![]() ![]() My concern is that, if normal punters (who are somewhat less experienced and sceptical than I am) see messages like this they will permit your software to "fix" the problem and, in the process, probably screw up their own systems.Īnd, just as seriously for experienced users, the tendency to false positives means we can't trust the reports, so if we are infected, we're likely to miss real threats because there is no easy way to distinguish between the real and the false positive - especially if you're reporting 125 threats at a time. In any case, with either the tdsskiller deep scan (125 threats) or the mbar quickie (7 threats) unless every other malware detector on the planet has been compromised, I am pretty sure these are all false positives. I had a response this morning which is basically asking for the logs. You all seem to contradict and conflict with each other not only in operation but in consultation and analysis. As a seasoned IT Pro myself, I have to advise my own clients and we've reached the position where it is no longer possible to trust any single scanner or source of expertise. ![]() I have to say my chief concern is the growing and general problem with navigating the minefield of malware. Is it still possible I could be compromised? Of course. I also practice safe browsing techniques with protections like noscript and adblock in my firefox browser and if I have any reason to be suspicious of a site, I browse from inside Sandboxie. I'm behind two hardware firewalls, zonealarm pro software firewall, using Avast and Spybot as realtime scanners (which Zonealarm also covers) and Clamwin to check if anything else reports a problem. I don't, incidentally, believe that I have any kind of infection. Are you claiming they're all wrong and only you are capable of identifying these threats? So why exactly does your software insist on identifying certain files as "forged" "rootkit" when 47 alternative malware checkers report no problem. Nevertheless, I uploaded each file to virustotal and, exactly as happened with the tdsskiller files, ALL reported a clean bill of health. It identified 7 so called "forged" files, most of which had been identified by tdsskiller the day before (it reported 125 threats). (First question: Didn't see an option for deep scan - where is that?) So I downloaded your mbar-1.exe and let it run. Didn't get much useful in response but posted same query on Experts Exchange where it was suggested a) that if my system was running OK (which it is) I shouldn't worry about it and b) that if I still had concerns, I should try running MBAM on a "deep scan". I submitted a further query to Malwarebytes using their online submission form, which I include here: My backups (which are dated archives, so I can roll back to before an error was made) are done nightly. ![]() Fascinating contrast between the advice I'm getting here and the response on the Malwarebytes forum, where they're obviously so convinced by the merits of their own system that they're convinced I must be infected.Īs an aside, I'm obviously more paranoid than most. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |