Jump to content

Asgaro

Members
  • Posts

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Asgaro

  • Rank
    Newbie
    Newbie

Profile Information

  • Location
    Belgium

Recent Profile Visitors

471 profile views
  1. Ah, I get it now: I now also disabled 'Exclude communication with trusted domains' and restarted my PC. Results: - gmail.com: works fine and shows Issued by: ESET SSL Filter CA. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2648/ESET/gmail.PNG - people.live.com: works fine and shows Issued by: ESET SSL Filter CA BUT https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2648/ESET/live.PNG Note it says something different here. I don't know if that can be related... ------------- But to summarize: it seems the issue is solved in 1226.26, isn't it?
  2. Marcos, if I understand it correctly: ESET whitelists some SSL/TLS websites by default so they do not get checked using the ESET SSL Filter CA. Because I noticed, for example, that (with Internet protection module 1226.26) gmail.com seems to be whitelisted since the certificate says: Issued by: Google Internet Authority G2 (No mention of ESET). While, for example, on forum.eset.com it says: Issued by: ESET SSL Filter CA. So if I understand correctly, in Internet protection module 1226.26 you also whitelisted people.live.com since on my system it says: Issued By: Symantec Class 3 EV SSL CA - G3 (No mention of ESET). ----------------------------- But looking at your screenshot, I see you use Firefox and can access people.live.com even WITH Issued by: ESET SSL Filter CA. Could you please try the 64 bits version of Google Chrome? Since that's what I use. ----------------------------- Btw, I installed Firefox 64 bits and I have the same results as I was having with Chrome 64 bits: - gmail.com: Issued by: Google Internet Authority G2 (No mention of ESET). - forum.eset.com: Issued by: ESET SSL Filter CA. - people.live.com: Issued By: Symantec Class 3 EV SSL CA - G3 (No mention of ESET).
  3. I enabled pre-release updates (and cleared update cache and restarted PC, as recommended). The issue still persists on the currently available Internet protection module 1226.24. I look forward to testing 1226.26.
  4. Sure, here you go: Virus signature database: 13256 (20160330) Rapid Response module: 7751 (20160330) Update module: 1062 (20151228) Antivirus and antispyware scanner module: 1481 (20160310) Advanced heuristics module: 1168 (20160304) Archive support module: 1247 (20160311) Cleaner module: 1119 (20160315) Anti-Stealth support module: 1094 (20160119) ESET SysInspector module: 1257 (20151113) Real-time file system protection module: 1010 (20150806) Translation support module: 1456 (20160222) HIPS support module: 1219 (20160322) Internet protection module: 1226.20 (20160323) Database module: 1078 (20160301) Configuration module (33): 1240.3 (20160215) LiveGrid communication module: 1021 (20160310) Specialized cleaner module: 1010 (20141118) Rootkit detection and cleaning module: 1000 (20151228) Network protection module: 1113 (20160330)
  5. Hi, I just noticed the 'HTTPS checking' feature(*) blocks the following from loading: - When composing a new email at outlook.com, the contacts auto-completion window in the To: field doesn't appear. - people.live.com doesn't load. The loading icon is shown eternally. (*) Location: Advanced setup => Web and email => Web access protection => Web protocols => Enable HTTPS checking. I have noticed this on 2 separate systems, both running Windows 10 (one Home, one Pro) and ESET NOD32 Antivirus 9 v9.0.375.0. Disabling this feature fixes the problem. Thought I would let the ESET developers know! Cheers, Yen
  6. Hi Roberto and Marcos, I'm the author of the post where Roberto links to: hxxp://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums/t/580248/eset-found-in-memory-a-variant-of-msilinjectoryt-trojan-and-its-trending/ (So only the author of that post. NOT the author of the malware removal guides I linked within that post.) I want to bring to everyone's attention a follow-up post I made within that same forum: hxxp://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums/t/580267/eset-found-in-memory-a-variant-of-msilinjectoryt-trojan-mbam-didnt/ Especially the edits at the top of that thread, are important to read. My conclusion: it was actually a false positive, like Marcos also stated here. edit: See Marcos's statement below. And Marcos, feel free to point out anything that's incorrect in that post I made. Kind regards, Asgaro
×
×
  • Create New...