Jump to content

BarryWilliams

Members
  • Posts

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by BarryWilliams

  1. I opined about this very issue and, after getting a bit of hostility from moderators for posting this behavior as being the possible cause of other user's pain, I decided to not comment or participate here anymore but I did continue to receive notifications of new replies. I am glad to see that this issue is being examined by the developers. While working as a programmer for IBM, without the benefit of finishing my CS degree (being in poor health killed it), I too ran into such user operation issues. I do not agree that all of the users that dismiss notifications are of low intelligence when it comes matters "PC". Indeed, I have found that it is a misconception by a programmer that usually gives rise to a user's "problem". I don't mean to belittle; actually this is something of a mea culpa. I know that being a programmer close to one's creation and understanding it intimately can lead to a certain "blindness" when it comes to user interaction. For my part, I did look for the answer of the behavior in the documentation and I am guilty of continually clicking the "Fix Now" items repeatedly with the same result. In fairness, all I got back from the interface was the equivalent of a "blank stare". Here's what I propose: Leave the behavior as it is except add a modal dialog with the message that detected threats must be "dispositioned" (that word was particularly annoying to one commenter who I think was a Mod) before update operations will complete. On being dismissed, the main dialog will open with the users attention drawn to the security item by some means of a highlight: maybe a honking-big, red-flashing arrow. Also, add "THREAT DETECTED! USER ACTION REQUIRED" in red letters to the "database out of date" dialog if there is an extant threat. I have found that a gentle clubbing of the user's eyeballs almost always evokes more than passing interest. As for automatic update of the database during operations invoked by the scheduler, the user can either use "autopilot", so to speak, and trust the boffins that created their computer "condom" to provide some mode to deal with threats or be more involved choosing instead to be hounded continuously by "screaming mimis" until they "stab it with their steely knife" . . . and so forth. After I understood that specific attention was needed, no problem! Now, if I get a repeated database-out-of-date error, I look to see if there is a detected threat I need to deal with. Maybe there could be some sensitivity so I can automatically deal with threats based upon their relative threat levels. Sounds simple but I am sure that feature could be difficult to implement. I still strongly recommend the program to anyone that I encounter. I use Norton 360 and I am currently trying the beta of the new product which appears to overlap with Malwarebytes. I also use automatic updates from Microsoft for my fully licensed copy of Windows (one of the cheapest security measures relatively speaking) along with the Microsoft supplied tools to deal with threats. Barry Williams What follows is a wordy and off-topic blab about me. I hope the Mod gods won't mind too much. If you read it all, it must mean you have nothing better to do than waste time reading the rambling anecdotes of an old codger! Bona fides: Aerospace engineer involved with programs from the Space Shuttle External Tank to the F/A-18 Advanced Strike fighter (again, no degree needed to excel - I do like to brag - although I had some college under my belt being comprised of mechanical engineering coursework) Programmer and problem solver for IBM for 3 years: originally to be an interruption in my pursuit of a bachelors degree in CS of only a semester or two. I was a well-paid intern in a fantastic job with a great company to work for. Alas, I was downsized out of my job by the consolidation of the education division. The downward spiral of my health started to steepen and I only worked 1 more year for a stock brokerage/financial management company as their IT director before I was forced to quit. Early years of computing: My first computer was a Zenith Z-120 with a 300 baud printing terminal that looked EXACTLY (caps because the usefulness of Google still amazes me at times) like this one: http://smist08.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/la36.jpg My first exposure to computing came in the mid-1960's when my father took me to his workplace at Lockheed. Some friendly engineering types took me under their wing and let me run a little program on punch cards on some big old mainframe that took up about 2000 square feet of floorspace. I was merrily running my improved program on a particular visit without obtaining the necessary clearance from the "boss" which led me to EFF up an experimental wireframe model of the C-5 Galaxy military cargo plane's fuselage elements that had been running for days: they were pissed - I wasn't invited back and my dad was almost not invited back too: he worked there! The C-5 wireframe was manipulable with a light pen and the effects of crude changes to the airframe could be calculated to approximately determine added airframe weight, aerodynamic drag, cargo capacity and so forth. I later saw the same type of round display tube and light pen being used with an early CAD system at Martin-Marietta Aerospace when I was working on the shuttle program in the 1980's I remember a "funny" thing I did when I visited the Lockheed lab as a kid. You see, there was this Friden calculator. It was a mechanical beast that was somewhat bigger than a typewriter of the day. Here are pictures and even a video if you are that interested: http://www.oldcalculatormuseum.com/fridenstw.html I was only 12 I'd guess but I'd long before learned that division by zero is undefined. Armed with that, I wondered how this computing marvel would deal with a problem encompassing such a parameter. I turned it on and waited for it to finish "booting up" for lack of a better term. Once apparently stabile, I carefully entered a 1 followed by the divide key and then zero (it was actually RPN so substitute an analogous set of steps if you know what RPN even means). Pressing the "enter key" (or the equivalent as I don't remember how it actually worked) caused the huge and heavy "accumulator" carriage atop the thing to start thrashing back and forth. I remember smelling the faint odor of machine oil after some period of "calculating" which prompted me to commence trying to clear the thing of its indigestible mathematical meal. Alas, all of my efforts were met with continued frantic clattering to the point I thought the thing would jump from the flimsy table upon which it rested. Getting a bit frantic myself, thinking I'd be discovered any minute trying to end my experiment on the now self-destructing calculator, I pulled the plug. After consideration of my options (chief among which was RUNNING!), I turned off the power switch, reapplied the wall cord to the socket and I switched it back "on". Only, it didn't switch on. Instead, it made a few humming noises, emitted more oily smell, clicked a few times in its final death throes . . . and went silent. Evidently, the machine was either broken before I got there and its ability to deal with division by zero gracefully wasn't operational; or it was broken afterwards. I don't know, In researching the recounting of this event, I have discovered that there was a "Divide Stop" key that evidently would quell the thrashing. Too bad I didn't know that at the time! Finally, I had an early hand-held calculator when I was in Navy BE&E (Basic Electronics and Electricity) school. I also found a picture of it here: http://www.vintagecalculators.com/html/mits_150.html (Damn! The Internet is so cool!). I think my calculator had a blue display and the square root, square and reciprocal keys were buttons on the top of the case and not on the keyboard as pictured here. The calculator was new in 1973. I don't know where I got the money to buy the thing. I guess it was from my first Navy paycheck as the calculator was about $120 and so was my paycheck! Finally, if my sentences didn't make good sense it may be because the drugs have robbed me of my good sense.
  2. I understand what you are saying that what I am doing might be considered trolling if I were about causing trouble. Trolling is defined: to make a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them. I am certainly NOT trolling as I am trying to help other users. I might be sharp, pithy, creative, learned, well-spoken but I am not rude or petty. I am also not a "proud author" in that I will listen to opposing points of view; to do otherwise would be to deny that there are plenty of people smarter than me. So, I am trying to help people use Malwarebytes which is a very good product in which I have invested time and money. By going back and finding users that seem to have similar problems, I am hoping to encourage them to continue to use Malwarebytes. I almost abandoned MBAM when I could find no documentation that explained the operation of the product. Mind you, I consider myself a sophisticated user as I have been using computers for 30 years. Although I didn't complete my dual-degree program in mechanical engineering and computer engineering due to financial then health problems, I still attained enough education to compete effectively in industries related to both. I have worked on the Space Shuttle External Tank, F-18 and classified projects that I may never be able to talk about. I also worked for several years for IBM. I mention this because I want to establish my bona fides as I am not a braggart. In my work experience, I was almost always a troubleshooter and problem solver. I found that gathering facts and considering them carefully before trying to fix anything makes for an efficient use of time and resources and leads to effective solutions. I think it is completely appropriate to ask those seeking help to do their part in that regard. Having users run diagnostic routines, observe the program in operation and send reports and screenshots is also completely appropriate. Having them launch straight away into remove, clean and reinstall without diagnosing the problem is, in my opinion, potentially counterproductive. I find it discouraging to get instruction that, when completed, leave me in the same circumstance and I'd bet that most people would feel the same. I feel less so if I have been engaged in a substantial way with those helping me before attempting to fix anything. I don't mean to criticize or demean anyone that invests their personal time here trying to help. I just think it would be better to diagnose the problem to some extent before offering any advice to perform complex and time-consuming tasks. I spent time reading, observing the program's operations and studying the available settings to determine how to deal with my problem. I joined the forum simply because I saw several users that seemed to have the same problem and I thought my solution might help them to fully benefit from MBAM. Indeed, I found a posting that goes back to the middle of May where two users complained about the same issue. I point this example out just to show that there is seems to be some history with this issue which indicates that the MBAM developers might want to take a look at providing more robust feedback to the users to reduce their frustration and preempt potentially needless involvement here in the forum. I invite you to consider a comment from a user that appears to have given up entirely. The user joined on 5/12/14, posted on 5/13 and hasn't been back since 5/18. Maybe someone could reach out to the user with encouragement to try MBAM again and offer them the simple solution I offered that has worked for a few people so far. https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=148569&hl=update I am going to post my little pearl in the hopes that users are monitoring the forums for updates and are still having the same problem. Who knows, maybe I can help them out too. It will be a WIN-WIN-WIN since I'll feel warm and fuzzy, their problem will be solved and the workload of the main contributors here will be reduced allowing them to focus on more complex problems. Lastly, thanks to everyone in the forum that have devoted so much time to helping others. Ron, I really appreciate your effort to be measured and diplomatic with me. I will take to heart your advice about my choice of words and I'll try to tailor my comments to reach a broader audience. I would point out that the Internet is at the disposal of all here to obtain the definition of words.
