's Spybot S&D like thesedays, it always seemed more trustworthy than these commercial "free" offerings.

    2. Re:It's a great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't care if the scan finishes in an hour, or in eight.

      I have customers that swear every time their computer takes an extra ten seconds to boot that it has a virus. Then I get calls demanding all sorts of scans even though the primary anti-virus has seen nothing, and there are really no symptoms of an infection. I kick off the scan and tell them to call me when its done. The longer it goes the more thorough is what the customer thinks.

  4. Good guys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've used the product over several years. I had the pleasure of meeting some of their folks at infosec europe (London) and as ever they remain some of the good guys out there. I'm happy to cut these guys a little slack when they need to sort things out - and I wish them well along the way!

  5. Where's the Linux version? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    distrowatch.com

  6. Tried It Out.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had a copy of MalwareBytes Home Full Version installed that I found on the floor of the internet and fired it up to see what happens.

    It said there was a new version and would I like to download it and install it. I let it install and let it run. It then popped up a window saying there was a problem with the license and asked me which scenario my copy came from. One choice was that I downloaded it from the internet or the second choice was that I had purchased a key from them. I, of course, chose option 2 and it went on and installed the new Premium Home version.

    Guinea Pig Sacrificed.

    1. Re:Tried It Out.... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I have used their service in the past but I never bought their program. I did some debugging and definitions work with a security company as a lark and have free access to their software. Anyhow, it took a minute to find a code online which I entered (use the ID too) and it offered me a free key after that. It was pretty painless. I will give their monitoring service a try on this laptop and see how it works out. I often do not use real-time AV anyhow.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  7. Windohs you say?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    This steaming load of Malwarebytes false security doesn't even run on Linux.

    Why would you give your child a Windows OEM PC and not help him/her with a dual boot install of Linux? Don't have the spare 10 mins? Or are you a stupid consumer level Windows enthusiast?

    eg. Son, your games go on Windows. Boot into Linux when you are not playing video games. Bingo. Your child doesn't become an idiot worrying about keygens for "anti-virus software".

    Make sure you tell them Internet Explorer is included with Windows for the sole purpose of downloading a web browser like Firefox. Put Adblock Plus, Ghostery, and NoScript add-ons on Firefox. Never use Microsoft email software. Thunderbird is free, etc.

    You can also tell them Oracle Virtualbox is free, and PC-BSD is free. Tell them to learn some software that has value beyond Internet Explorer and a flash player for webcam sites. Skype works on Linux and Android too.

    If you are not an idiot you can also show them how to run *nix in Virtual Machines. Show them how easy it is to copy a folder of a non-messed up backup VM install and start fresh. Encourage periodic data backups eg. bookmarks. Especially with SSD's, a reboot is not a big deal.

    As they grow older they will thank you and the end of these BS anti-virus apps and all related "stories" go in the toilet. Still waiting. If kids can use Macs, they can use Linux. distrowatch.com Costs literally nothing to be smarter.

    1. Re: Windohs you say?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But first and foremost, teach them how to pirate and install windows and how many ways it can now be done, steering them the hell clear from 8 and 10 esp.

    2. Re:Windohs you say?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I read was:

      blah blah blah WINDOWS blah blah blah FOAM AT THE MOUTH blah blah blah LINUX blah blah blah FROTH

      Please take your fanboy bullshit out to the highway and play in traffic. Linux is a great operating system, but you don't make it look good. In fact, attitudes like yours drive people away.

    3. Re:Windohs you say?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I read was:

      blah blah blah WINDOWS blah blah blah FOAM AT THE MOUTH blah blah blah LINUX blah blah blah FROTH

      Please take your fanboy bullshit out to the highway and play in traffic. Linux is a great operating system, but you don't make it look good. In fact, attitudes like yours drive people away.

      If you are driven away from an OS by "attitudes" you are stupid. Linux is a far better OS than Windows ever was. BSD is fantastic too. Mac could be, but it's not. At least they gave up the PPC and proprietary hardware lockdown before they became fully insignificant. It's still weak. No giant corporation says OK let's set up a Mac OSX server farm. How about a beowulf cluster of Windows 8 boxes. dumb.

