Jump to content

CaptainHindsight

Members
  • Content Count

    37
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by CaptainHindsight

  1. I think that high DPI scaling is only complex when the OS is trying to accomodate apps that were written in old GUI frameworks which assumed bitmapped graphics with a fixed or small range DPI (e.g. near 72 DPI). If you use a modern graphics API, you should get perfect scaling behavior (for text and vector graphic images) with no effort because the graphics framework will know what your current hardware is and will auto scale everything so that it comes out at the physical size that you want while using the full pixel resolution to be crisp. For example, all modern smartphone APIs are
  2. I just checked, and under MBAM's Settings --> Display, hardware acceleration is disabled for me. I think that it was that way by default.
  3. My MBAM GUI under my current settings definitely is sharp, it is just way too small. If I do the Override high DPI scaling behavior --> System (Enhanced) hack, the GUI gets bigger but fuzzier. In terms of bigness, it becomes 25.5 cm diagonal, which is a perfectly good size and is what your GUI image displays at on my box. But the text is fuzzy, no good!
  4. Staff: thanks again for your reply. I have a Dell Precision 7530 workstation laptop. Its video card is an AMD Radeon Pro WX 4150 w/4GB GDDR5. Its built in monitor is a 15" 4K. But I mainly use a much bigger external monitor, a Dell U2718Q, which is a 27 inch diagonal 16:9 aspect ratio fake 4K (3840 x 2160) monitor. My Win 10 Display settings are the same as yours except that I scale my monitor to 150% (otherwise the default text size is tiny). This is the same Display settings as Pluto. On my external monitor, your MBAM Reports image measures ~25.5 cm diagonal (I held up a r
  5. Staff: thanks for answering me. I was aware of your post #2. My point is that whatever you are doing, it is not working for me! At least, not from a default install nor if do the Override high DPI scaling behavior --> System (Enhanced) hack. If there is another way to configure this that I have overlooked, by all means enlighten me. Do you yourself have a 4K monitor, especially one about 27-32 inches diagonal? If not, you definitely deserve one! And once you try one, trust me, you will never go back. It makes that big of a difference. If you have one, does you
  6. I logged in just to comment on this issue. Like the original post, I too find Malwarebytes's text and icons to be ridiculously small on my 4K monitor. It is almost unusable. I hate having to use MBAM now, and I think that MBAM 4 is even worse than I recall 3 being... Like him, I also run my system scale at 150%. Why is it that some Win 10 apps behave absolutely perfectly, having fabulously sharp and normal sized text and icons, but MBAM does not? One (of many) examples of perfect behavior in Jebrain's IDEs (e.g. their Java one jetbrains IntelliJ or their Python one jetbrains
  7. I have Malwarebytes Premium set up to do a complete scan every day at 05:00. Today, for the first time, it flagged a file named MKVEXTRACTGUI-2.3.0.0.ZIP as malware. It is an installer for MKVEXTRACTGUI. I have had that file on my computer (in 3 different locations) for several years now, unmodified I think, and it has never been flagged before. I attached both my MBAM scan logs as a file, as well as the file MKVEXTRACTGUI-2.3.0.0.ZIP, to this post. I also uploaded MKVEXTRACTGUI-2.3.0.0.ZIP to virustotal just now, and nothing detected it as malware.
  8. I think that one of my relative's was tricked into letting someone take remote control of his computer a few weeks ago. Full details are below. My ultimate question: if he actually let someone take remote control of his computer, could they have infected it so deeply that it is hopeless to try and clean it? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Full details: Wednesday evening (2 days ago) I emailed a 90 year relative's in law that I wanted him to run a Malwarebytes scan before I come to visit him this weekend. (I had been planning to do several computer c
  9. Thanks for your reply and for confirming my understanding. Old style mechanical hard drives have been pretty durable for years (a few decades?) now. The sole concern that I am aware of is with SSDs. It is true that SSDs do have write limitations. Key specs to look out for are "Drive Writes Per Day" (DWPD) and "Terabytes Written" (TBW). For example, my latest laptop is a Dell 7530 Precision Mobile Workstation with a Samsung 970 EVO 2 TB SSD. Its product page gives a "Terabytes Written" spec of "1,200 TBW with a 5-year limited warranty, achieving 50 percent higher t
  10. MBAM: I really hope that you are looking at this thread. I am a Premium user and I have a huge need for command line support I want to run a full MBAM scan every day as part of a suite of nightly processes. The only way to properly do this is to have a command line script that says "do process 1" and then when that is over "do process 2" etc. But because MBAM lacks command line support, I have to resort to scheduling scans. But that is a deeply inadequate substitute, because all the processes in the suite have variable execution times. So, with scheduling, I am forced to
  11. Reading the wiki link on reCAPTCHA more, is MBAM using the NoCAPTCHA version? The wiki link says: "Because NoCAPTCHA relies on the use of Google cookies that are at least a few weeks old, reCAPTCHA has become nearly impossible to complete for people who frequently clear their cookies." I clear my entire browser cookies every time that I shut it down, which is more than once a week. Furthermore:
