On the UI of Avast it says my definitions are not up to date.(422)
When i try to up date it says i have the latest definitions(423).
I have also tried rebooting without success.
Help would be appreciated.
Regards.
Windows 7 SP1
Avast Free 70.1426.
Try a repair of avast:
Win7 - Control Panel, Programs & Features, uninstall a program, select ‘avast! Anti-Virus,’ click the Change/Remove button and scroll down to Repair, click next and follow.
You may need to reboot after the repair.
This has in the past resolved this out of sync issue between reported and actual VPS version.
What a clever boy you are.
Thanks David.
Regards
You’re welcome.
Not so much clever, more of having seen it lots of times in the forums ;D
There are some people who really know what they are talking about.
Regrettably far too many who think they know but in fact know FA.These people can be very dangerous.
Regards
David.
Do you think this has anything to do with my update problem?
It is the log from Malwarebytes this Morning.
Regards
I don’t believe so, as this isn’t blocking avastSvc.exe (which has nothing to do with the update function), in this case appears to be be blocking access to that IP connections request going through the avast web shield proxy (controlled by avastSvc.exe).
The more I see the MBAM malicious website function, the more convinced I am it is more trouble than it is worth. I have no idea why it would block access to this IP address for sharktech.net (see image). I disabled mine very shortly after installing MBAM Pro as you have both the avast! Network and Web Shields to look after on-line protection.
Sharktech was established in 2003 in order to offer a complete package of high-transfer server hosting, DDOS Filtering and Managed Services at affordable prices.
More serious thinking by me is required.
It looks like it is too much of a good thing.
Turning off the malicious website function in Malwarebytes looks a good idea.
Thanks for your assistance.
Regards
No problem.
David.
I have been thinking.I do that sometimes.
How did Sharktech get in on the act?.I have never heard of it before.Let alone visit the site.
How did it appear in the Malwarebyte log?
Thanks.
That is who the IP address is for, when I did a whois on the IP. and basic checks on it I couldn’t conclude why MBAM considers it malicious. Though that is what I don’t like about the MBAM malicious site check as it doesn’t just block malicious sites.
The other reason is that for whatever reason something on your system was trying to connect to that site, so there was some hope you might have a clue what that might be. But given the brief quote I gave about the company, there are many things which might be contacting one of their servers.
David.
I’m lost
I have absolutely no idea why my computer might be trying to connect to that site.
I did send an email to Malwarebytes on the subject.I will post the reply to you in the Morning when i am wide awake.
Yes that is the bigger mystery, why the connection was made in the first place, but like I said some of the services it may provide could be used by almost any program and you wouldn’t be aware of the server host that they may connect to.
David.
Here is the reply i received from Malwarebytes.It might shed some light on the matter
Unfortunately it doesn’t throw any more light on it than there already was, my big issue is, is this really a malicious IP and they have given a link about false positive reporting, etc.
Avast’s shields are usually very accurate if there is any hidden/undetected software trying to access known malicious sites. You only have to browse the Viruses and Worms forum for URL:MAL subjects to see this in action.
As I said that is what I hate about the MBAM malicious site blocking, it doesn’t do what it says on the tin (and why I have disabled it) as there are many more categories that it also alerts on and this under the guise of the malicious sites, so there is no way that the user knows what is ‘malicious’ about the IP alert. So for my money (excuse the pun) they either need to change the wording and or make it clear ‘why’ an IP was blocked.
I’ve more or less come to the conclusion that false positive is responsible.
The only thing that i did yesterday which was out of the usual was to visit CPR Global.It was suggested by Sky to enable block nuisance calls on the telephone.I read what it was all about and then closed it.