Jump to content

Jim-1

Honorary Members
  • Posts

    28
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. Guys, thanks for all the help, but I am going to give up. I spent most of the day today doing each step in the post above, but with zero success. After uninstalling Chrome, resetting IE8, and rebooting for one of perhaps 20 times during this process today, MBAM still had the same database error. I then uninstalled and cleaned the traces of MBAM, rebooted as usual, and reinstalled MBAM. Needless to say, the same database error continues to prevent me from doing a direct update through MBAM. Fortunately, I now know all too well how to copy a previous good rules.ref so that MBAM is working happily with that older version. My plan from here is to simply update MBAM on another computer once a week or so and copy the new rules.ref to this computer so MBAM will continue to work here, but with a database that is a few days old. If anyone has a good idea about a possible cause and cure for the MBAM update problem, I will be willing to give it a try, but without a new direction I plan to just live with the problem I have with MBAM updates. A little later, I will also reinstall Google Chrome because I really like it for browsing much better than IE8. Then I will need to remember to open IE8 anytime I want to download a video or any software. Thanks again for all the previous assistance. Jim .
  2. Thanks for the effort, but no cigars tonight. I upgraded the NIC drivers with IE8 as the open browser, and then tried to update through MBAM, but it crashed with the same database error as before. After I discovered that other files I downloaded while Chrome was the active browser were corrupt, I went to the Google Chrome support forum to look around. I found many threads, like the one at the link below, that said lots of users were having problems with Chrome corrupting download files. I wonder if installing Chrome may have caused the problem with the MBAM program not downloading rules.ref properly? I installed Chrome in mid September, and I think I have updated MBAM a few times since then, but I am not sure now. If no one has a better suggestion, I may try uninstalling Chrome and then see if MBAM will update properly. Thanks for all the help. http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Chro...73d1c&hl=en
  3. The top tracert below is with Google Chrome browser open and IE8 not open. The bottom tracert is with IE8 open and Chrome not open.
  4. Now that I have switched back to using IE8, both ping and tracert work, as shown in the two attachments below. Tracert actually had another line of message that I could not get a screenshot of before the tracert window closed. .
  5. I have been busy working on this today. To make a long story short, I found that with Google Chrome open as a browser, my downloads are the right size, but they are corrupted. The most recent example of that problem was that I could download the Speccy file, but it would not execute and gave an error message instead. After I closed Chrome and opened IE8 instead, a new download for 4957rules.rar passed the md5 checks and installed the new update without problem, and the new download of speccy installed without difficulty. I changed from IE8 to Google Chrome a few weeks ago, and I like it much better than IE8, but there have been other problems with Chrome (for example, all videos would fully download, but would play only for a few seconds and then freeze). For now, I have returned to IE8 as my default browser to eliminate the unexpected download problems. The bad news is that even with IE8 as my default browser, MBAM still crashes with the same database error when I try to update through the MBAM program. Fortunately, I can copy the good rules.ref from yesterday, and MBAM is happy to work with that database. The md5 checks were exactly right (with IE8 as my browser), and executing 4957.exe resulted in small windows which said MBAM was up to date with the 10/27 update. FYI, After doing that 10/27 update, I opened MBAM to look at the update page, but it still said the last update was 10/26 from yesterday. The Speccy zip is attached below. Thanks again for the help. Jim JIM_SV3NUJLD0C5.zip .
  6. I didn't get very far with this. The md5 of my rar download does not match the md5 in your post, so I did not proceed with extraction. A screenshot is attached. I will work on Speccy tomorrow.
  7. Here are the results of five attempts at ping. I also tried to Start -> Run TRACERT mbam-cdn.malwarebytes.org, but nothing happened that I can see. Thanks again for the help with this problem. .
  8. I downloaded the checksum program, and captured the checksum (md5 = 121A2F4DA2BA1C4BF33370DA08D2E558) of the good rules.ref. Since I had already overwritten the earlier bad rules.ref, I clicked Update in MABM and downloaded a new rules.ref, which immediately crashed in the database error. That new bad rules.ref is obviously different than the previous bad rules.ref, as shown by the properties below, so no need for a checksum calculator. Download of bad rules 2b.ref (md5 = 3F4A4EBEB26DF4858DD4EA0F4336E80E): I tried to download another time to get a different rules.ref for comparison, but after I replaced the bad rules.ref with a good one (either 10/26 or 10/15), MBAM insisted that my files were up to date and it would not download another. I resorted to deleting the rules.ref, so MBAM offered to download another database. Here are the results of downloads 2c, 2d, and 2e. The md5 checksum of each is different, even though the file size is the same. I also briefly tested my file download integrity by comparing the md5 of the md5.exe contained within the md5.zip, and it exactly matched the published md5, so that download worked OK. Here are the results for the last three test downloads of rules.ref tonight: Download of bad rules 2c.ref (md5 = DD99D726FBD44E5655C1054B243227C1): Download of bad rules 2d.ref (md5 = 56035A0604E7E5394D15B76C1C719537): Download of bad rules 2e.ref (md5 = 22679A275C5DFD8BF28E37BE43DCEDF9): .