      If you're mad because you like monolithic virus crapware that let's you play games that's your business. Nobody cares. My comment was for the people who aren't stupid.

      You also assert your expertise on attitudes about somebody you have no idea about... and fantasize that mysterious people drive other people away from Linux, when in fact, nobody is driven away from Linux. Supercomputers run on Linux. Not 1 on Windohs. None. Windows is garbage as an OS.

      Android is Linux, it's not looking real unpopular today. 1.5 mil apps on Play Store, most sold phone/tablet.. etc etc

      Google runs on Linux, Amazon runs on Linux, Netflix runs on BSD, Google used to run on BSD before it ran on Linux... brokerages run on Linux. Slashdot? I never looked. Damn maybe it's Windows XP workgroups?

      Billions and billions of dollars of supercomputers run on Linux. Governments run on Linux.
      http://www.top500.org/lists/

      Who runs Windows? Not them. You. The exact opposite of high tech.

      So you are a perfect example of a Windows user. Don't bother learning better OS's out there, just scrape by with KB123456 and your swell 50% off with Free Bundled Anti Virus software. It's quite believable that your approach to "thinking" will fail you if it's not the first OS you ever used. (based on what you blurted, you could have problems learning)

      Why did you even respond though when you literally provided nothing? Did you think somebody was looking for anonymous feels on slashdot? herp derp foam CAPS herp derp froth CAPS. Or are you vendor related.. hm.

      Take Malwarebytes and go bite your malware. That stuff doesn't exist on Linux because it is absolutely NOT NEEDED. Windows is on it's way out the door because the design sucked from day 1. I hope Malwarebytes goes broke and you are their AC CEO. Then you run out of money and crawl starving on your last breaths into the same traffic you mentioned.

    4. Re:Windohs you say?! by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      They all run Linux servers, big difference. Makes perfect sense there. Desktop, for most people, not so much.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    5. Re:Windohs you say?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Who runs Windows?"

      Millions of people all over the world. For as much progress as Linux has made, it's still pure shit for the average user on the desktop.

    6. Re:Windohs you say?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They all run Linux servers, big difference. Makes perfect sense there. Desktop, for most people, not so much.

      Every install of Linux is immediately server capable. It is a multi-user OS. Not some dumb named "home edition." Already everything works without shelling out more money for the "Professional Edition". Linux is professional at all times, every time.

      It "makes perfect sense there" because it's a better OS. eg. You can install the Servers Ultimate from Play Store and even your Android phone is immediately a smarter server than Windohs. Android is Linux.

      Linux installs faster than Windows, and is far more multi-boot friendly than any Windows has ever been. Linux has every bit as much (and more) of a user friendly GUI as every other OS, and the command line gives you a bash shell, exactly like Mac OSX. If you can navigate a Mac you can navigate Linux... and Mac is genuinely a fork of BSD... so if you can navigate a Mac you can also navigate BSD. Mac is just BSD that you have to pay for. Apple absolutely forked BSD code to even begin their business. It wasn't theirs. They copied it and built on it. They took BSD licensed code and sold it. For years you had to buy their hardware to even use it. Never forget when a company are dicks from the get-go.

      When you install linux, just choose KDE (the default) when you install Linux and it's awesome. Multiple virtual desktops, check a box to install anything you want. All free, as in thanks smart people for sharing smart code for free.

      If you are saying oh but noes you can't run Microsoft Office xyz $xxx/yr subscription... LibreOffice is free and does it all. OpenOffice as well but I prefer Libre. There is plenty of .pdf support in *nix, even on Android. Again, Android is Linux.

      The absolute ONLY reason I even have Windohs around is for current games. When more game devs write for Linux I will format c:\ and melt windows software discs with Bic lighters and celebrate the end of an era of Anti-trust monolithic suckware.

      Playstation 4 is BSD kernel. Does it suck? No. Is it better than Xbox 1? Yes.

      If you decide what is smarter because "most people" have it, and it is on their PC because it came with it as OEM OS installation, and that OEM OS installation resulted from monopolistic anti-trust methods, then the nature of your comparison is obvious. No need for me to elaborate. By all means if you have a point, spew it. Fact check me.

