TomFace

Thanks TJP, I'll take a look at it.

Ok...just hung up with AT&T U-verse support and they are telling me that port 443 has to do with my Cisco access point for U-Verse TV and not to be too concerned with it. They cannot see the access point (MAC Address) once I close that port. The only thing is once I delete activity (close the port) it does NOT seem to affect my TV at all. At least I got some useful information from them. ESET Support did reply saying : Port 443 is a service that is needed internally within your network and therefore safe to use. However, your router appears to have this port 443 open to the public as well. Therefore the ESET alert is telling you to close that port so that the world cannot access that port to get inside your internal network. You also can use online port scanning services to determine which ports are open to the public: http://www.whatsmyip.org/port-scanner/ So...I didn't really get the answer I was looking for (I still feel vulnerable), but I'll just play it by ear. Thanks again to itman & cyberhash for their input. By the way itman, I still cannot access the GRC Common Port scan webpage, I did send them a e-mail about that. ESET Support did send me another port scanner webpage (see above) to use.

That's on my list for tomorrow. I also opened a ticket with ESET Support since no ESET Moderator/Forum Administrator has bothered to respond or open my PM (not good).

I appreciate all the information itman, but the basic question I have is should I be concerned about this? And if so, what can I do about it? Sorry if I seem dense, but I understand plain verbiage best. I also sent GRC an e-mail about the Common Ports scan as I still cannot access that webpage from either IE11 or Firefox 56.0.1

OK...will try again in a bit. I'll also nose around in advanced firewall setting as well and see what's there (I think I ale\ready did that and nothing caught my eye). I don't change things that I don't understand.

I'm IE11.0.9600.18792/Win 7 Home Prem/Svc Pack 3 and current on updates (except telemetry add-ons)

This is what I get (and also received yesterday) when trying that link Browser Reload Suppressed For your security, your web browser's "reload" function has been temporarily disabled Allowing a web browser to "reload" a page which has already been sent to you creates a "security hole" that would allow someone using your computer at any later time to attain potentially private and personal information. To safeguard your privacy we have disabled the browser's "reload" or "refresh" facility while you are in sensitive areas of our web site. Reloading pages will function normally once you have left this area . . . but until then please refrain from "reloading" pages. You may press your browser's [BACK] button now to return to the page prior to the one you were just viewing. Thanks very much for your interest and patronage.

The AT&T screen you are showing does not look like what I have...This is what I see at my IP web address without logging in...where are you finding that screen? I have never seen that before. I have U-Verse interne and TV (no U-Verse phone). I cannot locate the common port test at GRC...can you please provide a link to it?

Yes ESS Premium (ESSP) is a relative new (6-8 moths ago if I recall correctly) animal. I believe once v11 is released, there will be (for Windows) ESSP (premium) and EIS (ESET Internet Security) which will replace ESS (of course NOD32 will still be available). I assume ESET will migrate ESS users to EIS. (Disclaimer : I am just a user and I am NOT an ESET employee)

Yes to U-Verse...how do I see the LAN side to know for sure? I have not fooled with the router settings (except deleting this service as explained above). The GRC Instant UPnP Exposure Test give a reply of "THE EQUIPMENT AT THE TARGET IP ADDRESS DID NOT RESPOND TO OUR UPnP PROBES!"...am I running the correct test?

So should I be concerned about Can I do anything to stop this silliness?

I've run the exposure test before and it comes back "THE EQUIPMENT AT THE TARGET IP ADDRESS DID NOT RESPOND TO OUR UPnP PROBES!" Which I guess is good.

Thanks Hash...seems to be a hit and miss type thing...when I delete it I notice no restrictions in PC behavior. But why the conflicting reports from ESET? If it's necessary for HTTPS protocol why warn me about it? Maybe I am over simplifying it, but if it's OK then it's OK, if it's bad then it's bad. ESS is telling me both things at the same time in the same notice (one on top of the other).

I know we kicked this around previously (https://forum.eset.com/topic/10660-icmp-flood-attacks/?do=findComment&comment=54320), but on occasion I am getting a warning when I scan my network and at the same tome I also get this notice (which seems contradictory to me). When I go into my router webpage I am finding this after I delete that service, I do not get any (either notice) warning notice from ESS when doing a network scan (I am NOT a gamer). I also see that ESS shows this Not being the brightest bulb in the box, I am confused as to what to make of all this and if I should be concerned. Could someone please explain it to me in plain English and what if any actions I need to take. I am running Win 7 Home Prem and ESS 10.1.219.0 (ESS Firewall in Automatic/default mode). I do not take any actions to change ports as I do not have that knowledge, so I don't think it's anything that I am doing. What else could be causing this?

Not sure I want (or need) a replacement for CCleaner, but someone mentioned Glary Disk Cleaner. Does anyone have any thoughts or opinions about Glary?

A box, CD sleeve or an e-mail....it all counts. And yes Joe is SPECIAL. By the way Arik, I see you are relatively new to this great forum, so I want to welcome you. It's a nice place to be and there are many very knowledgeable Moderators and Members. I learn something new here every day.

Thanks you for the update Marcos.

Hey Janus it's GREAT to see you. Thought you might be still at Arecibo . Hope all is well...that's some good feedback. I know how busy you are, but don't be a stranger! Now if SweX and Arakasi stop by my day will be complete.

If I remember correctly, the OP had the option to mark his/her thread as "solved". Has that ben done away with?

I must live in the low rent district...I only have 5 (sorry, no picture-the camera is buried here somewhere on my table/desk)

It was an accident of birth....I deny all knowledge.

That's my boy! Always showing his "wares". Got him in trouble when he was 15...fortunately the Police were very understanding. It pays to have extras....I only have just 2 or 3.

Thanks for your input SCR. I highly regard your opinion as well as cyberhash and itman. You folks help a lot of other users.

Chkdsk completed without any issues (as far as I know-it took about 4 hours). So now we shall see.

Thanks to you two again....will do the chkdsk/command prompt. It just seems to me if the error message was designed by the developers a "cause and effect" explanation should exist. But maybe I'm incorrect.