Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by exile360

  1. Please upload the file to WeTransfer.com, selecting the Send as link option (click the round ... button) and then provide the link it gives you once the upload is complete. Thanks
  2. Please refer to this support article. It provides contact information for both of the e-commerce partners who handle payment processing and automatic payments for Malwarebytes license purchases. You may contact the appropriate vendor who handles payment processing for your account directly to have them cancel auto-renewal for your account.
  3. Greetings, We have seen similar issues reported in the past. If you would, please do the following so that we my review your current system and software configuration to hopefully aid in determining the cause of the issue as well as hopefully finding a solution: Download and run the Malwarebytes Support Tool Accept the EULA and click Advanced tab on the left (not Start Repair) Click the Gather Logs button, and once it completes, attach the zip file it creates on your desktop to your next reply Thanks
  4. Does anyone else see the irony in a survey about concerns regarding sharing data online requiring that participants enter private demographic information about themselves (i.e. age etc.)? I get why, I'm just saying, I suspect that some of the individuals you probably want to hear from most won't participate specifically because they guard their privacy and info so intensely. My personal opinion is that you consider making it more concise and only ask questions relevant to the subject at hand rather than including and requiring answers for questions that really have no bearing on the topic itself. Again, I understand why you ask these things because you want to establish heuristic patterns based on demographics and trends within each demographic/group with regards to their opinions on privacy/how much/how little data they share online rather than making assumptions and probably have some existing assumptions that you want to either prove or possibly disprove if inaccurate, but it's likely to turn some people off for sure (even when you offer more vague responses as options like a specific age range). This is especially significant for those of us who understand how machine learning/AI works and how such seemingly anonymous/ancillary data can actually be correlated with other seemingly innocuous data from other sources (both public and held by individual companies' private databases) to determine precisely who an individual is, at least within a very high probability of accuracy. Just to cite a widely known and acknowledged example, Google can easily determine who a user is based on their searches based on past searches and data they've collected even when an individual starts using an anonymized service such as Startpage or any other aggregate privacy related search engine that queries Google or any other large data harvesting search engine service provider (Yahoo, Bing/Microsoft, Yandex, Ask etc.). Machine based profiling is a real thing, and regardless of how much or how little we share deliberately online, these machines and algorithms can and do track far more of our activities and are able to determine far more about us (even outside of our page visits, public postings and search tendencies) than we realize. They can (and do) even go as far as recognizing our typing patterns which some researchers say can be as accurate and unique as an individual's fingerprint in identifying them (this is no different from the way AI can recognize a person on a video feed or through motion sensors based on the gate and rhythm of their steps/body movement as they walk, even if it can't see or recognize their face, clothing or any other markers related to their physical appearance). Just like playing a game of poker with a single deck, if you do the math you can easily determine the probability of winning or losing based on the cards that have turned up so far and the cards in your own hand without knowing what your opponents have in their own. AI and complex mathematics allow these organizations to do the same thing with people, using metadata, public info and the aggregate to determine more specific things about them, both based on connections within the data itself as well as assumptions based on knowledge of other individuals with similar data that it already knows more about as well as what it knows of people and the data sets in general (i.e. if it determines you are not an infant, which is likely always assumed, that's one possibility eliminated; if it sees you visited WebMD on multiple occasions and at least a few of the items you viewed were specific to one biological gender, then that's another; if it sees you looking up the weather for a particular country/city/state/province etc., there's a hint as to your probable location) and all of these things add up to a profile that is retained and constantly cross-referenced and refined until it either identifies precisely who you are or determines a sufficient amount of data about you to satisfy its classification requirements for whatever its purpose is (obviously many of these entities behind these programs don't actually care about identifying individuals, but would be interested in things such as your purchasing habits, tastes in entertainment, topics of interest, political leanings etc. etc.). On top of all this, the things we've learned about what certain governments have done/are doing is just downright terrifying and I'm pretty convinced that privacy is essentially an illusion at this point if you use any kind of digital device (including a television now that they exclusively use digital signals which are 2-way and service providers now know what you watch and when without any kind of 'Nielsen' box in your home) and with smart home/IoT devices becoming commonplace as well as 'always on/always connected' devices in our lives such as cell phones (especially smart phones, equipped with everything a surveillance organization could ever want to put on anyone they wanted to track/spy on, including a camera, microphone, motion sensors, GPS along with all the usual call logs/text logs and internet logs that go with such devices), anyone with access can learn more than they'd ever want to about any and all of us without us volunteering anything knowingly/willingly. It is the ultimate sacrifice of personal privacy and security for convenience and we all go right along with it all the while as AI gets smarter and the technology that powers it becomes orders of magnitude more powerful every year (for example, both major GPU manufacturers are now far more interested in building the most powerful 'compute card' than building the most powerful 'graphics card' like they used to be, and even Intel has plans to get into the GPU business within the next couple of years for that very reason). It's like we all woke up one day and the world had changed completely while we slept without us realizing it, with the most powerful organizations now being those with the most data rather than the most assets and the consumer/user now being the product rather than the buyer/user of products. Coke and Pepsi still taste the same, but their purpose has changed, and TV is still entertaining but now you are the show that everyone tunes in to.
