Jump to content

dougatwork

Members
  • Posts

    16
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. Awesome! Thanks for the fast resolution. I've just been informed we do have one computer where a user did remove the files. If the computer can no longer boot due to the missing files, is there a way to get the files from wherever the Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware quarantine is located? We can boot off other devices (USB or CD) to get to the hard drive.
  2. And here's the one from the other person's computer. Lots of files come up as 'infected' but they're not really infected. Since she's a Director in IS, I had her upgrade to the latest version of Malwarebytes so she can get back to work. I still have the VirtualPC with 1.45 and this issue, so I can still troubleshoot using that. mbam_log_2010_12_02__15_03_17_.zip
  3. Ah, sorry I missed those instructions. Two of the users have since upgraded to 1.50 and have gone through a quick scan and are no longer seeing the 'infection'. The third is running the scan with the /developer flag and is still seeing the infection, so we'll get that log soon. I also launched a VirtualPC with Windows XP, McAfee VirusScan 8.7, and Malwarebytes v1.45 with 5234 definitions. I did a Flash Scan and it detected four VirusScan files are false positives. I have attached the mbam log file while in /developer, the mbam-info file from the Tools tab, and the two files listed as infected, which are part of VirusScan and are not infected with anything. The VirtualPC this was done on is also not infected as it's just Windows XP, VirusScan, Clean Access, and Malwarebytes. Most of the campus is on v1.46, so we are only seeing this with a few users who haven't upgraded. mbam_fp.zip
  4. We have had a few users today call our Help Desk saying that Malwarebytes Anti-Malware had detected some legit files (McAfee, Quicktime, and a few others - see the log) as "=Backdoor.Bot" infections. These files are definitely not infected, but Malwarebytes says they are. The common factor seems to be the computers are running Malwarebytes Anti-Malware v1.45, but have definitions of at least 5231. I thought that older versions of the app could not use newer definitions, so I'm not sure how this happened. Also, one of the users said her computer is scheduled to update Malwarebytes' daily, and has been updating the definitions, but has not been updating the application. It appears there is/was an issue with the 5231 definitions and the 1.45 application that is causing it to produce these false positives. I'm having the users upgrade to v1.50 of the client, and see if that resolves this false positive issue. mbam_log_2010_12_02__12_37_26_.txt
  5. Hi, I work at the Computing HelpDesk at a College and we licensed Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware for all faculty, staff, and students on campus (about 3000). I think the new scheduler is great, but we have a huge issue with scheduling going from v1.44 to v1.45. People with old versions of registered Malwarebytes installs were upgraded to v1.45, but their old schedules were removed and no new ones were put in place with this v1.45 update. So we now have the entire campus running Malwarebytes v1.45 (GREAT!), but they all lost their scheduled scans (VERY BAD!). We now have to send out a notice to the entire community to get them to manually go in and create scheduled scans on their computers (they're not managed, and most are personally-owned student computers). This will not look good for us in the eyes of the community, since it causes everyone to have to waste time of their day to deal with this, and may reduce their trust in Malwarebytes' updating system. It will also be a drain on the Help Desk for all the questions from users that aren't technical and don't have an easy time figuring out computing directions. It was difficult enough getting them to enter the license key and enable the scheduler when they installed the software. Was there any consideration for this scheduler issue for installs upgrading to v1.45? Most software upgrades would make a conversion from the old settings to the new settings for something as critical as this. We're not happy with this situation we've been placed in, and I would just like to let you guys know for the future, and if there's an easier way to go about resolving this.
  6. This is a legitimate library database that our college pays for, and we also have a license for Malwarebytes. Their IP address is being blocked by Malwarebytes' IP Protection. The hostname is http://www.asia-studies.com which was registered with GoDaddy according to a WHOIS search: http://www.whois.net/whois/asia-studies.com But it is hosted with a different company, Netelligent, as noted in an ARIN search: http://ws.arin.net/whois/?queryinput=67.212.80.50 Please let us know why it is in the blocked list, thanks.
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.