  9. Mods: Please change the title of this thread to MBAM updates on XP Pro x64 to better reflect the problem and the solutions offered. Shadowwar, please accept my thanks for dragging me toward the solution of this problem. I previously tried a copy of rules.ref sent to me as an email attachment by tech support and it also failed, so I did not think downloading the rules.ref file a different way would work any better. However, I wanted to cover my bases and I did use a different computer to update MBAM today. After I copied that new rules.ref into this computer, MBAM updated with no problem. As another test, I then used MBAM to update the same version of rules.ref into this computer, but MBAM crashed with the database error again. Restoring the copy of rules.ref that I downloaded on a different computer returned MBAM to normal operation. I looked at the properties of the good rules.ref (that I downloaded on a different computer) and the bad rules.ref (that I obtained by MBAM update on this computer, but both look the same so far as I can see. The screenshots for both files are copied below. The good rules.ref properties is on the left side below. - - - - - The bad rules.ref properties is on the right side below. - - It seems clear that there must be a problem with the way that rules.ref downloads onto my computer now that was not a problem a few weeks ago. The only changes to my computer that I can think of are a switch from IE8 to Google Chrome browser, a major Windows Update, and installation of AVG 2011. Other files and software programs seem to download without problem, but something is obstructing MBAM from properly updating by direct download. To respond to those who continue to think an infection might be the cause of this problem, let me add that I completed a full scan with Dr.Web Cureit, a cleaning process with TFC, and full scans with ESET and Panda Active Scan as guided by tech support, but there was no significant problem detected. I will continue to look into the file downloading problem on my computer. Thanks to all for the help that you have provided. I have not yet tried the manual update process. I will try that later after I find a better description of what to do and what to expect. Thanks again Shadowwar! .
  10. My experience with other forums is that there are an abundance of people who are eager for an opportunity to tell me that I don't know what I am talking about. If someone who is running XP pro x64 and who is having no problems with MBAM, then I am confident that he will quickly tell me I am barking up the wrong tree. I think my previous reply responded to your post #30. If there is something I did not respond to, please say it again. Thanks.
  11. Well, MBAM tech support ran me through four different anti virus programs, but he couldn't find a problem. Now it looks like MBAM tech support has given up on my problem. Seems like there isn't much interest at MBAM since I am the only user who is complaining. Is anyone out there still running XP Pro x64 and MBAM? Until someone actually says he is using XP Pro x64 and that he has no problem with MBAM, my interpretation is that 100% of us users have had this problem since the 10/16/10 update. Can any of you please contact the MBAM software staff? It would be great if they could take a few minutes to put the 10/15/10 (or earlier) rules.ref update on the left side of their screen (I can email a copy to them if they want) and the 10/16/10 (or more recent) update on the right side of the screen. They could call the older one on the left "Good" and the newer one on the right "Evil" Then they could look through the updates line by line to see what significant change was made on 10/16/10. Since the older updates all work flawlessly, but the newer updates all crash MBAM with a database error on my system, I am convinced that something was done to the rules.ref updates after 10/15/10, and that an unintended consequence of that change is that all the users with a system profile like mine can no longer run MBAM with updated rules.ref. Any help would be much appreciated.
  12. Impossible is a very strong word. There are lots of kinks in XP Pro x64, and my guess is that most of the people who tried it have already upgraded to Win 7, partially because of the legacy problems. If this does turn out to be an inadvertent problem MBAM made with the changes to rules.ref since 10/15, will all of you guys chip in to buy me an upgrade to Win 7 too? :-) If there really is a specific issue in my computer, then it is not likely to be related to AVG or Outpost firewall. I have already tested both by disabling them before trying to update the MBAM database, but I always get the same database error instantaneously after the download completes. Also, AVG 2011 has an anti spyware module that would likely alert to a malware problem that could affect MBAM, but there are no problems indicated in my computer and I do not expect to find any there. I have absolutely no problems I know of when I use rules.ref dated 10/15/2010 or earlier.
  13. MBAM tech support email the latest rules.ref on 10/19, but it crashed with a database error in exactly the same way that any update I downloaded since 10/16. Silence from a few people who may still be running XP Pro x64 and MBAM over the last few days is not the same as someone saying he is doing it and has no problem. Has MBAM staff actually run MBAM on XP Pro x64 in the last week to confirm that it really does work OK since 10/15? You guys can't really be saying that silence over a few days from a few users (if there really are that many remaining after the migration to Win 7) makes you just certain that whatever change MBAM made in rules.ref after 10/15 is perfect for everyone, and so any problem I have since then is the fault of only my computer. Wouldn't it be worthwhile for MBAM to actually confirm that their updates since 10/15 are not causing a problem for XP Pro x64 systems?
  14. Thanks! Good information to know about. Outpost was the only free software firewall I could find that would support XP Pro x64. I will look more at other possibilities to see if I can find another to consider. Meanwhile, the software firewall is not critical on my computer. Most of my Internet work is protected by a hardware router, and I usually only surf to the same old financial sites that offer a very low risk profile. :-)
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.