  5. Excellent, I'm glad to be of service If you have any future questions or issues please don't hesitate to post again.
  6. Greetings, I believe this can happen sometimes when you remove or deactivate the software on a single device and then reinstall/reactivate it later. That would explain the phantom activations taking up your remaining licenses/device activations. You should be able to correct this by using the Deactivate all link at the bottom right of the Manage devices interface. That should reset your license activations to 0, then you'd just need to activate your two devices normally again and that should leave you with your additional 2 remaining license activations. There may be another way to resolve the issue, however it would likely involve contacting Malwarebytes Support directly as I believe they have direct access to the backend of the license activation/management system. If you wish to go that route instead then it would be best to contact them via one of the options found on this page and they will assist you. Please let us know if that resolved the issue or not and if there's anything else we might assist you with. Thanks
  7. Yes, that's correct. Unfortunately I don't know of a fix for this issue currently, but hopefully Microsoft will get the problem corrected on their end soon.
  8. My bad, I was just trying to help since I recognized the issue. I should have just sent you a PM instead but I didn't think about it. My apologies, it won't happen again. I hid my reply and I can hide this one too if you wish.
  9. Thanks for reporting. Yes, this issue seems to be pretty common based on all the reports I'm seeing and I believe Microsoft is investigating the issue. Hopefully they will have it fixed soon; hopefully before they decide to release build 18323 to the general public.
  10. Greetings, I reviewed the block logs you posted and they indicate that the trackers (sites used for tracking/managing torrents for peer-to-peer Bittorrent clients like Vuze) for something you were probably downloading or searching for were being blocked. These blocks are not an indication of infection and are quite normal when using a peer-to-peer (P2P) application like a Bittorrent client as they tend to connect to a wide array of IP addresses which may include some that are also used for hosting malware and other malicious content. That said, those sites won't infect your system when connecting through your Bittorrent client like this and you can eliminate the blocks by excluding Vuze from the Web Protection component in Malwarebytes so that it is allowed to connect to any server that it needs to without compromising the protection of your system from malicious sites for other applications which would be a risk such as your web browser. To exclude Vuze, follow the instructions found in this support article under the section titled Exclude an Application that Connects to the Internet. If you are seeing any other signs of infection or would just like to have your system checked to make sure that it is not infected then please continue to work with kevinf80 and he will guide you on what to do to check and clean your system. I hope this information has helped set your mind at ease and if there is anything else we might do to assist you please don't hesitate to let us know. Thanks
  11. Yep, same here with the one notable exception being the issue I discovered with the OEM HotKey application software on my system and Ransomware Protection that I discovered, though excluding it corrected that problem.
  12. I don't know if this is at all related, but earlier today I had an issue reaching the Malwarebytes support site and blog. I kept getting certificate errors. It seems to be resolved now but that could be because I clicked 'yes' to a confirmation prompt/warning from my browser about the cert issue.