      I literally use every OS, and Windohs sucks by comparison. If anybody wants to find out for themselves, install every OS and compare yourself. Come back and tell me your conclusion. That'd be a great /. story. [Smart new person tries all OS's, finds out, Linux and BSD users were right the whole time.] First post can be "frist post, come on game devs what were you thinking".

      "Genuine Windows" --gtfo
      "Home Edition" --gtfo
      "Professional Edition" --gtfo
      "Anti-virus bundle" --gtfo
      "Office 365" --gtfo
      "KB123456" --gtfo
      "TechNet subscription" --gtfo

      and a *LOT* of other gtfo's.

      Windows belongs on an old operating system museum website for free, to run in Wine or whatever. It was a fad.

    7. Re:Windohs you say?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Who runs Windows?"

      Millions of people all over the world. For as much progress as Linux has made, it's still pure shit for the average user on the desktop.

      This is why "Millions of people all over the world"

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.

      "The plaintiffs alleged that Microsoft abused monopoly power on Intel-based personal computers in its handling of operating system and web browser sales."

      Convenient little side deals with OEM PC retailers, that is why it comes loaded on your PC at the store. A little hush hush here, a little wink wink there. Payola. Then the lawsuit, then augh damn, busted. Then more "cooperation". ;) ;) ;)

      Here is how Linux seat licensing works:
      Install Linux. Thanks.

      DONE

      There are many things you can not do with Windows that you can do with Linux. There is nothing you can't do with Linux that you can do with Windows. The absolute only exception is where it comes to game devs writing games primarily for Windows (and consoles) to get the largest audience and most profits.

      When more people use Linux, the game devs see the audience and sales they are missing, they port the code to Linux environments as well. It's already happening. eg. Steam. I see Top Seller on Steam for Linux right now is
      Community Hub
      Counter-Strike: Global Offensive $14.99

      You also dual boot Linux on your Mac. Google it.

      Here is what won't happen. Supercomputers run Windows. Google becomes a Windows 10 server farm. Netflix switches to Windows 11 Pro Edition. Fortune 500 companies eg. Amazon switch from Linux to Windohs. etc. No. If it was better, sure. It's not. So not just no but hell no.

      If you think Linux is pure shit for the "average user" on the desktop, you are not even as skilled as an average user. Kids all day every day use Linux. Maybe grandma can't program the VCR or comprehend installing an OS that didn't come already installed, but many can. Those are the ones that posts like the AC I'm responding to above give doubts to. You help nobody.

      Linux is bamf. Google it. distrowatch.com has links and rankings. My advice is avoid Ubuntu and Redhat/Fedora. Those are the Microsoft wannabe's.

      Like to see a cute chick teaching Linux? Google nixiepixel. She has been doing how-to videos for years on YouTube etc.

      If I say hey pour water from the bowl into the glass, and you are the type of person that drops the glass in the bowl... THAT person will have problems with ANY operating system. That type of person will count as a Windows user on headcount. "it came with muh PC" If you can read a how-to or watch a video, or are just adept in general. Linux rocks. Microsoft's virus prone monolithic anti-trust crashware can go to archive.org forever. The sooner the better. Linux rocks. Linux rocks. Android rocks. Android is Linux.

      Fact, check, me. You want the truth? Can you handle it?

      Also, if anybody reading this is absolutely brand new, you can install Linux into a virtual machine on your Windohs for free and play with it. Zero harm done. Oracle VirtualBox. Google it, it's free.

      Brainwashed/braindead Windohs users can spend the 10 minutes it takes to install Linux slapping themselves sillier. It's faster than that on an SSD if you can aim a mouse at "Next" at even average speed.

  8. not really giving much away... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    since they've moved away from the perpetual lifetime license and updates, and onto the shitty subscription model... mbam used to stand apart from the crowd in that regard, but now they're just the same greedy money-grabbing scum as everybody else.

