Jump to content

itman

Most Valued Members
  • Posts

    12,198
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    321

Posts posted by itman

  1. 5 hours ago, Laurent75 said:

    image.png.2881d3ac52efec1161a978223f040c04.png

    if I deactivate it works

    Of note is if the "X" symbol is selected, the result is the disabling of the browser green frame indicating B&PP mode is active: https://help.eset.com/essp/16.2/en-US/idh_config_opp_badge.html . The browser remains in B&PP mode.

    If file uploads are allowed with the green frame disabled, that is the source of issue for some unknown reason.

  2. I am posting a link to Eset's official notification article on this issue: https://support-eol.eset.com/en/trending_weol2023_10_2022.html .

    Specifically noted in this article is;

    Quote

    Notifications in ESET products

    Application statuses in affected endpoint and server products and alerts in ESET PROTECT management console appear from July 10, 2023, displaying the "Your operating system is outdated" message. In the first half of September 2023, this message started displaying "Missing support for Azure Code Signing". The same message will appear also in ESET home products.

    It will be possible for administrators to hide the messages in Advanced setup during September 2023. For more information on how to hide application statuses in ESET business products, see the appropriate section in the documentation:

    ESET endpoint products

    ESET server products

    ESET PROTECT

    It is fairly obvious that Eset will not be providing this notification disabling capability in NOD32, EIS, or ESSP. Furthermore, it is Eset long established policy not to allow for disabling of critical operational notifications in these products.

    -EDIT- Removed prior EULA reference based on this posting: https://forum.eset.com/topic/1169-future-changes-to-eset-nod32-antivirus/?do=findComment&comment=173136 . I really give up on Eset licensing practices; they are a total and complete mess.

  3. 16 hours ago, whitefern said:

    I am sure I will hear cricket sounds.

    Actually, you will hear silence since this has been asked and answered multiple times. The latest Eset response is here: https://forum.eset.com/topic/1169-future-changes-to-eset-nod32-antivirus/?do=findComment&comment=173013 . FYI - Aryeh Goretsky is head of Eset's N.A. subsidiary which handles all product sales and support in the U.S. and Canada.

    Since your Windows versions are LTSC, you are wasting time on this quest in futility. Instead you should be applying the applicable KB update to your Window installations

  4. 4 hours ago, lucamc said:

    I have the same problem too. It seems that the malware is linked to the WordPress theme called "Newspaper". I also have that theme, and Grzegorz's site also has it.

    However, on the theme's support forum, the developer "TagDiv" says that the theme is clean.

    Per Sucuri web site analysis, below is the Newspaper plug-in being used. Is this the latest plug-in version?

    Eset_Theme.thumb.png.31dd720feb1f2677b226077e4e036891.png

    Also Sucuri noted that the password entry field on this web site is not encrypted; i.e. HTTPS, meaning it can be intercepted by a hacker.

  5. 2 hours ago, Marcos said:

    Where in the pdf is a clickable hyperlink?

    image.png

    Another important detail is no data exists on where to make the payment to. This leads me to believe the e-mail itself contained this info along with possibly a malicious link. I assume the .pdf was an attachment to the e-mail.

    Bottom line - there is nothing malicious about the .pdf per se other than to support the attempted scam attempt.

    -EDIT- Duh ..... Just realized the .pdf was a receipt. So the whole purpose was to get the e-mail recipient to open the .pdf. Was the attachment a .pdf or something else? I suspect the later. Let's say the attachment was an archive. When Eset scanned it, it removed any malware leaving the benign .pdf file.

  6. 37 minutes ago, sovchen said:

    That doesn't sound right. Blocking via prompt stopped any network interaction nvdisplaycontainer tried to do, and it hasn't attempted to deploy from elsewhere either, I have verified this on my machine.

    Refer my prior posting here: https://forum.eset.com/topic/37283-interactive-firewall-useless-since-162/?do=findComment&comment=172757 .

    As long as the NvDisplayContainer.exe firewall rule specifies child processes, all outbound network traffic from it will be blocked. It is the NvDisplayContainer.exe child process that is performing the network connection.

  7. 9 hours ago, whitefern said:

    It is BECAUSE it is a legitimate request. And the ESET Developers are ignoring a legitimate request from their user.

    The request wasn't ignored by the Eset moderator. It was stated that Eset NOD32, EIS, and ESSP will not be modified to accommodate your request. If you are dissatisfied with this response, escalate your request to Eset corporate and stop wasting forum disk space. 

  8. 31 minutes ago, Binabik said:

    In the firewall rules window, every time I select a rule, after a few seconds (up to a minute), it disappears automatically. 

    I can't duplicate this behavior.

    32 minutes ago, Binabik said:

    If I close the window by clicking on the cancel button and reopen it, the deleted rules are still in the list,

    This is expected behavior since you canceled the delete action.

    33 minutes ago, Binabik said:

    but if I close the window by clicking on the accept button (accepting the changes) and reopen the window, the deleted rules are gone forever.

    Again, this is expected behavior since you confirmed the rule delete action.

  9. 53 minutes ago, whitefern said:

    I will ask again. All I/We are asking is to give users the option to disable of the status/notification of "Missing Support for Azure Code Signing". It is just a Check Box. Users who disables the notification knows fully of the consequence.

    You've asked this question no less than 14 times in this thread.

    You're fortunate that the Eset forum is tolerate of such activity. You would have been banned long ago on most security forums.

×
×
  • Create New...