MBAM blocking avastsvc.exe outgoing

08:12:10 NewUser IP-BLOCK 74.55.136.34 (Type: outgoing, Port: 50452, Process: avastsvc.exe)
08:12:10 NewUser IP-BLOCK 74.55.136.34 (Type: outgoing, Port: 50453, Process: avastsvc.exe)
08:12:10 NewUser IP-BLOCK 74.55.136.34 (Type: outgoing, Port: 50455, Process: avastsvc.exe)
08:12:10 NewUser IP-BLOCK 74.55.136.34 (Type: outgoing, Port: 50456, Process: avastsvc.exe)

That is from the log for MBAM. I think it was correct since this is not a normal avast IP address for avast to send to. So, is my system infected with something that both cannot see?

I’m not used to this, but isn’t this Web Shield scanning of avast that is being “detected” by MBAM?

It is the web shield handling browser requests to connect to that IP or it might even be one of avasts IP’s which MBAM considers a malicious IP as I believe they have some at the planet internet services. Check out the servers.def file and you also see some IPs in that range 74.55. which are avast update servers, mots of which are test5beta

Personally I have switched off the MBAM malicious IP as I found it more of a hindrance than a help (a pain in the rear), it is too damn sensitive. Not all IPs are malicious either, so the blocking isn’t just for malicious IPs, too widespread.

How do you switch off the mbam malicious IP scan?

It is in the Protection tab of the mine interface, see image.

Personally I have switched off the MBAM malicious IP as I found it more of a hindrance than a help (a pain in the rear), it is too damn sensitive. Not all IPs are malicious either, so the blocking isn’t just for malicious IPs, too widespread.

I found just the opposite. I so far have had MBAM Pro IP blocker block one IP and that is when I purposely browsed to a porn site to see what the popup blocker would catch.

I turned it off because it was causing major slow downs and disconnects in IE8. MBAM IP blocker doesn’t seem to be very compatiable with Avast’s web shield.

Basically you are confirming what I said, it is more of a hindrance than a help. Whilst some would consider p.o.r.n. sites objectionable that should be no reason to block them as the protection is meant to (as it is named) protect against malicious sites.