Marcos

I'd suggest you try the following: - temporarily disable self-defense and reboot the machine - uninstall the ESET Firewall driver in your Local area connection properties and reboot the machine - - check if you can access the Internet - click Install -> Service -> Have a disk, browse to "C:\Program Files\ESET\ESET Security\Drivers\epfwlwf" and install it. - check if the issue has been resolved - finally re-enable Self-defense and reboot the machine

Are you from Guatemala? How did you contact customer care? You can drop me a private message me with your license key and the ID generated by the unlock tool. Alternatively you can remove ESET in safe mode using the uninstall tool as per https://support.eset.com/kb2289/.

A WFP transaction error occurred. This is typically caused by corrupted Windows transaction system. To fix it: 1, Run cmd with elevated administrator rights 2, Run from the console the following commands: fsutil resource setautoreset true c:\ cd c:\windows\system32\config\TxR attrib -H -S * del *.blf del *.regtrans-ms 3, reboot the machine

You can disable automatic MS SQL exclusions and add the exclusions manually as per https://support.eset.com/kb3078/#MicrosoftSQLServer

Please carry on as follows: - enable advanced logging under Help and support -> Details for customer care - reboot the system - disable logging - collect logs with ESET Log Collector and post the generated archive here. For instructions, see the FAQ section at the right-hand side of this forum).

If you are getting the warning in a browser, try running the browser without any extensions, then re-enable the extensions one by one unless you narrow it down to the one which attempts to communicate with the said server.

If you use Chrome for browsing the Internet, don't exclude it from scanning or you will not be fully protected against threats that come from the Internet through browsers. I'd suggest making this change in the list of HTTPS ports:

Please use the ESET Uninstall tool in safe mode as per https://support.eset.com/kb2289/ and then install v12.2.23 from scratch.

Such scam emails should be filtered out by antispam.

1, This is not a bug but a new intentionally added feature. We understand that not all users will like changes made in the software. It's like with any other software or operating system; some will like certain changes, some not. It's not possible to make everybody satisfied. I've reported it as a wish for future versions that the notification appears only once after installation. 2, I've activated Endpoint using an offline license file (lf) on drive X but no other file was created there. NOTICE_mod should be created only in the modules folder, ie. "C:\ProgramData\ESET\ESET Security\NOTICE_mod" Couldn't it be that you set a specific folder on drive F: for application's data during installation and this file was created in it?

You have posted in the ESET CyberSecurity for Mac forum, however, you have ESET Internet Security for Windows. I'll move it to the appropriate forum. Please collect logs with ESET Log Collector and upload the generated archive here. The maximum size of uploaded files is 512 MB.

Do you have ESET Mobile Security installed for Android installed on the mobile phone? Do you have it activated with a paid license? What error do you get when you run update? Does it make any difference if the phone is connected via wi-fi or 3G/4G ? Please contact customer care through the built-in form in EMS and let it submit logs as well.

Could you please provide a screen shot of the error that is displayed when you run update manually?

You have 2 options: - disable detection of potentially unsafe applications - exclude the app by the detection name

Do you see ESET Security registered in the Windows Security Center? Have you tried uninstalling ESET and installing the latest version 12.2.23 from scratch?

What happens when you run the installer? Do you get an error? If so, please post a screen shot of it.

The detection is correct: Please keep in mind that this forum is not a place for disputing detections or blocks.

There was a temporary glitch with activations servers in the afternoon which got fixed itself at about 14:40 CEST. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Rules are evaluated in the order as they appear in the list; ie. if a URL matches the first rule, the second rule won't be evaluated. According to your screen shots, the problem is using of wildcards in Web Control rules which are not supported. Please remove "*." from each URL. Should you use URLs with paths and not just the hostname, make sure that SSL filtering is enabled on clients as well.

Did you add the whole url in the list of blocked websites or the hostname eu.attractionsonoahu.icu ? The latter should work, blocking the whole url not since SSL filtering is not performed on Mac.

I would correct you in that it's not a bug, it's rather an issue caused by design of scanning SSL. The issue occurred after improving protection by extending the list of scanned HTTPS ports to all. Until recently, SSL communication was scanned only on the default HTTPS port 443 which, with the increase of malware utilizing HTTPS communication on other ports, started to pose a risk to users. If Chrome performed MitM on port 8009, then the extension of scanned ports naturally introduced the issue since AVs also perform MitM if they scan SSL communication of any application. The issue has been reported to ESET, we now know about it and a solution (I wouldn't call it a bugfix because of the reasones above) should be available some time soon.

I was unable to reproduce it. If you switch to pre-release updates, do you get an empty notification? That what I tried and the notification about successful update was displayed alright:

This detection is triggered if an ARP response about a particular IP address is returned from multiple devices, ie. when the MAC addresses are different. It could happen when multiple NICs are used in a server for load balancing for instance.

The fix will be about a safe certificate exclusion so if you make a relatively safe exclusion now you won't have to wait for the exclusion added via an automatic module update.

To my best knowledge, this is already on a wish list. Thank you for the suggestion.