132 replies to this topic

[khagaroth]

Swandog46, on 20 December 2011 - 11:15 AM, said:

@nnoa110
We struggled a great deal with Japanese, more than with many other languages. Our GUI is written in VB, there are core VB display issues with certain languages, and Japanese is one of them. We may not be able to fix this. Re-encoding the language files in Unicode ensures the data itself is portable, i.e. that there is no ambiguity that the language file is intended to be Japanese, and no ambiguity about what *should be* displayed. The next step after that is to work out the issues with displaying the data itself, but unfortunately that is a separate problem.

Yep, VB is stupid in this regard, it's storing the strings as Unicode, but it's automatically converting it to the current system ANSI charset and then it's converting this converted charset to the set control charset. It's a huge pain to workaround this, basically you have to get the current system charset and convert your string to a specifically mangled format so that it gets back the correct format after the automatic charset conversion.
The reason buttons appear correctly is that it does this stupidity only for text boxes and labels.

[exile360]

rgabbard, on 21 December 2011 - 02:18 PM, said:

Is there a corporate version for beta testing? I've downloaded this one and am using the trial, but would like to get a test of the corporate version so I can get an idea of what it can do in our environment.

Thanks

No corporate version yet, this beta is only for the consumer version.

[fivealive]

wildman424, on 21 December 2011 - 03:00 PM, said:

Chameleon is really cool

what does this feature do exactly

[exile360]

fivealive, on 21 December 2011 - 05:52 PM, said:

what does this feature do exactly

It gets MBAM running when it is being blocked from doing so by an infection (like many of those nasty rogues have been doing for a while now).

[fivealive]

exile360, on 21 December 2011 - 06:01 PM, said:

It gets MBAM running when it is being blocked from doing so by an infection (like many of those nasty rogues have been doing for a while now).

oh sweet thats great

that will definately help out glad to see it

[exile360]

fivealive, on 21 December 2011 - 06:55 PM, said:

oh sweet thats great

that will definately help out glad to see it

Yep, it was needed. It also avoids the need to do most of the stuff in these tutorials. Chameleon is a very powerful tool .

[G1111]

ourstanley, on 21 December 2011 - 12:21 PM, said:

Ditto, just installed and showing ....

Date: 20/12/2011 21:52:33
Database version: v2011.12.20.06
Fingerprints loaded: 350980

Still no database updates for MBAM 1.60 Beta. Looks like maybe two updates for 1.51, but when I try and update the Beta it indicates I have the latest database version.

[exile360]

The current beta database is v2011.12.20.06, so that is accurate.

[wildman424]

Date: 12/20/2011
Database version: v2011.12.20.06
Fingerprints loaded: 350980

started computer it said it was out of date by 1 day, try to update it says its up to date.

edit:
ah ok, I seen you viewing the topic, I should have waited for you to reply ... before freaking out

um still confused a bit.

I'm getting this in a debugview log

00000074	7:37:53 PM	[5620] Caught update error:  HTTPStatusCode (404)

and when I update while viewing tcpview says its mbam.exe connecting to my local loopback address

mbam.exe	        5620	TCP	127.0.0.1	 51018	127.0.0.1	12080	ESTABLISHED	1	265
[System Process]	0	TCP	WildThang1	 51131	194.web03.sld5.mb-internal.com	http	TIME_WAIT	1	742	5	26,280						
[System Process]	0	TCP	WildThang1	 51137	194.web03.sld5.mb-internal.com	http	TIME_WAIT										
								

[G1111]

exile360, on 21 December 2011 - 07:27 PM, said:

The current beta database is v2011.12.20.06, so that is accurate.

Okay thanks exile360, glad to know it is not a bug, but how come no updates for 1.60 in over 24 hours?

Everything running smooth with 1.60 thus far.

[shadowwar]

We are addressing the issue with updates at the moment. If you are using this for active protection it may be a good idea to switch back to 1.51 for now. 1.51 will update fine.

