whatmeworry?

Honorary Members
  • Content count

    359
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About whatmeworry?

  • Rank
    True Member

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0
  1. Hi daledoc1, I wasn't obsessing over the difference in scan times between yesterday and today, and I'm well aware that scan times will vary. I was simply VERY pleased that today's scan was even noticeably shorter than yesterday's good result, and I thought other people concerned about long scan times might find these results encouraging. I should add that the 18:10 time did not occur on a subsequent scan during the same Windows user session. I turned off my computer the night before and rebooted this morning, so today's time occurred during a fresh session. Again, many thanks for your help.
  2. Just a quick follow-up. Today, MBAM's scan was even faster than yesterday's. Then, I was delighted that it had gone from 39:11 to 22:09. Well, today the scan finished in 18:10, less than half the time it took before I uninstalled MBAM and installed a newly downloaded copy of the same version!
  3. Hi again, daledoc1, In answer to your question about my PUPs setting, yes, I do want to keep it at "warn" rather than "treat as malware." In the past, MBAM has flagged as PUPs and treated as malware files that I want. The easiest way to prevent that from happening is to ask MBAM to let me know about the PUPs and let me decide what to do. I appreciate the fact that MBAM gives me that option.
  4. You've nailed it, daledoc1! The scan I just ran after uninstalling and reinstalling MBAM (the same version and database, but a newly downloaded copy) has apparently reduced the scan time from 39:11 to 22:09! MANY THANKS!! I might add that I also took your advice to upgrade Firefox from version 43 to 45, though I usually use Pale Moon rather than Firefox. But I agree that it's important to keep Firefox up-to-date as well, since I do use it from time to time. Again, thanks very much for your help.
  5. Many thanks, daledoc1, for your very prompt and helpful response. I hope to do some of what you've suggested later today, but right now I simply wanted to thank you and also attach today's MBAM scan log and another copy of the Addition.txt file. I hope this one is complete. mbam_scanlog_4022016.txt Addition.txt
  6. I am using MBAM Premium 2.2.1.1043 on Windows 7 Prof. 64-bit. I run an MBAM scan almost every day. I've noticed that the scans take much longer than they used to, and much longer than some other people with similar systems have reported. Today, for example, the scan took 39:11 to scan 386,171 files. I do not think that my computer is infected. Scans always come up clean, except on very rare occasions when there are confirmed false positives. I've had no problems with MBAM (which I've used for years), except for the length of the scans. It was suggested to me that I should raise the issue here and see whether anyone from MBAM can let me know whether there's a problem with my computer or not. I've attached the three files that were requested in the instructions: FRST.txt, Addition.txt, and CheckResults.txt. Many thanks. FRST.txt Addition.txt CheckResults.txt
  7. Today I received an email message supposedly from "Malwarebytes" with the subject header "Is antivirus dead?" A look at the headers seems to indicate that this is NOT from Malwarebytes and that the links that are included would probably cause me grief. Does the company want to be informed about exploits like this? If so, where should I forward the email to? If you're not interested in seeing it, I'll just delete it.
  8. bobber269, You have to click on Attach this file after you've said you want to attach a file and have selected the file. It's not exactly obvious--I recall having the same problem once. [Ah, I see you figured it out.]
  9. I just saw Ade Gill's announcement about this being a FP. Many thanks.
  10. I too had what I'm almost sure is a false positive involving Tracker Software today. I've had this software on my computer for years, and I run MBAM scans just about every day. MBAM has never objected to it before. Suddenly today it found 488 problems. I've attached MBAM's log, with my username omitted for privacy. mbam_trackerFP1.txt
  11. Terrific! Thanks very much, Mieke, for your quick and helpful response(s).
  12. Thanks, Mieke. I'll try again with this post. Visually Speaking Spanish - Level 2.zip scanlog.txt
  13. Hi. I run MBAM scans almost every day. Today the scan reported that my Visually Speaking Spanish program contained a PUP.Optional.Amonetize. I have had this program on my computer for months, and never before has MBAM cited it. Is this just a false positive? Even if it's not, should I be concerned? I have no wish to remove this program, which I bought months ago from a reputable company, unless there's a serious problem. Please advise. I've attached the scan log and a zipped copy of the supposedly offending file. Thanks in advance. Added Note: Why don't I see any sign of the two files I attached to this post?
  14. Hi daledoc1. Thanks very much for your response. Yes, I've got MBAM set to check for updates hourly. As for scans, I'd rather not have the scan occurring when I'm doing other things on the computer. In the past, at any rate, I've noticed the difference. I'm more comfortable just having the scan run when I know I won't be using the computer for other things. And yes, I think given how busy I am right now, I think I'd prefer not to send a message to the other forum. But I definitely do appreciate your suggestion.
  15. Hi daledoc1. Thanks very much for your response. I've been immensely busy these last few days, so busy in fact that I thought the PUPs had been detected on the 6th, whereas I see now from my files that they were detected on the 5th. And yes, I do have MBAM set to check for updates automatically each day, and it does. I've stopped having it automatically run a scan each day, since no matter when I set it to do so, it invariably wound up doing so at an inconvenient time. So now I just manually ask for a scan most days at a time that suits me on that day. So, I don't think that I've got a problem with MBAM not updating correctly. The main problem is with my unreliable brain. Since I'm still far busier than I'd like, and since MBAM is updating correctly, I think I'll not delve further right now into why MBAM is taking so much longer to scan on my computer than on yours. I'll keep your suggestion in mind for the future, however. Again, many thanks!