Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Samoréen last won the day on January 30

Samoréen had the most liked content!

About Samoréen

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

1,011 profile views
  1. Problem apparently fixed. Thanks for the quick answer.
  2. Hi, Today, ESET has started filtering genuine.adobe.com which is used by adobegcclient.exe , a legitimate program. I have added the IP address to the exception list but this is not correct. An old problem showing up again...
  3. Samoréen

    Can Not Enable Web Access Protection

    Since several workarounds have been suggested, I suggest that you try the driver re-installation first (if any event in the log is mentioning a driver installation failure - otherwise just forget it). It's faster than uninstalling/re-installing.
  4. Samoréen

    Can Not Enable Web Access Protection

    Rudolph, Something you could try : go to Tools | Log Files | Events and check whether there's a notification about failed installation of some drivers. If this is the case, navigate to this page and follow the instructions in order to re-install the drivers which failed to install.
  5. Samoréen

    Error when applying differential update

    Peter, The only difference with other sensitive files that I can think of is the way these files are following to reach my PC. I agree with Itman's statements but I'm sure I have downloaded a lot of files that would have been rejected if they were corrupted. Well, we are now aware that the problem was due to some corruption caused by an SNR value on my DSL line that was too low. What we don't know is what was actually corrupted. Referring to a message from Itman at the beginning of this thread : Eset modules use a code signed Eset certificate. This cert. is not stored in Windows root CA store. As such, cert. "pinning" path to root CA issuer must be validated via Internet connection. If this chain validation lookup is blocked locally, Eset certificate validation will fail. So maybe the files themselves were not corrupted but something repeatedly went wrong during the exchange mentioned by Itman OR the firmware of my DSL box was not able to recover FEC errors (which are normally recoverable) during this exchange because of the SNR value. The exchanged data during the certificate validation could have a particular "signature" that caused the bug while other certificates are not affected. I guess we'll never know.
  6. Samoréen

    Error when applying differential update

    Additional information about this issue... The problem now appears to be clearly related to my DSL box settings. Quoting a previous message : As soon as I have tried to lower again the acceptable SNR value, the problem re-appeared within the next 24 hours. After setting it to a higher value, it was gone again. Now, I'm still wondering why this caused problems to ESET NOD32 updates only. I'm downloading a lot of files that have to be error free (images, Windows updates, installation files, etc.) and I never observed a file corruption or a failure due to a corrupted file. These downloads are too frequent to merely consider a coincidence. No idea about what could make ESET downloads specific.
  7. And when the warning points to an Eset product, there's no way to decide that this warning is irrelevant ? I must admit that I have difficulties to understand this. Granted, this is apparently Google code only but you said "we warn". If Eset was involved in this code, disabling irrelevant warnings should have been easy. I'm confused... OK, not a big deal as far as security is not compromised.
  8. Or maybe it's because the problem had already been reported once to Google ?
  9. Hi, There's definitely something I don't understand in this discussion. I'm using Eset NOD32, latest version. When I opened the Chrome settings a few minutes ago and activated the Cleanup Computer option, Chrome told me that I should remove Eset Endpoint because it's a harmful software. However, this Chrome module is obviously the result of a collaboration between Eset and Google. This inconsistency has certainly been observed during the development phase. It's almost the same as an Eset scan reporting Eset as a virus. So it shouldn't be a big issue to exclude Eset products from the list of "harmful software" that Chrome is possibly reporting. Now another inconsistency... The first time I ran the Cleanup Computer feature of Chrome, I had this odd message. The second time, after re-launching Chrome ( Version 69.0.3497.100 ), it told me "No harmful software found".
  10. Samoréen

    Error on Module Update

    Hi, I had a similar problem in the past. This driver and 2 others wouldn't install during an update. I had found a temporary fix described here : https://forum.eset.com/topic/11967-hips-disabled-after-nod32-update/
  11. Samoréen

    Error when applying differential update

    OK. The problem didn't re-appear since more than one month. Nothing has changed on my system beside what's explained above. So there's a good chance that this was the problem - crossing my fingers - (although I still don't understand why only the ESET update files were affected).
  12. Samoréen

    Error when applying differential update

    I have understood that the tool must be running when the problem occurs. If the problem was related to my internet connection, it should not re-appear. If not, I will see it again one of these days and it will happen more than once. So if I see it again in the near future, I will activate all the available reporting tools and wait for the next failure. Re: disk failure If you re-read this thread, you'll see that I have done everything I could do to confirm or invalidate this possibility. For the moment, I exclude the idea that the 2 SSDs that are/were used to store the update files are having problems only with ESET update files.
  13. Samoréen

    Error when applying differential update

    Phil_S, It would be interesting to see whether we get these notifications for the same updates. They might be triggered at a different time (or date) but they can be identified by their version number. For example, the last one that failed for me was this one Time;Module;Event;User 08/08/2018 17:11:56;ESET Kernel;Detection Engine was successfully updated to version 17850 (20180808).;SYSTEM The above is the success notification after 2 failed attempts.
  14. Samoréen

    Error when applying differential update

    Hi Peter, The problem didn't re-appear since 12 days now. Meanwhile, I noticed that something had been changed (by my ISP) in the settings of my DSL box. The acceptable margin for the SNR (signal noise ratio) has been set to a higher value, which means that the box is now less tolerant to transmission errors. This could explain why the problem didn't show up since almost 2 weeks although I never had any file corruption problem with the previous settings (with exception of the ESET updates). I don't see why only the ESET update files should be corrupted. Maybe they go a specific route where some device between your servers and my PC is generating the problem. Anyway, I will download the tool and use it if the problem shows up again.
  15. Samoréen

    Error when applying differential update

    Peter, As I already explained multiple times, the problem appears randomly so I'm unable to anticipate. I cannot reproduce at will. Thus, providing consistent logs along with a Process Monitor log as you requested in your message from June 12 is a problem. The problem didn't re-appear since about 8 days. It may re-appear at any time without any warning. I will be notified of the error by the ESET UI after a failed attempt. So any log collecting procedure implying a before/after backup is a no go. Otherwise, I can provide any file you want.