[G1111]

shadowwar, on 21 December 2011 - 08:57 PM, said:

We are addressing the issue with updates at the moment. If you are using this for active protection it may be a good idea to switch back to 1.51 for now. 1.51 will update fine.

Okay thanks for the update.

[sg09]

shadowwar, on 21 December 2011 - 08:57 PM, said:

We are addressing the issue with updates at the moment. If you are using this for active protection it may be a good idea to switch back to 1.51 for now. 1.51 will update fine.

Thanks for clarifying ! I was wondering the same for updates...

[MaxBrechler]

Can you integrate Malwarebytes to Windows 7 Action Center?

[1PW]

Hello MaxBrechler:

Although this might be looked upon as an unwanted intrusion by some, the Windows 7 Action Center is a customizable feature.

[indent]
http://www.howtogeek...in-windows-7-2/
[/indent]

I do like your idea...

[MaxBrechler]

Wich one is lastest database version for Malwarebytes?Beacuse the database that i have is v2011.12.20.06..And the database is outdated by 2 days.

[1PW]

MaxBrechler, on 22 December 2011 - 05:20 AM, said:

Wich one is lastest database version for Malwarebytes?Beacuse the database that i have is v2011.12.20.06..And the database is outdated by 2 days.

As of this writing,

It's 911122202 if you are using MBAM v1.51.2.1300

It's v2011.12.20.06 if you are using MBAM v1.60.0.1400

HTH

[delphin136]

Hi all

I have install the 1.60 Beta over the last final version of Malwarebytes

On pic 1 is the database old it is from 20.12.2011

On pic 2 + 3 have no an icon from Malwarebytes

Please fix it soon

[jadinolf]

Looking good here.

[TommyDecker]

Hi i am a total dummy when it comes to antivirusprograms...

I had Kapersky Internet Security, but it wiped out my harddisk..., then i had Norton Internet Security, i thought it stopped viruses but that wasn't the case. I had Avg Free... damaged windows quiet good... Avira and Avast, did slow down my computer badly...
Now i'm using Malwarebytes so far so good... even stops bad links on the internet... downloading updates quiet fast, the scanning is a bit slow, but no problem, the interface is a bit ''cold'' , a good idea would be extra information for dummy's... like me... Panic Panic Panic...

The reaction on False Alerts from Malwarebytes is excellent ( fsquirt ) ...

My computer is quiet old, but can't afford anything else... so quiet slow... used to be windows 98 - then Me and now Xp home UK...

I hope i didn't make any mistakes,

www.malwarebytes.org

Databaseversie: v2011.12.20.06

Windows XP Service Pack 2 x86 NTFS
Internet Explorer 8.0.6001.18702
Administrator :: Ulrich [administrator]

Realtime bescherming: Ingeschakeld

22/12/2011 21:30:31
mbam-log-2011-12-22 (21-30-31).txt

Scantype: Volledige scan
Ingeschakelde scanopties: Geheugen | Opstarten | Register | Bestanden en mappen | Heuristiek/Extra | Heuristiek/Shuriken | PUP | PUM | P2P
Uitgeschakelde scanopties:
Objecten gescand: 197159
Verstreken tijd: 51 minuut/minuten, 49 seconde(n)

Geheugenprocessen gedetecteerd: 0
(Geen kwaadaardige objecten gedetecteerd)

Geheugenmodulen gedetecteerd: 0
(Geen kwaadaardige objecten gedetecteerd)

Registersleutels gedetecteerd: 0
(Geen kwaadaardige objecten gedetecteerd)

Registerwaarden gedetecteerd: 0
(Geen kwaadaardige objecten gedetecteerd)

Registerdata gedetecteerd: 0
(Geen kwaadaardige objecten gedetecteerd)

Mappen gedetecteerd: 0
(Geen kwaadaardige objecten gedetecteerd)

Bestanden gedetecteerd: 0
(Geen kwaadaardige objecten gedetecteerd)

(einde)