  13. Greetings, I'm not a fan of captcha's either, so I definitely feel your pain on that point. I hate those lame pictogram tests and how tedious they are. That said, I do know the reason they implemented it. Unfortunately for years the forums here had a major issue with near constant flood postings by spam bots, and they only way they were able to put a stop to it was by implementing stricter protocols such as the captcha when signing up for an account as well as higher requirements for forum passwords. As for the reason you're unable to post in the normal support area, I'm honestly not sure as I've never heard of any users having that issue before but I have alerted the forum admins so hopefully they will investigate the problem and get it corrected. My guess is that it's a problem with the forum software which is deployed and hosted by IPS, a third party software/hosting company that handles many forums on the web, including the Malwarebytes support forums here. We've had our share of bugs with the IPS forum software so it wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that this is what has occurred in this situation. That said, all I can offer is my personal assurance that no one in the Malwarebytes organization would try and prevent any kind of honest feedback or criticism from their users and customers, not even negative feedback or criticism and they have an active policy of seeking out issues, bugs and feedback (including negative feedback) in order to try and make their products better. With regards to the RAM usage issue, yes, Malwarebytes does use a substantial amount of memory, especially during a scan. There are numerous reasons for this, but the primary one is performance. CPU cycles are much more noticeable when it comes to system performance than RAM usage, especially on modern systems which typically have 6GB or more of system memory. This is why Malwarebytes has chosen an approach of keeping the majority of their databases loaded into memory when protection is active (typically using somewhere in the neighborhood of 40MB~100MB, sometimes more) and using a large amount of RAM during scans (typically hundreds of megabytes as you mentioned) because it allows scans to complete much more quickly and for real-time protection to be much more responsive rather than having to use more disk reads and CPU cycles to load databases piecemeal as some security products do (this is why you'll see many AVs having a major impact on software/process load times because they have to halt new processes from entering memory while they load their databases and scan/analyze the process/file trying to load which in turn creates a delay; something many users often complain about with the worst offenders). With all of that said, I would refer you to the following resources and articles as they reflect the reason that using a large amount of memory isn't necessarily a bad thing, and why having a large amount of free/unused RAM isn't necessarily going to improve system performance (as long as you have enough that your system doesn't run out so that it is forced to use virtual memory by way of the paging file on disk, which is going to slow down performance dramatically; though again, this is not typically a problem in modern systems which have higher amounts of RAM than in the past during the days of Windows 2000, XP and even Windows Vista when amounts ranging from 120K~4GB was typical): https://computer.howstuffworks.com/question1751.htm https://lifehacker.com/5415355/do-you-really-need-more-than-4gb-of-ram https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/memory-module-upgrade,2264.html https://www.howtogeek.com/128130/htg-explains-why-its-good-that-your-computers-ram-is-full/ https://techlogon.com/2011/03/28/will-more-ram-memory-make-my-computer-faster/ I hope this helps, and in the meantime if you are willing to troubleshoot the issue you're experiencing, assuming that the RAM usage on your system is above normal (which it very well may be) then it would be helpful if you would be willing to provide some logs for analysis by a member of Support: Download and run the Malwarebytes Support Tool Accept the EULA and click Advanced tab on the left (not Start Repair) Click the Gather Logs button, and once it completes, attach the zip file it creates on your desktop to your next reply It is up to you whether you wish to troubleshoot this issue or not of course, so if you would rather not then I understand and that's of course OK as well.
  14. Thanks Corrine. I've been tracking this issue as well and have seen several threads and reports from several users with this issue with the Insider Preview build and it does indeed appear to be an issue with the new build preventing Malwarebytes from installing drivers based on the logs and reports I've analyzed so far.
  15. Yes, I have noticed it is snappier on shutdown (as well as startup most of the time) with the latest build, at least on my system (7 x64 Pro SP1, fully patched).
