"This example of vicious competition goes against IObit's ultimate mission to offer the best service for our customers. "First, we would like to apologise to our users for the unnecessary frustration due to these circumstances", says Bing Wang, IObit product director. IObit says it conducted an inspection on its own programs to make sure there were no issues that could cause false positives. However Malwarebytes has not taken the company seriously. The false positives were released 10 days prior and IObit says it initially contacted Malwarebytes at that point. While those who use both programs could list Advanced SystemCare files as excluded when Malwarebytes initially reported them, the program could then pick up other files for reporting.Īccording to IObit, this operation means users could potentially no longer use or trust the Advanced SystemCare program. This time around, IObit says it will ‘spare no effort to protect the company and the users' rights'. However, the two companies have been doing battle with each other since at least 2010, when Malwarebytes accused IObit of stealing signature databases, according to reports by Softpedia. Many antivirus providers include scanning for PUPs and potentially unwanted applications (PUAs), and this time it seems Malwarebytes was a little overzealous about its flagging.Īs of March 31, IObit says Malwarebytes hasn't provided any official criteria or communication channels for how to deal with misleading flags. PC troubleshooting provider IObit has openly criticised Malwarebytes for flagging its Advanced SystemCare as a potentially unwanted programme (PUP) and removed it without warning.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |