Jump to content

FrackyMacky

Honorary Members
  • Posts

    37
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by FrackyMacky

  1. Thanks. As I mentioned, I don't have MalwareBytes installed (which is the problem), so there is nothing to repair.
  2. I have been running MalwareBytes Free for almost 2 months. Today, I tried to update the virus definitions, and was told that MalwareBytes needed to restart. In the process, I got an installation window, so I assumed that it was talking about new definitions. I think now, however, that it was reinstalling MalwareBytes, for some reason. I let it do its thing, and I can't recall whether it was at that stage where I had to restart the computer as well. I eventually was given the message in the subject line. Obviously something went wrong, so I uninstalled MalwareBytes, downloaded the most recent installer, and attempted a clean install. I got the same message, and the this time, MalwareBytes was not in the Add/Remove list of applications. The following page talks about this error message, but the solution is to use a repair tool. As I don't have MalwareBytes installed, there is nothing to repair. https://forums.malwarebytes.com/topic/254260-an-error-has-occurred-and-malwarebytes-will-not-install-on-your-computer/?tab=comments What should I try next? I am on Windows 10. Thanks.
  3. Actually, it went pretty quick today. If you don't mind, I'd like to put off diagnostics until it recurs.
  4. I tried to update my virus definitions today, and it took much longer than usual. It also took 3 tries. At first, I started the upadte, noticed it's incredible slowness, then left it running as I used other apps. Then I noticed that the MalwareBytes window was gone. So I restarted it, let it do its thing, and well into it's update, a message popped up in the notification area warning that the virus definitions were out of date. So I went to the MalwareBytes window and saw that the update was not running, and there was a yellow warning symbol saying that the updates were old. I restarted it yet again, and it finally finished. Was there something particular about the updates in the last 2 weeks that would explain either the long update time or the fact that it seems to have a penchant to abandon updates?
  5. Hmmm, interesting. I remember MalwareBytes taking a long time for scan of the entire system, but I can't verify that now. Thanks for the info, Ron.
  6. Ron, I appreciate the advice to date. Before I pursued this any further, I was wondering if you can comment on the question of whether the new MalwareBytes can be expected to take signficantly less time to scan compared to a full scan of the C drive for the old MalwareBytes? I'm intending this question to be general rather than what could be wrong with my specific computer. I typically scan with MalwareBytes, Spybot S&D, and Microsoft Security Essentials, so I'm somewhat confident that I don't have particularly nasty stuff on my computer. I'm more interested on how to calibrate my expectations for the new MalwareBytes.
  7. Hello, Thanks for the instructions. The files are attached. I ran mbam-check and FRST64 before turning on detection of rootkits. Please note that there is one detail which I did not adhere to: I left PUP at the default of warning the user. I wanted to first ask what the risk was of doing damage. FRST.txt Addition.txt CheckResults.txt mbam-log-2014-08-24 (22-13-25).txt
  8. I am examining http://www.malwarebytes.org/support/guides/mbam I have Applications Logs but not Daily logs. For Applications Logs, there does not seem to be the ability to export to text file. Is there a decent way to upload these?
  9. Thanks, that does indeed inform. However, I chose to scan the entire C drive, but it still only takes a fraction of the time it use to. Has something fundamentally changed with this new version?
  10. I upgraded to MalwareBytes (Free) yesterday. It' version 2.0.2.1012, snazzy new look. I think (but can't verify anymore) that I could choose a full scan that would take forever. Now there doesn't seem to be anything to distinguish a full scan from whatever a non-full scan is. A scan simply takes mere minutes. What has changed? Is this scan as thorough?
  11. Daledoc1, Firefox, Noknojon, Thanks for the added information. I think the problem was that I was confused by the majorgeeks page. But I got it figured out now. I have to choose one of the Download@MajorGeeks links (and they are in fact links) even though I'm already at the MajorGeeks website. After realizing that, things went smoothly. Thanks again.
  12. Daledoc1, Firefox [ really??? ], I've tried those steps. I perhaps didn't describe them as well as I could have in my original post, but I did them a number of times in the past. At the current time, I'm just trying to find which button is the actual button to download the free version of malwarebytes (or the single install executable from which you can choose the free version). As I described, the current redirection is to majorgeeks (presumably a mirror), and I don't find it obvious which button actually fetches the install executable. Thanks.
  13. For the longest time, I've been getting notices that my trial has expired, even though I ensured that I installed only the free version. I reinstalled once, but to no avail. Also tried clicking the message and choosing the end the unwanted trial, but no effect. Recently, after seeing the same message many times, I decided to give it one more go. Uninstalled Malwarebytes and also ran the cleaner (and rebooted). Now I'm having trouble finding MalwareBytes free. The site http://www.malwarebytes.org/products/malwarebytes_free directs me to a majorgeeks page, but there is no button that looks like it is obviously for MalwareyBytes download (as opposed to something else -- an we all know that buttons for things other than that intended are all too common). which is the button to download MalwareBytes Free? Is it even available anymore?
  14. According to web forums, you can stop the reminders that your MalwareBytes trial has expired by choosing End Trial. It doesn't seem to work for me. Does anyone know if it is necessary to be logged in to the Administrator account when the reminder occurs before the End Trial option sticks? If so, then I need a way to elicit the reminder at will when logged in as Administrator (since that's more the exception rather than the norm).
  15. Isn't that a common political tagline? What-his-face represents change? The people voted for change?
  16. It may be a legitimate program, but depending on where you download it from, it seems that you may or may not get stuff that triggers the PUP critieria. Based on advice from another forum, I went directly to the developer's site http://www.tracker-software.com/product/pdf-xchange-viewer. The download did not trigger PUP.
  17. PDF-XChange Viewer has got great reviews as a PDF reader that can edit PDF files. (It was either this or Foxit, and I thought I'd try this first). I downloaded the installer from softonic However, MalwareBytes Free classifies this as "PUP.ToolbarDownloader". Ugh, not what I want. A google search doesn't find anything informative, at least not in English. This is odd, because a real problem usually generates a significant number of hits. Has anyone else found this problem? Has anyone found this to *not* be a problem? How bad *is* "PUP.ToolbarDownloader"? Some installers don't even ask the user for permission to install toolbars (or ignore it when the user refuses). From past experience, I know that I certainly don't want that kind of situation.
  18. Hi, Samuel, I'm not 100% sure, but I think that apps launched from an administrative account run with less-than-admin privileges in Vista and Windows 7. I'm pretty sure that's the case with Windows 7 because my replacement laptop has it. However, I believe that this does not apply to Windows XP or Windows 2000. I've never had issues with underprivilege instances of apps or commands initiated from an administrator account in those OSs. With some sleuthing, I think I have a bit more insight into the riddle (if not an answer) of why the admin account can't browse the nonadmin user's file system, but MalwareBytes can scan it. There are actually two riddles: (1) why the admin account can't access the nonadmin user's file system, and (2) why Avast *can* access the nonadmin users's file system. About question #1, I used Cygwin (a unix layer running in the windows environment) to list the account directories in "c:\Documents and Settings". Of all the account folders, only the nonadmin user of interest showed up with different access permissions than the rest. In unix parlance, the user account showed up with read/write/execute access only for the group, not for the user or the world. So I must have messed around with the permissions. The above permissions would suggest that the user him/herself wouldn't be able to access his/her own account, much less the administrator. However, I find the cygwin listing of Windows folders quite confusing, and possibly not always entirely correct. Since I have a rather old installation of Cygwin, it is possible that the mapping scheme between Windows file/folder security settings and unix permissions representation is immature and not quite stable. For that reason, I did not consider it sensible to pursue this line of sleuthing further without upgrading cygwin and becoming more knowledgable about the windows/unix permissions mappings. Because of the age of my cygwin installation, upgrading will likely involve much chasing down of loose ends and broken functionality, so I've relegated it to a long term to-do. Become familiar with the windows permissions schemes and the mapping to cygwin's unix permissions is also nontrivial to me, so it's also on the longer-term to-do's list. Even though I can't follow up on the answer to #1 right away, there is a riddle arising from the above which is somewhat separate from that answer. Even if I messed around with nonadministrative users's file/folder permissions, it surprises me that the administrator account cannot override this. After all, the permission changes are only done by a "mere" user account. Perhaps that's just the way Windows works? About question #2, I asked a related question on another forum about another antimalware app (Avast AV). The explanation given there was that scanning is done under the Avast! service, which runs under a Service account and has access to all user accounts. However, when I view mbam.exe in the Task Manager, it is running with the administrator account's user name, not under the SYSTEM user name like the Avast! service. So while scanning with SYSTEM privileges explains why Avast can access all accounts, it does not explain why mbam can. Thanks for any further insight.
  19. Sorry for the late reply, sometimes the weekend is the only time I can get for personal stuff. The problem seems to be solved. I no longer get the malware warning. Thanks.
  20. Thanks, melboy! I got this suggestion in another thread, and it works great.
  21. Thanks for that, exile360. I understand point#2, and point#3 works. I was wondering if you could elaborate a bit more on point#1? I said that the admin account doesn't seem to have access to the user account (at least not from a command line or from windows explorer), so how did the admin scan pinpoint the location of the potential malware in the user folder hierarchy? I know that it does because point#3 works, but I'm not sure how to reconcile this with the fact that you can't browse to the user files. On a separate note, I noticed a potentially undesirable error handling by mbam (not sure how easy it is to fix). If you specify a path to a nonexistent folder for scanning, mbam reports no malware. It doesn't complain about the nonexistence of the folder.
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.