  16. Greetings, It appears what you are seeing are what are known as browser push notifications. It isn't a sign of infection or even a PUP (Potentially Unwanted Program); just a setting in your browser for how websites are able to display notifications. You can find out more about this, including how to control and disable these kinds of notifications in this Malwarebytes Labs blog article. I hope this helps, and please let us know if that does not resolve the issue. Thanks
  17. You're welcome. If there's anything else we might assist you with please don't hesitate to let us know. Thanks
  18. I'm currently tracking this issue. Several other users have reported the same issue with the latest Insider Preview build of Windows 10 with various protection components failing as well as some other modules on occasion including rootkit scanning. The cause of the problem appears to be an issue with Malwarebytes failing to install its drivers for some reason, and since each protection component (as well as rootkit scanning) uses its own driver, the end result is protection components cannot be enabled. Perhaps Microsoft has changed how drivers are allowed to be installed and registered on systems in the latest Insider Preview. Whatever it is, I expect it to be resolved by the time the Insider Preview build goes final/RTM.
  19. Just FYI, the original user in this thread has reported that their issue with Malwarebytes causing the system to freeze when using Windows Mail and Google Chrome has also been fixed by the latest release so I suspect the impact of this multithreading architectural fix in the Web Protection driver may have wider implications in improving performance and fixing previously seemingly unconnected issues with the protection components in Malwarebytes 3.
  20. Excellent, thank you for letting us know. It is likely that when they fixed the recently discovered freeze issue with Windows 7 that emerged in build 508 it corrected your issue as well. It was a fix for an architectural issue dealing with improper multithreading in the Web Protection component, so it may have far reaching implications on correcting previously undiagnosed performance issues with Malwarebytes under many conditions across many systems.
  21. Yes, based on the logs I've been seeing from users affected by this issue, it appears that the root of the problem is that, for whatever reason, Malwarebytes is failing to install its drivers for the affected protection components as each of them uses their own driver, just like Anti-Rootkit does. So whatever has changed in the Insider Preview build of Windows 10 is apparently affecting Malwarebytes' ability to install and register its drivers.
  22. Excellent, I'm glad to hear it. Yes, it shouldn't have registered itself with the Windows Action Center. By default, if the Malwarebytes installer detects Defender or Microsoft Security Essentials as being active it will not register Malwarebytes in the Windows Action Center which will cause Defender/Security Essentials to leave itself turned on, however it seems that for some reason Malwarebytes is now registering itself with the Action Center/Security Center under certain conditions when Defender is active, causing Defender to disable itself. From now on, as long as you keep the setting configured explicitly to not register with the Windows Action Center, Malwarebytes shouldn't register itself with the Action Center and Defender should keep itself enabled.
  23. Well, I've got a weird result for you. The next time I rebooted my system it didn't hang and Hotkey was allowed to load and Malwarebytes loaded normally. I'll keep playing with it as I'm sure it will return again, however I suspect that it was the presence of Procmon logging boot activity which altered the timing and may have lead to the issue not occurring since it could have offset the normal startup sequence which allowed Hotkey to load fully prior to Malwarebytes trying to load.
  24. Greetings, Please do the following on the affected system to see if it resolves the issue: Download and run the Malwarebytes Support Tool Accept the EULA and click Advanced tab on the left (not Start Repair) Click the Clean button, and allow it to restart your system and then reinstall Malwarebytes, either by allowing the tool to do so when it offers to on restart, or by downloading and installing the latest version from here Once that's done, open Malwarebytes and navigate to Settings>Application and under Windows Action Center select the option Never register Malwarebytes in the Windows Action Center. Once that is complete, restart your system and check to see if Windows Defender is now functional or not.
  25. I believe this is an issue with Insider Preview build 18323 of Windows 10 as I've seen similar reports from several other users running the Insider Preview. Also bear in mind that, at least as I understand it, Malwarebytes does not officially support any beta/early preview operating systems, including the MS Insider Preview builds, so official support for build 18323 should not be expected until it is released officially to non-insiders by Microsoft and that unforeseen issues may occur when running Malwarebytes software on the test operating system. Here are a couple of other topics where similar issues with the Insider Preview build have been reported: https://forums.malwarebytes.com/topic/241843-malwarebytes-turned-off-on-windows-10-build-18323-19h1/ https://forums.malwarebytes.com/topic/241849-w10-build-upgrade-to-18323-switches-of-mbw-protection/
  • 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.