  12. I just logged into my MBAM account at https://my.malwarebytes.com/en/login# That login was agonizing because this MBAM website uses the horrid reCAPTCHA as an extra layer of alleged protection. I hate reCAPTCHA with an unmitigated passion. It took me many screens to pass that ******* test. Once logged in, I tried to file a support ticket. Once again, the website made me do a reCAPTCHA test before I could click on the Submit Ticket button. Why? I had already done that upon login?! I tried several times that pass this reCAPTCHA, but eventually had to give up. Dea
  13. Also: could a Russian IP address have an innocuous explanation, such as, since I was sharing a file, maybe there was another ordinary person in Russia who simply wanted to download it as well? Also, strictly speaking, 46.172.212.116 is a Ukrainian not Russian IP address that points to the domain name pool.sevtele.com (if ipinfo.info is to be believed, not that that is any more reassuring...).
  14. My colleagues at the DNC tell me that that is just fine. Kidding! Thanks for adding that info.
  15. Thanks for your response. I just sent you a private message with the subject "requested files" that has the requested files. I looked at this a little deeper (the log files), and I think that my initial guess that Vuze was trying to download an auto updater was wrong. My version of Vuze is the latest, there is no update. Instead, I think that Vuze was trying to open a connection to IP address 46.172.212.116, and that particular IP address was blocked. My guess is that that IP is one that is know to you to have downloaded malware in the past to other people?
  16. While running Vuze today, I noticed that Malwarebytes Premium version 3.4.5 flagged Azureus.exe as malware. My guess is that Vuze wanted to download an updater to itself (i.e. Azureus.exe), but MBAM caught that, and decided to block it. Looking at Reports --> View Reports, I see that MBAM's Category for Azureus.exe is "RiskWare". My questions: What exactly is "RiskWare"? I have only used MBAM free in the past, never Premium (am currently on a free trial), and MBAM never identified Azureus.exe before as malware (when I manually scanned my system), so did anything c
  17. Aura: thanks for your response. I did download this installer from the official 7-Zip website. I too now conclude that AVG must have reported a false positive this morning. Reason: after it auto updated its database later today, I right clicked on the installer and did a dedicated scan of it with AVG and now AVG thinks that it is fine.
  18. I use AVG paid for and MBAM free. All programs are the latest versions, and both have the latest databases. This morning when I logged onto my computer, to my horror, I found that AVG had popped up a dialog saying that the installer program for 7zip, 7z1604-x64.exe, harbors the Trojan horse Atros5.AYO. Check out the attached screen shot. So, I opened MBAM, updated its database, and then scanned my entire directory where I store all installer files. MBAM found no issues whatsoever. See attached screen shot. I then went to https://www.virustotal.com and up
  19. I am concerned about multimedia files that I download having malware inside them. In the first answer in this forum post, David H. Lipman soon states But then he goes on to note Assuming that the above info is still current, I have a couple questions. First, why does MBAM skip scanning of non-executable files? Yes, executables are the most significant danger. But interpreted file types can still have malware. Like MBAM eventually added support for scanning within archive files, will they eventually add support for scanning all file types? Second, I note that I
  20. David: my original post on 2014-12-23 observed this bug in MBAM version 2.0.4.1028, and that is the version that is still presented for download on the official link as of this instant. Or, did you simply mean that the MBAM developers internally finished work on the next update, which has yet to be released to the public?
  21. Subject says it all. My original post, with all of my original details, is here. It was pointed out to me by one of my responders to read your false positive reporting guidelines. Normally, I would generate the requested log file. However, my original scan took 2.5 hours, and my wife is going to kill me if I spend any more time on the computer right now, as we have to pack for a trip tomorrow. So, as a quick substitute, I am simply attaching the AzureusTor.exe.bak file to this post so that the MBAM developers can have a full go at it. I trust that that will work. Scratch the senten
  22. Pondus: many thanks for the suggestion. I unquarantined it, and made virustotal rescan it. Here is its results. Exactly 2 out of the 56 malware programs it used claimed that it was malware: MBAM and ByteHero. False alarm by MBAM, or evidence of brilliant detection that all others are blind to?
  23. When I last tried using MBAM back in August, I was hit by a bad bug in MBAM if it tried to scan a TrueCrypt volume. My travails are documented in this post. So, I was keen to see if the latest version fixes that bug. I downloaded and installed the latest MBAM (version 2.0.4.1028) this morning. Before leaving for work, I selected a custom scan, and selected all my drives (including 2 TrueCrypt volumes), and selected all scan options, including for rootkits. When I got back home, I found to my pleasure that my machine had not crashed, and that MBAM was presenting me with scan results: the
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.