Jump to content

Durew

Honorary Members
  • Content Count

    287
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Durew

  • Rank
    True Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Europe
  • Interests
    Computer security, human biology and some other things.

Recent Profile Visitors

3,474 profile views
  1. Hi Exile360, mods, Thanks for your reply. The systray-icon is fixed now. It was indeed a software conflict, part of mbam was missing on a whitelist of the anti-executable (I'm playing with). This prevented part of MBAM from running, as the anti-executable was disabled during the setup of the new mbam version the problem did not occur earlier. As the systemtray part of mbam is back I did not follow Exile360's troubleshooting advice for fixing it. The anti-exploit still refuses to see heapspraying. This was already replicated by @nikhils during the private beta and some exploits are caught so I do not think that is related to a faulty installation. I've attached the software I used for testing the anti-exploit, I could be wrong and perhaps it does work on a different computer. Do make sure to add the executables to the list of software protected by the anti-exploit part of MBAM, otherwise it would be a somewhat pointless test. Regards, Durew hpma-test.zip
  2. Hi all, I turned on logging, rebooted the computer and the systemtray icon was gone. As this also meant that the messages that an exploit was blocked were gone as well this was somewhat inconvenient. After the reboot I launched an exploit it would detect at 9:41, launched all heapsprays the tool offered (wich it could not detect) at 9:42 and the first exploit again at 9:43. As the systemtray Icon disappeared I also added the autoruns-file for the standard-user account I always use. Regards, Durew mbst-grab-results.zip autorunsStandardUser.zip
  3. Hi all, @Porthos @exile360 thanks for your suggestions and swift replies. The self-protection and real-time malware protection are up and running again. No false positives showed up during the scan. The issues with the exploit protection however remains. Just like with the previous version. As I couldn't find it in the known problems list I was somewhat disappointed. @LiquidTension Could you add this to the known problems list? Regards, Durew
  4. Hi exile360, LiquidTension, I've removed the old version and installed the new. The good news is that the FP no longer occurs. The bad news is that the anti-exploit is having the same issues as the previous version. The worse news is that I cannot enable the self-protection. Clicking the switch makes no difference. (rebooted several times, didn't work) The worst news is that the same applies to the real-time malware protection. Does the beta-version have a clean-removal tool that could help? PC specs attached Regards, Dures P.S. Even without MBAM my PC is sufficiently protected against malware, so I'm not worried about getting infected. specs.txt
  5. Hi @LiquidTension, Then one last request. I notice MBAM still having version number 4.0.0. Is this correct or did the program update fail? Edit: the update failed. Need to try again. Regards, Durew
  6. Hi all, The zip-folder was done manually so I hope nothing is missing. In short MBAM picked up the streaming_client of steam. Regards, Durew FP submission.zip
  7. http://physionet.cps.unizar.es/challenge/2013/sources/maurizio.varanini@ifc.cnr.it/B/FecgQRSmDet.m Should contain a matalb-script a fellow student advised me to try. (ECG analysis related). Seems to be a university website. Thus I think that this is a false positive.
  8. "Behave as such" or "being able to prevent live infections in equal measure" is the key difference here. At MBAM they don't seem to believe in fighting stuff that doesn't do anything so I don't expect them to add on-acces scans. In the FAQ (linked below), post 5, this is explained in more detail. Personally I dislike this 'can replace'-claim so on my computer it functions as a companion AV/AM. My main AV does the on-acces scans.
  9. Was the infection active? MBAM is known for not caring much about dormant infection as they don't do anything. Out of personal interest: you wrote "detected by threats when performing a personalized analysis", what is "threats" for a program/service? Could you tell more about it? Regards, Durew
  10. Hi Amaroq, You may want to read the following article: https://www.zdnet.com/article/malwarebytes-acquires-windows-firewall-control-firm-binisoft/ So the firewall seems to be on the to do list. Could you tell what features of glasswire you like that you would like to see implemented? Regards, Durew (home user)
  11. At the malwarebytes employees: I like the dark theme idea.
  12. Hi Amaroq, It is currently possible to protect your important settings with a password, would that be sufficient in your opinion? If not you might want to explain why you feel this is insufficient to strengthen your case and increase the change they see the value of you proposition. Regards, Durew
  13. So far I've had MWB running with Symantec EndpointProtect and Emsisoft AntiMalware without problems (do set exceptions). So I politely disagree with your statement. That said, many here consider MBAM+Windows Defender to be sufficient.
  14. Hi Oaklandr, Malwarebytes is blocking acces to a site it deems dangerous. That's all. But if you think you are infected, please visit this topic explains how to get that checked out. Regards, Durew
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This site uses cookies - We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.