  9. Fair is Fair? by digitaljc · · Score: 1

    So let's see if I have this right. With this initiative pirates get free product while customers are charged for the same product? Score: Pirates 1 / Customers 0 I say they expand the initiative to include providing existing customers with a free 1 year license extension and 1 year free to new customers. In that way, everyone can fairly enjoy the same benefits while being properly exposed to the premium product.

    1. Re:Fair is Fair? by nhat11 · · Score: 1

      Pretty much, I have almost no incentive to buy the product if I can pirate it then get it for free

  10. OK so how do I fix this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    A friend of mine (no really, my house is a Mac/Linux place), got the "Your data has been encrypted by Russian hackers, pay us extortion money or the cost goes up next week". So her laptop has been sitting here for the last month or two, because she's not gonna play that game.

    Can I un-fark her files? Anyone got a link or suggestions on terms I can google on this? It's been a month or two, I figured people would get smarter in the meantime, and indeed it seems they have.

    1. Re:OK so how do I fix this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *Your* house is a mac/linux place, so you must be a really smart guy that knows computers. Right? RIGHT?!

      You shouldn't have any problems figuring this out yourself, given that only PEASANTS run other operating systems.

    2. Re:OK so how do I fix this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe.

      Some of those cryptowares are easily reversed. You should be intelligent enough to figure out which one she has and google for that answer if you really do run Linux boxes.

    3. Re:OK so how do I fix this? by crypticedge · · Score: 2

      Short answer is no. Long answer is yes.

      Some versions of the crypto viruses have the keys released so you can decrypt. Others do not. If you know how to google, you know how to find out what version it is and if it's been released. If you've got cryptolocker it's simple.

  11. Reddit by kidsizedcoffin · · Score: 1

    Several months ago after one of the Internet large password breaches the company offered several "forever" codes on Reddit as a gesture of goodwill. Amazingly enough those are now coming up as these suspicious licenses now. I suppose you can't complain about something you got for free, even if it wasn't pirated. I have another year of the license now before it expires instead of lifetime.

  12. can we get back to the 1990s standard of antivirus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We need a generation of antivirus tools that decern between the disher and the dishee....... so it doesnt flag your attack tool, unless you've been hit with your own petard.

  13. Snake oil product vendors by ruir · · Score: 1

    offer free license key. Colour me impressed and dully excited. (disclaimer nothing against the particular vendor)

  14. Re:Hardware Locking (BIN SPAM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's pretty easy to lock down these things via hardware.

    NOP
    NOP
    NOP

    In fact,

    cough (me think he protest overly so) "to be frank", "to be honest" (trust me, that warm feeling is not me pissing in your pocket, in fact...)

    I have a working model that's (theoretically) infinitely scale-able

    So much for the fact. The "theoretically" taketh away the impossible "infinitely"....

    on any given server, ignoring file number restraints from the hosting provider.

    tl;dr? rhetoric + sophism + bullshit = pure_weasel

    http://www.tot-ltd.con/WMSDK.h...

    FTFY

    Now stop spamming and fuck off back to Intertubes Worriers where you belong. Surely they need more of your fake malware products more than /. readers? (Erick - that is you isn't it? Your self-promotion is almost as good as your ability to fall down fire-stairs when trying to skive off work.)

  15. A software company showing respect for customers? by Kevin108 · · Score: 1

    Damned if this isn't a first. I've never needed a licensed version of their software, but the transparency, respect, and benefit of the doubt they are giving users of their software, both paid and otherwise, truly impresses me. As such, I will be happy to purchase a license the next time I need their software.

    --

    It's a perfect time for being wasted.
    A perfect time to watch the stars.
    - Burden Brothers, "Beautiful Night"
  16. Re:Hardware Locking (BIN SPAM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That won't happen anytime soon. As for the fake malware product? Hardly. Any speculation that the malware scanner is somehow fake, or secretly malicious has been disproven for quite some time. Well over a decade, as a matter of fact. And yes, that is me. As for the insinuation that I fell down fire-stairs, that's a knee-slapper (pun intended). After the most recent injury (again, due to negligence on the part of the company and the property management), I left. Not because I was ripping anyone off, in fact, quite the opposite was true. I have back-and-forth emails proving this, along with their source code, readable and easily understandable documentation, and an actual working content delivery system that had all undergone extensive penetration testing. The reason I left was because they wanted to turn a legit work-related injury into a game of attempted blackmailing and some kind of bizzare victim-blaming bullshit.

