Jump to content

hake

Honorary Members
  • Content Count

    529
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About hake

  • Rank
    Elite Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Wigan, England
  • Interests
    Rugby League, Cricket

Recent Profile Visitors

8,346 profile views
  1. I looked on in helpless horror as the system restarted. There was no way to stop it in the short time available to act. Fortunately I always backup the system BEFORE installing a feature update.
  2. I guess that the apparent lack of an option to wait until the next system start will be in the code. I was simply unable to cancel the restart. MBAE can also require a restart in a similar way but it has not caused a similar difficulty to MBARW, as far as I am aware. I am now on my guard. The incident happened while I was running Windows 10 2004 installer to update from version 1909 (OUCH!) so I was extremely stupid to try to update MBARW at that time. The devil makes work for idle mouse clicking fingers.
  3. If an installation is attempted when MBARW is already auto-updating, a message box will pop up informing the user that a sytem restart is necessary. The trouble is that the user is not allowed to prevent that restart, only delay it for a short time. If another possibly critical operation is proceeding at the same time, then that is the user's bad luck. The moral of this tale appears to be not to manually update MBARW including and after version 0.9.19.56 - 1.1.330.
  4. Come on lad! You've only got 70 yards to go.
  5. I have made an error of omission. I forgot to mention the reporting of a Bottom-Up ASLR Exploit Blocked in Windows XP not long ago. I love this one which appears to show some evidence of modest randomisation of base addresses in Windows XP. It's a nice curiosity if nothing else. It has only happened once. I have been known to stumble across web sites which depict young ladies in bathing custumes . I use MVPS HOSTS and OpenDNS which I have used for many years as do all my 'customers'. We all have OpenDNS 208.67.222.222 and 208.67.220.220 added to our network DNS settings.
  6. I wish that I knew why my Winows XP SP3 has managed to avoid any attempts to exploit it since 2004 (when the present incarnation was installed) and that includes after April 2014 since when I used POSReady updates (until MS broke its own rules in August 2018 and ceased to update this pre-SSE2 processor equipped system). I just cannot understand how I could have acquired this apparent immunity for any Windows systems I have installed from installation media? The Windows 8.1 and 10 systems which I have installed and currently maintain for myself and friends and relatives also enjoy such apparent immunity. One observation common to all these installations, including XP and now 7, is that no alarms/warnings have yet been shown of attempted exploitations or violations. Needless to say, I do NOT use unsupported Windows systems for any purpose which would put at risk privacy and confidentiality or failing due diligence as is required by banks. I have yet to be aware of having private information being stolen or accessed, i.e. I have not experienced any effects of such events.
  7. I won't waste you guy's time any more by asking questions about XP. MBAE sticks at version 1.12.1.109 which works jolly well. Out of idle curiosity, I am interested to see if XP can remain untouched by malware and it is now the only system I have which provides a platform for Agnitum Outpost Firewall Pro 9.3 which runs with maximum security settings. To me it's the equivalent of driving a classic car.
  8. Thanks Pedro. I have found that XP on faster hardware than my 18 year-old system also has uncertainty in starting MBAE. I will try your suggestion.
  9. Thank you for that. I regret to say that I am unable to use MBAE 1.13.1.186 or 164 because of the inability of those versions to start reliably with XP. Consequently I have reverted to MBAE 1.12.1.109 for Windows XP. This version has consistenty started reliably and is able to respond to my bat MBAE start script in the very rare cases when it doesn't start properly. Sometimes MBAE starts and the system tray icon fails to show and sometimes mbae-svc.exe simply won't go. I am intrigued as to why MBAE is so sensitive at startup. Is there a timing issue? Other startups are robust and survive the chaos of startup. Fortunately MBAE in later versions of Windows seems immune to this At least MBAE 1.12.1.109 allows every advanced setting option to be ticked and to remain ticked including those for RET ROP gadgets. SumatraPDF is the only application to take exception to RET ROP gadget checking. I guess that MBAE 1.12.1.109 is better than nothing.
  10. I have just become aware that the Outlook Express 6 executable msimn.exe (in Windows XP) has disappeared from the shield list. I had previously (several years ago) manually included it in the shield list using the profile of 'Browsers'. Assuming that I had accidentally deleted the shield, I tried to create a new shield for msimn.exe and MBAE declined to add it to the shield list, telling me the the application is already protected. By coincidence, MBAE now has the capability to block potentially malicious email attachments. Is Outlook Express treated as Outlook for this purpose? Can it be confirmed that Outlook Express is still protected from exploits using the 'Browsers' profile? There is no item shown in the shield list for Outlook so there seems to be no way of switching MBAE protection off, only the blocking of potentially malicious email attachments (I am unlikely to do this but I am unable to do so if I felt the need to). Additional note: Microsoft Outlook Express appears in the MBAE log as a protection event so it obviously receives some degree of protection but is it in the profile of 'Browsers'?
  11. Hi Pedro. Nice to hear from you. Hope you are successfully ducking and diving through the virus hazards. In my ignorance, I wondered if legitimate pen testing could be subverted to criminal ends. Behind the barrier of my NAT router, I don't anticipate being the victim of non-ethical pen testing but I am not sure.
  12. Isn't pen testing a legitimate activity? If it is not, then presumably I should be well-advised to enable the relevant new protection. This release works good with Windows XP, 7, 8.1 and 10.
  13. Keep old version installation executables so there is a fall-back position. Uninstall the new and reinstall the old.
  14. Thanks very much. No need. MBAE 1.13.1.164 seems to have settled down and is starting well consistently. Perhaps this is an example of Windows' alleged ability to tune itself. It's nice to have the latest anti-exploit protection. I do allow about a minute following the logon prompt before clicking the button to set everything rolling.
  15. I do not use fast startup with Windows 10. I have yet to notice MBAE failing to start properly. MBAE has a history of uncertain starting on my two XP systems. I can say MBAE 1.12.1.109 started properly every time wheras 1.12.1.90 had the odd hiccup but there is no definite pattern of behaviour. At the moment MBAE 1.13.1.164 seems to be enjoying a purple patch. I have a vague hunch that the use of Agnitum Outpost Firewall Pro 9.3 might affect things but who uses that nowadays apart from me and probably very few others.
×
×
  • 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.