Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About WZZZ

  • Rank
    New Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Just got new one, but it was installed by "Shove," as usual.
  2. Thanks for the tip about looking at release history -- had thought about that already, but wasn't sure just what to look for there. But what specific kinds of "engine improvements" would mean that detections are diverging? Also, sorry to keep you going on this, but find the following a bit confusing: You mean that even if the definitions remain the same from one version to another, the older software, in this case the 1.3.1, will start falling behind and not be able to identify/catch/or quarantine certain items? I.e., it will have the appropriate definitions, but not necessarily know where to look for them?
  3. Thanks Thomas. Good to know. Not sure how I will know, but will try to keep an eye out for when the 1.3.1 is completely deprecated.
  4. Thanks for the info Thomas. Further question, if I may. Seeing at https://support.malwarebytes.com/docs/DOC-1896 However, I'm seeing today that Update Rules from the Scanner dropdown in the 1.3.1 moves the Signatures Version from 336 to 337. Just intuitively, this would seem to mean that the 1.3.1 is still getting newer signatures, and might be just as effective for a manual scan. So can you perhaps explain just what "no longer supported or maintained" means real-world? To be honest, for my purposes -- for just the occasional manual scan -- I would prefer to keep using the 1.3.1, if it's currently just as effective as the v.3, at least until complete EOL.
  5. Thomas, a follow up question (sorry if this has been asked before): I have gone over to the free program. Basically interested in running the occasional manual scan, so no need for RTP. I'm noticing that on a restart, on opening Malwarebytes, and on accessing settings, the RTProtectionDaemon (quite early in the startup, PID 45/56), makes any number of outgoing connections). Are these connections from the RTP daemon necessary for running a manual scan in order to download the latest definitions? Can the RTP daemon be disabled without losing the ability to update the definitions? I have "automatically check for protection updates" unchecked. Can you say just which connections or which part of the app need to stay enabled only to run updated manual scans? Also seeing a connection to "telemetry"... something. As I have unchecked "usage and threat statistics," can you please say what the purpose is of this connection? Thanks.
  6. OK, thanks. Will give it a bit more time next time.
  7. Actually, this feature request becomes a bit more important if one wants to hide the menubar icon. As far as I can see, without the icon no way then to stop a scan.
  8. OK, seeing that it can be done from menubar icon. Non-urgent feature request: a stop scan button located directly next to cancel, pause buttons. Cancel button might do with a tooltip or short note explaining its use.
  9. Just started running the 3.6.21. Cancel button doesn't appear to stop a manual scan in progress -- from the user guide, https://www.malwarebytes.com/pdf/guides/Malwarebytes-For-Mac-User-Guide.pdf?d=2019-01-03-14-09-16--0800 seems meant to stop further processing of threats found. I simply want to be able to stop a scan. How to do this?
  10. Hmm, nothing like Apple for being transparent and keeping its users alerted to developments.
  11. Hasn't been updated since March. Any idea what's up with that?
  12. My error, you are correct, the one explicitly showing Meltdown is for 10.13.1. For me somewhat confusing, since there are a number of others for 10.11-12 there with what I suppose could be called "Meltdown-like" vulnerabilities: "Impact: An application may be able to read restricted memory." But I suppose those are not chip/microprocessor related, therefore not Meltdown.
  13. EDIT: gave misleading information above, re. the 10.13.2 supplemental. That supplemental is related to Spectre, but only insofar as it provides the Safari/WebKit updates which 10.11/12 also received. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208397
  14. The several kernel related items noted for the 2017-002, 2017-005 security updates for 10.11/12, respectively, would appear to protect against Meltdown. (Maybe Spectre, as well??) -Impact: An application may be able to read kernel memory (Meltdown) -Impact: An application may be able to execute arbitrary code with kernel privileges (Spectre??) my parenthetical -Impact: An application may be able to read restricted memory (Spectre??) my parenthetical https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208331 On the other hand, there's this appleinsider article, which suggests that that can't be taken at face value. http://appleinsider.com/articles/18/01/05/december-apple-updates-fixed-meltdown-spectre-vulnerabilities-on-older-macs Not sure what to think. 10.13.2 did receive a supplemental update, which appears to mitigate against Spectre. Nothing like that yet for 10.11/10.12. https://www.macrumors.com/2018/01/08/macos-high-sierra-10-13-2-spectre-fix/
  • 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.