Pardon me, folks, but... Taking this issue to personal messages and personal topics on other forums to address individually is counter to effectively addressing the particular question raised in this forum theme: Malwarebytes DOES identify a threat, viz., an outbound attempt to connect with the malicious website ccbidder.tlvmedia.com - with there being a logical inference that there is malicious software actively operating within the files of our computers. While I understand that not all threats are being identified by Malwarebytes (or any other anti-malware software), and hence is being handled as identified threats should be, it seems to me that if Malwarebytes does identify evidence that there is malicious software acting on a patron's computer, and does address a 'symptom' of the contagion, Malwarebytes would pursue a course of finding and eliminating the source of the threat. This is not being done.I have to ask, then... why not? One symptom of active malicious software should be enough to get the ball rolling to seek out its source to address the threat. In fact, there should be no assumption made that the evident malicious software is capable of producing only the single threat identified by Malwarebytes (i.e., attempt to access the malicious website ccbidder.tlvmedia.com). Identifying this 'symptom' of an infection must be sufficient reason to find and eliminate the source of the infection - I mean, how many other malicious actions might this evident malicious software be taking that have not been identified by Malwarebytes? It seems irresponsible to me for a Malwarebytes helper to conclude that the Malwarebytes anti-malware software is adequately performing its function by blocking access to a computer's attempted outbound connection with a known malicious website without taking further actions against the source of the threat hidden within the files of the computer While I understand that Malwarebytes may not yet be programed to do so - after all, no anti-malware product has everything covered - I must take umbrage with an attitude on the part of Malwarebytes principals that they have no company obligation to revise the products' software to positively address this logical omission in patrons' effective anti-malware coverage. I suspect that there are more than a few patrons of Malwarebytes products whose computers are infected with this malicious software - patrons who have just not weighed in on this forum (meaning that this is a more general software issue and is not the result of a few individuals' computer peculiarities). To treat this issue as isolated instances requiring individual patrons of Malwarebytes products to seek help in solving their dilemma is... um... unwarranted...? With all due respect, I request that you (Malwarebytes representatives) respond to this line of reasoning in this forum. Thank you. KAW