Discussion in 'other firewalls' started by alexandrud, May 20, 2013.
"Connections Log" takes 3-4 seconds to load/refresh with this new version. Intended or some problem?
v126.96.36.199 fails to install on my Windows 10 Pro x64 computer, all versions, (registered), from v3.x.x.x have installed without a problem.
I get the following http://tinyimg.io/i/d82dsXy.png
So why add to it
Yeah that post was pointless, people have a right to be concerned, and question strange and different things like EULA, new dll's such as mbcut.dll, mbcut32.dll, not to mention Malwarebytes doesn't have the greatest history...
Also anyone not living under a rock has probably heard about Avast and Ccleaner by now. So people are jumpy.
I had to revert back to 188.8.131.52.
184.108.40.206 would not create nor delete any firewall rules when I installed it. Even the temporary rules created via a notification did not appear, and so notifications were caught in a loop.
Now it is signed and you can choose to allow/block Metro Apps rules, it is all i wanted; the rest i dont care much.
About the EULA it was expected to be the same as MBAM. WFC is now a MBAM product, no surprise here, like it or leave it.
Now that you got rich with this multi-billion acquisition, I demand you to repay those 10 bucks I donated for the cause!
LOL yeah ! because making it free isn't enough !!!
This is not as easy as you make it sound. The only alternative to WFC which I know is Glasswire Basic, which is super expensive.
Sphinx-soft Windows 10 Firewall Control? Simplewall? Windows Firewall Notifier?
No, no, no.
The only serious alternative available for Windows 10 - Comodo Firewall (if you turn off all the fashion jewelry), it works very well. But for now it is necessary to wait for a response from the alexandrud regarding telemetry.
If it doesn't break your system after a huge update, yes, it's quite good
I don't like the fact that I had to uninstall the previous version in order to update to 220.127.116.11
But it's whatever. Still the best firewall program for Windows.
"And not to worry—we will maintain, support, and keep Binisoft products free for everyone in the short term."
It's the "...in the short term." part that worries me.
Off the record:
The following data is sent once a day to Malwarebytes: program version, os version, os architecture (x64, x86), os language (english, german, etc), filesystem (ntfs, fat32), process run as administrator or not, computer is joined into a domain or not, machine id. No personal data is collected. These are used for statistics data to see how many users of WFC exist. Depending on the number of existing users, WFC will continue to receive new features or not. A reduced number of installations will probably stop the development of WFC, a large number will probably continue the development.
mbcut(32).dlls are used to generate a unique machine id based on os architecture. These are the same in any Malwarebytes products. Newtonsoft.Json.dll is used to create the JSON data which is sent to Malwarebytes servers.
Note: This data is sent if Windows Firewall has outbound filtering disabled (Low Filtering or No Filtering profile is used) or if there is an allow rule for wfc.exe and outbound filtering is enabled (Medium Filtering profile). In case it can't send the data if will fail silently without making nasty stuff. You can check this through Connections Log where all connections (allowed or blocked) are anyway logged. Keep in mind that if everyone will block this, it may lead to the decision of not investing anymore in WFC because there are not enough users to keep supporting it.
Thank you for the honest answer.
I think there will be enthusiasts who will work with WireShark.
MBAM didn't spend lot of money to give it away for free, they aren't in the charity business.
Even before it wasn't free, you had to make a donation, i will say being able to have it for free right now, is way more than i expected, and i'm glad they did it even if it is for short time.
The new version tries to connect to:telemetry.malwarebytes.com
The current ip's 18.104.22.168, 22.214.171.124, 126.96.36.199 should you wish to block them.
honestly those telemetry paranoids...without telemetry you can't have proper development plans, company have to rely on telemetry , everybody in the industry knows that, telemetry didn't started with Win10.
and @alexandrud was very clear about what it's sent to MB
Thanks Alex for your honest replies.
But there has not been such an epidemic of telemetry yet! Every Internet user is bound to be paranoid.
Did you try uninstalling the previous version first?
Why is this not in the changelog? What is the point of providing a changelog if some of the added new features are missing?
That being said, I absolutely love Windows Firewall Control 188.8.131.52
Yes, uninstalled 184.108.40.206 (including removing activation), tried installing 220.127.116.11 which failed.
Re-installed 18.104.22.168 (without a problem), uninstalled it again, and tried installing 22.214.171.124 again - same result.
Currently, reverted to 126.96.36.199.
EDIT: Both times I elected to keep the existing rules.
I do not know whether this will help or not. If you have problems with reinstalling WFC, remove WFC manually:
A) Close the wfc.exe process via the WFC icon in the tray or through the Task Manager.
B) Run CMD as admin, run the following three commands:
Sc.exe stop _wfcs
Sc.exe delete _wfcs
reg delete "HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall\Windows Firewall Control"/f
C) Manually delete the WFC installation folder.
Now your system is completely cleaned of the traces of WFC installation (note that your firewall rules and settings still exist and work!).
Now you can perform a clean WFC installation of the latest version.
Before starting these procedures, turn off Secure Rules and Secure Profile, maybe you do not have the right to registry.