Honorary Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Durew

Profile Information

  • Location
  • Interests
    Computer security, amongst other things.

Recent Profile Visitors

2,112 profile views
  1. Hi axkazex93, The principle behind a lot of exploit mechanisms can be found in the user manual of EMET. You can download it from https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=50802 I hope this will help, if you have any questions, feel free to ask. I can't promise I can answer them though. Regards, Durew (not an IT student nor an IT professional)
  2. @Tarun Won't turning off anti-exploit or anti-ransomeware trigger continuous warning messages? I've heard quite a few people asking around on the forum asking how to disable these warning messages, only to be told it is impossible (and will continue to be impossible).
  3. Hi promidi, If you set the language to English (U.K.) the dates wil be displayed as you proposed. I hope this helped. If you have any questions, please ask. Regards, Durew
  4. Hi STAR, Can you explain at what point you do not understand the directions? We could try to walk you through it. Regards, Durew
  5. Hi Cabizzi, Did you just start a new topic here: https://forums.malwarebytes.com/topic/193954-real-time/ Regards, Durew
  6. Hi LinkinForcer, Malwarebytes only scans files that can be executed. Virusscanners tend to scan just 'n about every file it can find. As such, that the number of files scanned by malwarebytes is lower than that of your virusscanner is normal. I hope this awnsers your question. If you have any questions (left), feel free to ask. Regards, Durew
  7. Hi mohawk, Officially it is not a known issue, as it is not in the 'known issues' topic. Then again, I've seen the problem more often over here and used to encounter it myself. (I don't know why it got better.) I suggest you start your own topic about the problem with the realtime protection you experience so that those better versed in these kind of problems can help you solve it. Regards, Durew
  8. Hi filipanton, On my computer the service uses about 243 MB. So I'd say it probably normal, maybe a tad high but not excessive. It staff or expert disagrees with me than they are right. Regards, Durew
  9. Hi Cabizzi, Could you post the list of steps they ask you to take so we can talk you through it? Regards, Durew
  10. Hi DeGraff and anyone looking into this, On my computer (windows 10 Pro) the registry key value of the key mentioned before is C:\PROGRAM FILES\MALWAREBYTES\ANTI-MALWARE\mbamtray.exe So on my computer the slashes seem to be correct. How bad it is that the quotation marks are not there I do not know. I hope this helps anyone (probably staff) to get this bug/issue resolved. Regards, Durew
  11. Hi Peter2150, MBAM2 is not fool proof. see this test report: https://www.mrg-effitas.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/MRG-Effitas-360-Assessment-Q3-2016.pdf As such, most people prefer to have mutliple layers so the failure of one does not mean getting infected. MBAM3 provides (some of) these layers. I hope this clearifies. Regards, Durew
  12. Hi mbam4ever, Though I agree that EMET is older and thus more time tested i'm not really sure wether it stood the test of time that well. A simple search for "EMET 5.5 bypass" should clarify what I mean. But this is personal preference and in the end everyone one has his/her own preference. Finding test for anti-exploit systems is not easy so we just have to deduce what is best from what we know and hope we are right. Good luck with playing with MalwareBytes anti-exploit settings! Could you post you findings so that others may benefit from them? Regards, Durew
  13. Hi mbam4ever, Glad to know you already knew that. Again, see this forumthread. It has screenshots in the first post showing with what setting EMET and 3.0EP run together. Set those settings to EMET and they should run together without conflicts. Experiences form other uses can also befound in this thread, it should provide you with all the information you need. Malwarebytes anti-exploit was later implemented in MalwareBytes and forms the current 3.0EP. As I still use both EMET and 3.0EP together I'm quite sure the info is still relevant. 3.0EP has some more setting than on and off but nowhere near EMET levels. As far as I know nobody has messed with the settings of 3.0EP to get it working with EMET. I hope this helps. If you have any questions, please ask. Regards, Durew
  14. Hi mbam4ever, Wether it is the best can be debated but, with the correct settings in EMET, 3.0EP and EMET can run together. ). You just need to know what protection features for what process needs to be disabled. A long time ago a few forum members figured it out in this topic. If you have to choose between the two I'd go for 3.0EP as it offers a more layered approach then EMET. In the past we had a discussion about this here. Just for the record: neither EMET nor 3.0EP use signatures. I hope this helps. If you have any questions, please ask. Regards, Durew
  15. Hi Saurabhdua, Out of curiosity, as the behavior you proposed is what I would expect from the free version, (I use the premium version) is there a chance that when you upgraded to 3.0 that it started a new trial version? If so, you suggestion should be implemented in a couple of days (as the trail expires). I hope this helps. If you have any questions, please ask. Regards, Durew