  3. Not to put words in paulcurtis' mouth, our time spent trying to figure out an undocumented "feature" is important to us. It can be vexing to say the least to get what appears to be boilerplate advice to do a couple of hours of work removing, cleaning and reinstalling when it is not necessary. Now, when a user has the same problem, you can offer this tidbit: Make sure any "Detected Threats" are dispositioned on the "Scan" page of the interface then check to see if you can update. Unresolved threats disable database updates. Short and sweet. Maybe it works and maybe not. In any event, the effort by either stakeholder would be small in relation to the potential payoff. Over time, the boffins in the shop can fix up the logic in the interface to inform of this conditional restraint on the functionality of the program. That is really the correct way, ultimately, to handle this situation because it unburdens the user but mainly it will reduce the load on the support staff by removing, forever in the future, this "fringe issue" that seems to be popping up quite a bit lately. However, I agree that most issues raised seem to be more complex.
  4. Make sure any "Detected Threats" are dispositioned on the "Scan" page of the interface then check to see if you can update. Unresolved threats prevent database updates.
  5. Make sure any "Detected Threats" are dispositioned on the "Scan" page of the interface then check to see if you can update.
  6. You can add an exception for any items you feel were detected in error and they will be ignored. Don't give up on MBAM just yet. It found and removed a threat (pseudo ransomware) that I picked up because I threw caution to the wind and did something I knew was potentially dangerous. I am ashamed.
  7. My computer being infected is not the main issue. I can understand how to deal with the detected threats perfectly well. My issue arose because the database update function is apparently disabled if there are detected threats that haven't been dispositioned. A lack of familiarity with MBAM likely contributed to my issue but there is little documentation (actually I have found no documentation) of this operational condition and I think it isn't at all unreasonable to expect a bit of feedback from the user interface to inform of this constraint. After seeing several people complaining of the same condition and at least one person benefiting from my suggestion, I think it is fair to say that my simple solution is more effective than jumping straight into remove, clean, reinstall . . . etc. My philosophy is to look for some simple thing and fix that first. As a former (retired due to health) aerospace engineer and a programmer (both an independent and several years at IBM), K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple and Straightforward) served me well. In closing, I share one of my most important and useful axioms: If a "solution" to a problem requires many exceptions, then the wrong problem has been solved. I saw many instances of programmers who write convoluted code to fix something because they were approaching the task from a bad perspective. I am speaking in general terms here and nothing I have said should be viewed as a criticism directed at anyone addressing the needs of users here. Personally, I found MBAM so incredibly useful when it removed a malware threat from my computer that I immediately upgraded to a paid version. Also, I appreciate the effort put forth by every one of the solution providers here even though I may not agree with the modality of the solutions provided.
  8. Make sure any "Detected Threats" are dispositioned on the "Scan" page of the interface. Apparently, it is a feature that the program will not update the database until all threats are dispositioned. It would be nice if this "feature" was documented (I haven't found a reference yet) or a reminder to disposition threats was provided.
  9. Make sure any "Detected Threats" are dispositioned on the "Scan" page of the interface. Unresolved threats appear to stop the program from updating.