    I can do quite a bit, but what I can't do is fix 20+ years of internal disorganization, including tax records going back to 1987. There's also quite a bit of other medical problems that have been ongoing for about 15 years, but really, fully disclosing my own state of health is nobody's business other than my own, and the attorneys involved in my current situation.

    Now, if you really want to be offended, I'd suggest visiting the following subdirectories: tot-ltd.org/rmd tot-ltd.org/sgp

    Along with - facebook.com/AGameOfCraps

  17. Only on slashdot.. by kuzb · · Score: 1

    ..would people shit on someone for acknowledging a problem, admitting fault, and then moving to fix it in a way that benefits not just the consumer, but everyone else too.

    --
    BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
  18. "Eating your words" != GOOD nutrition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Your hosts file comments are not trustworthy" - by omnichad (1198475) on Friday August 09, 2013 @11:22AM (#44520759)

    Oh, really? Ok: MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee who has seen & verified its sourcecode too no less as safe) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

    &

    MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus (per this VERY recent testing of them all) -> http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's GUARANTEED safe & clean (per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently) in BOTH its 64-bit model -> https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    ---

    Tells us, omniweasel:

    * HOW'S IT TASTE "EATING YOUR WORDS" flavored with your FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH ramming them down spiced with the BITTER TASTE of SELF-DEFEAT"?

    LMAO...

    APK

    P.S.=> Lastly: In the past, You also conceded MANY points on hosts to me & made huge mistakes vs. me here http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    &

    Here too http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    LMAO @ U, "omniloser"... apk

    1. Re:"Eating your words" != GOOD nutrition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've got to be the biggest loser in the world. Do you really have such low self-esteem that you feel the need to stalk people on an internet forum to tell them how "great" your hosts file is by hijacking the thread? Pathetic.

      Try getting a girl so you can lose your virginity. Also try getting a job so you can move out of your mommy's house and have an actual life. You know, grow up.

  19. "Eating your words" != GOOD nutrition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Your hosts file comments are not trustworthy" - by omnichad (1198475) on Friday August 09, 2013 @11:22AM (#44520759)

    Oh, really? Ok: MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee who has seen & verified its sourcecode too no less as safe) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

    &

    MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus (per this VERY recent testing of them all) -> http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's GUARANTEED safe & clean (per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently) in BOTH its 64-bit model -> https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    ---

    Tells us, omniweasel:

    * HOW'S IT TASTE "EATING YOUR WORDS" flavored with your FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH ramming them down spiced with the BITTER TASTE of SELF-DEFEAT"?

    LMAO...

    APK

    P.S.=> Lastly: In the past, You also conceded MANY points on hosts to me & made huge mistakes vs. me here http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    &

    Here too http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    LMAO @ U, "omniloser"... apk

  20. "Eating your words" != GOOD nutrition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Your hosts file comments are not trustworthy" - by omnichad (1198475) on Friday August 09, 2013 @11:22AM (#44520759)

    See subject: MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee who has seen & verified its sourcecode too no less as safe) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

    &

    MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus (per this VERY recent testing of them all) -> http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's GUARANTEED safe & clean (per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently) in BOTH its 64-bit model -> https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    ---

    Tells us, omniweasel:

    * HOW'S IT TASTE "EATING YOUR WORDS" flavored with your FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH ramming them down spiced with the BITTER TASTE of SELF-DEFEAT"?

    LMAO...

    Additionally - have some manners!

    It's NOT POLITE to talk with your mouth full as you "eat your words" quoted above after all that proof to the contrary from reputable sources.

    APK

    P.S.=> Lastly: You also conceded MANY points on hosts to me & made huge mistakes vs. me here http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    &

    Here too http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    LMAO @ U, "omniloser"... apk

  21. Fishy by sentiblue · · Score: 1

    I just have a feeling this "free" version will do things like Superfish on Lenovo... stealing info, or gathering non-private data to boost their advertising campaign....