Jim-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 .

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

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.

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. .

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 .

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.

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. .

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): .

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! .

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.

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.

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.

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?

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. :-)

Greetings again! Let me admit up front that I am not a rocket scientist. However, I am an Engineer with substantial experience in troubleshooting non-computer systems. My experience tells me that when everything works great, until one new thing is added, then there is likely to be a problem with that one new thing. On my computer, MBAM and AVG 2011 and Outpost played nice without problem, until MBAM updated their rules.ref on 10/16/2010. I have been able to restore rules.ref to the 10/15/2010 version, and everything works great on my computer again. In my mind, it is clear that MBAM changed rules.ref after 10/15/2010 in a way that makes MBAM crash with a database error on my computer. I can't say for sure that the problem is not related to AVG or to Outpost, or to my XP Pro x64 OS, but I can be sure that all of those worked well before the 10/16/2010 MBAM update to rules.ref, and all of them work well now (with the 10/15/2010 version of rules.ref). In my simple view, the rules.ref 10/16/2010 update broke my MBAM, so I have reverted to the 10/15/2010 rules.ref to repair the database problem cause by the update. From my viewpoint, it would make much more sense for MBAM staff to research the database problem caused by the rules.ref updates after 10/15/2010, than for me to chase after every other possible explanation in a complicated computer system. I will certainly admit that it is a stretch for me to say that the updated rules.ref impact all XP Pro x64 systems. It could be that the damage caused by the updated rules.ref is more specific to the software that I have installed on my computer. I would be much more confident of that if just one user of XP Pro x64 would step up and say that his system works fine with the latest updates to rules.ref. Whatever is the actual cause of this database problem, I still see it as a problem caused by the changes in the updates to rules.ref since 10/15/2010, because everything works great on my computer when I do not update MBAM to later than 10/15/2010.

No problem. I expect to be corrected when I make a mistake. I am not yet convinced, however, that I have made a mistake here. My search for a free antivirus program that would support XP Pro x64 found only Avast and AVG. Just to be sure that I am not mistaken about the updates, I ran Windows Update again just a few minutes ago. The result was zero High Priority updates available. The screenshot is copied below.

Agreed, and thanks for the clarification. My computer is running XP Pro x64 SP2 as shown in the screenshot below.

Thanks for the other AV programs. I will check them out when i have a problem with AVG 2011. Most of the free or paid AV programs do not support XP Pro x64, so I cannot use one of those. AVG seems to be working well on my computer for now, so I am not inclined to change to something else until I see a problem that needs to be fixed. The Outpost firewall asked about allowing MBAM when I first installed it, and it has exclusions for MBAM in place.

Sorry, but just like everyone else, I have limited time, so I need to limit my activities in areas that are not likely to be productive. I think there is a very low probability that my computer is infected. Even if my computer did have some form of malware, I think the probability is approximately zero that the malware would cause the MBAM database to crash only with versions of rules.ref that are more recent than 10/15/2010. I do not have time to do everything, so I will postpone a search for malware, which is not likely on my computer, at least until I see more evidence that malware is likely to be present.

MBAM works well, but only so long as I do not update rules.ref to a later version than 10/15/2010. Since the MBAM program works well with the rules.ref dated 10/15/2010, I continue to think there is a problem with the subsequent updates to rules.ref. Something clearly changed after the 10/15/2010 rules.ref which my computer works well with, to the 10/16/2010 and more recent rules.ref which crashes MBAM with a database error on my computer. I will consider this problem resolved when MBAM will continue to operate on my computer with a rules.ref that is more recent than 10/15/2010. Thanks for the suggestion, but I have no tasks scheduled that I am aware of. I actually do not know how to schedule a task, and I do not think I have scheduled one inadvertently, but I could be wrong about that. It is interesting that MBAM alerts on termsrv.dll only approximately half the time, and seemingly at random. I do not know what that implies about either the file or MBAM. Windows Explorer reports that termsrv.dll was last modified on 2/16/2007. Since the file is not changing, MBAM could be inconsistent in flagging that file only sometimes. I started using AVG 2011 on 10/06/2010. FYI, it worked great with MBAM with no special exclusions in exactly the same way that AVG 9 worked well with no special exclusions. Whatever issue has been identified with AVG 2011, I have seen no effects from it on my computer. Since MBAM continues to work well on my computer - so long as I do not update rules.ref to more recent than 10/15/2010 - I find it difficult to blame AVG for the MBAM database error with more recent versions of rules.ref.

I am not sure what to check for in Regional and Language Settings. I look at them, and they are still set to USA English, which is exactly what I have always used. On the off chance that it might matter, I added Chile Spanish too. I then tried to update MBAM, but it crashed again immediately after rules.ref loaded. Once again, MBAM returned to proper operation when I copied the 10/15/2010 rules.ref back again. If there is anything I need to do with Regional and Language Settings, please tell me what to do and how to do it. Thanks!

Thanks for the suggestion. Rules.ref and I have had frequent encounters over the past two days of troubleshooting. I must have deleted rules.ref a dozen times. The result is always the same: When I replace a newer rules.ref with a copy of version 4844 (from 10/15/2010), MBAM is happy and it works great! When I update (or replace) rules.ref with a more recent version, I immediately get the same database error. Versions 4844 (from 10/15/2010) or earlier work AOK. Any more recent version of rules.ref crashes MBAM with a database error in my XP Pro x64 system. I continue to think there is a problem with updates of rules.ref after Friday 10/15/2010.

Thanks for your quick reply. Yes. I followed the instructions to scrub MBAM traces out of my computer. Then I reinstalled MBAM to the default location. MBAM crashed again with a database error immediately after completing the download of the current rules.ref file. You may be right, but it is very difficult for me to see how this could be a problem with my computer since MBAM continues to run perfectly now, as it has done for many months, with rules.ref dated 10/15/2010 or earlier. MBAM only crashes again with a database error immediately after completing the download of a later rules.ref file. That sure looks like a problem with the way the recent rules.ref does not work properly with my XP Pro x64 system. FYI, there were few souls brave enough to try the XP Pro x64 OS considering the problems most have had with software incompatibility. Most of the early XP Pro x64 users have already switched to Win 7, so there are likely to be very few XP pro x64 users remaining. Of those few x64 users, only a small number are likely to be using MBAM. Of that tiny data set, some may have experienced the same problem which began only on Saturday, but simply not yet reported it. Silence from the XP Pro x64 community (small as it is) is not the same as a positive statement from active XP Pro x64 users that all is well. I will continue to work with the tech service rep, but I doubt that the result will be a problem with my computer. Here is the information you requested above: * My computer is currently located in Santiago, Chile. *AVG 2011 anti virus and Outpost Firewall 2009 * As part of the initial troubleshooting process for this problem, I added the exclusions to AVG, even though MBAM worked perfectly for many months with no exclusions added.

Thanks for the quick reply. When I first encountered this message (months ago), I searched the web for information. My understanding is that there was a virus problem with that file at one time, but it had been corrected (hence the "Trojan.Patched" designation). I just now sent the file to Virus Total (screenshot below). I think they are saying there have been many inquiries about the file, but no reports of any problems. Here are the answers to your questions: 1. XP Pro x64 2. AVG 2011 and Outpost Firewall 2009 3. MBAM version 1.46 4. Definition version 4844 (from 10/15/2010). Any later update to the Rules.ref file crashes MBAM with a database error. There is more about that in the other two threads I started. 5. Yes, I use a router which is hardwired to my computer.