  10. Are you behind a firewall or do you have to manually configure a proxy? Looks like your Norton360 is disabled. How about any other protection software such as Windows Defender or Firewall? My problem was that I could not update the MBAM database until I dispositioned the "Detected Threats" in the "Scan" section of the interface. That operational constraint is not clearly explained in the documentation and no warning is thrown by MBAM advising that the threats must be dispositioned before the update will occur. I spent considerable time reading the fora before finding the clue to my problem. I ignored all of the complicated remove, reinstall and other fiddly bits. I prefer to keep it simple and use complex "solutions" as a last resort. Note: I am not qualified to give advice about or solve problems related to MBAM. It is just that I have found that talking about problems in broader terms sometimes leads down a path that finds commonalities which alone or combined with other knowledge can lead to solutions.
  11. See my post in this thread https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=148393&hl= I don't know if our problems are any more similar than the database not updating. The upshot of the message I left in the referenced post: make sure any "Detected Threats" are dispositioned on the "Scan" page of the interface. I could not find any info in the available fora or the Knowledge Base as to whether this is intentional in the design of the software. Given all of the instructions to remove, clean, and reinstall and doing other fiddly bits, I get the impression the system wasn't designed to behave this way or the programmers haven't adequately documented the "feature". Otherwise, I doubt there'd be suggestions other than dispositioning the detected threats.
  12. I can understand your skepticism. I dealt with the problem for a week before I became irritated enough to dig in and fix the thing or disable/uninstall the software. I had the option to "Ignore Once" so, as an experiment, I immediately rescanned to get same threats detected and then I waited for it to update. When the update failed again, I ignored the threats again (they were minor) and the updates worked again. I put a comment in another thread (https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=148393&hl=) but there has been no response there from anyone. I think getting a reminder with the database out of date warning would be helpful. It seems that this is happening often.
  13. Make sure any "Detected Threats" are dispositioned on the "Scan" page of the interface.
  14. Make sure any Detected Threats are dispositioned on the Scan page of the interface.
  15. Make sure any previous Detected Threats are dispositioned on the Scan page.
  16. I had the same issue about the updates not working. After reading what cayennejim did, I started looking for the same setting. Having not found a setting named "Recover Missed Tasks", I continued to think about the problem and it occurred to me that I had some unresolved threat reports from my last scan. I decided that I should resolve them to see if there was a connection. I reasoned that the items were a "missed task" since I had not dispositioned them. Sure enough, updates were working again after I selected "Ignore Once" for the 8 or so items and hit "Apply Actions". I did another scan and the same items were reported as expected. I waited for the update attempt to see if it would fail again and it did. Then I went to the "Dashboard" and sure enough the "Update Now" item next to "Database Version" was disabled (greyed out). "Check for Updates" is also disabled in the context menu when right-clicking the Taskbar notification icon. Also, the Dashboard says "Your databases are out of date" and the button says "Fix Now". Pushing the "Fix Now" button does nothing. When I clear all of the messages on the "Scan" page, the update actions come back again. If this is a feature, the program should notify me to clear those items so the updates can complete. I have invested considerable time trying to figure out why my databases would not update. I tried the Help button and it took me to Malwarebytes.org. From there I went to the Knowledge Base and I read the topics. Under "Basic Troubleshooting" I found the topic "I'm trying to update but the 'Check for Updates' button is grayed out or unable to be clicked, why?" The only suggestion there is that the user lacks sufficient privileges. I also spent time reading other forum posts including those that had instructions for uninstalling and updating the program and doing other fiddlybits. I am glad I decided to not try those methods! At one point I was so discouraged I considered bagging Malwarebytes altogether. I am a sophisticated user as I have worked as a programmer and system admin in the past. I am also doggedly determined. I fear that many users may lack the knowledge and determination I possess which may lead them to abandon Malwarebytes. That would be unfortunate for them as I think Malwarebytes is an important and valuable tool that is dirt cheap considering what it can do to protect Internet users from the criminals preying on them every day. Please make the operation a bit more clear by providing feedback to inform the user that the "Detected Threats" must be cleared before updates can be performed. Or, allow the updates to take place without regard to incomplete actions regarding threats. Thanks for the excellent software and the contribution Malwarebytes has made to the safety of Internet users. I am going to install your other tools both to help me and maybe to help Malwarebytes as my contribution. Barry Williams Malwarebytes Premium user More info: Malwarebytes Anti-Malware 2.0.2.1012Build Date: 5/12/2014Database Version 2014.06.04.12
Back to top
×
×
  • 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.