Jump to content


Experienced Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


0 Neutral

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Melbourne - Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

1,655 profile views
  1. Yeah, like 2171F says these ads only happen when Ccleaner starts and it has internet access. Naturally not being connected to the internet when Ccleaner launches will stop the ads. Not having it start on windows startup is going to give you control over when the ads appear as you'll manually have to start the program. Regarding things like PUP's or PUM's, I'm not sure what you mean by them being deployed for this purpose. They are just programs that you (or any user) choose to install but have a reputation for doing unexpected or bad things that they aren't really meant to do (from the perspective of a user). Some are more insidious than others, but most the time the program itself will do what it's meant to do but there is an unknown catch to installing/using them. You could easily view CCleaner as such a program these days considering it's current behavior. Malwarebytes and other programs like it are designed to check for and warn a user about such programs, and then give you a choice of removing them. Sometimes (but not in ccleaners case) they will simply remove the bad components of a program (so the program will still work, just it won't be able to run the dodgy process it also installed) but other times there is no extra "dodgy" process, it's all self contained within the main program, and it causes undesired behavior so the program itself has to be removed. CCleaner isn't considered a PUP by the creators of these programs, yet, as far as I'm aware, but it may be in the future. The bottom line is CCleaner doesn't use some external third party advertising platform which is what these programs usually detect, when it comes to simply advertising. If CCleaner actually did something more damaging than simply showing an ad whenever it starts, these programs would definitely flag it, as they do with other programs. Finally what OS are you on, asking as I suspect you don't run a 3rd party firewall, but probably are running one, as all major OS's ship with one these days. (Course you may have disabled it, which I wouldn't recommend, as yes they add a little to latency, but they also add a lot to making your network more secure. The analogy being do you think its a good idea to always leave your doors unlocked because it's quicker to leave & enter without locked doors).
  2. The ways I'm aware of to stop these adverts, are to either uninstall, or within whatever firewall you're running, block incoming and outgoing connections for ccleaner.exe & ccleaner64.exe (and perhaps CCupdate.exe, not sure if it's needed). The only potential downside to revoking ccleaner's internet access is it won't be able to check for updates, but personally I suggest using some other app that checks multiple programs for updates anyway (eg PatchMyPC, SUMO, etc. there are a few around, or you can periodically check the home page). What's causing these adds to appear is now AVAST has the reigns, whenever you start the program, it checks certain servers to see what wonderful things it can try to sell you, and then attempts to nag you into purchasing them by bombarding you with the add presumably in an attempt to wear you down so you submit to make a purchase. (not sure why they chose this method, most mature people know it only serves to annoy and deters you from ever wanting to deal with the offending entity, but I guess some companies like to act like children or are simply too lazy & apathetic to use mechanisms they already have in place which would tell them you've seen the add so not display it any more) FYI: I'm confident this particular add will stop after 30th of November (since that's when the sale ends) but Christmas is coming so it will more than likely all play out again.
  3. This isn't entirely accurate as far as I understand it. My understanding is that forced uninstall (in Revo pro / tiral) is to do with uninstalling left over junk which wasn't uninstalled via Revo, i.e. it was uninstalled using the native or windows uninstall options, or if you just manually deleted the program file/folder (hopefully most people know not to do that these days), then the forced uninstall would still be able to scan for leftover registry entries and files despite not initiating the uninstall itself. Also the free version definitely does NOT need to monitor a programs installation in order to uninstall it, in fact the free version can't monitor an installation at all, that functionality is only available in the paid / trial versions (i.e. it's one of frees' limitations). The free version NEEDS the program to be installed to be able to uninstall a program, Revo (free) doesn't care if it was installed after the other program, it just cares the program is still intact, as it runs the native uninstaller first (after creating a restore point) than will scan the registry and hard drive after the installer has finished, it's important not to let the installer do a reboot (if it wants to) using the free version, as doing so means Revo won't scan for additional stuff, and won't be able to do so after a reboot. The paid versions can still scan after the reboot (using forced uninstall, but it's still probably better to defer reboot with the paid version too). The other limitation of the free Revo is it can't do Universal Apps, (otherwise known as Metro/Windows Store Apps). There is another uninstaller called Geek Uninstaller which is free and can do those apps. And is comparable to Revo, the weakness of Geek Uninstaller compared to Revo, IMO, is it doesn't show you what will be deleted, it just deletes it, but does seem to do a comparable job to Revo set to medium. (I only know about this one as Revo only had the 32-bit cleaner available for many years, while Geek Uninstaller had both 32/64bit cleaning during that time, but I prefer Revo since it shows you what's going to be deleted and gives the option to change it, and it also means you can do a manual scan for similar entries in the registry and on disk as both programs still miss things at times).
  4. It may be to faint to come through the wall from outside but it still may be coming from within the wall itself. Had an issue a while ago where I could hear a noise periodically (sounded like a small intermittent sprinkler or the noise water makes when someone holds their thumb over a hose to make the water disperse in a spray), turned out it was a pin-hole leak in a little water-pipe (approx 10mm diameter) running behind the plaster board, only found out when I noticed the carpet was wet in the area the sound could be heard from, but it took approx six months for that to happen and I had checked the carpet for dampness in that area prior. Anyway point being you may have insects of some kind living in the wall (it's more likely than in the computer case itself) but could also possibly be wiring or something else entirely, who knows maybe a trades person or previous owner accidentally dropped a pager or something down there once. Anyway I'm sure the cause will reveal itself one day, and there will be some boring logical explanation, at least at the moment you can pretend it's ghosts or something else more interesting
  5. Another thing to check is if you have firefox sync enabled. Simply mentioning it as you haven't said you've disabled it within firefox and I believe it's enabled by default. This would also explain why the entries keep returning (i.e it gets recreated from the synced backup), rather than a new default and empty places.sqlite just being recreated (i.e. no sync occurring). Also contrary to what you said above, there is a setting to clean history on exit in firefox. Go to Options -> "Privacy & Security" section -> scroll down to the area labeled History, uncheck the "Remember browsing and download history" checkbox and enable the "Clear history when Firefox closes" check box. To the right of the "Clear history when Firefox closes" line is a button labeled "Settings...", click it and it opens a popup window allowing you to choose what data gets deleted on exit. Select the "Browsing & History data" option (and any of the others you want cleared each exit). FYI: the sync options are contained in the Options -> "Firefox Account" section.
  6. Yep try what mta said. If that solves the problem it's highly possible that the fast startup option is contributing to this. Essentially fast boot/startup as was said earlier puts the system into a low power mode (akin to hibernate) and can allow the system to wake, the waking aspect doesn't seem to be the issue. So the issue is likely due to the system still being in a low power state (i.e it is still powered, compared to a traditional "slow startup" shutdown). Even physically plugged in without fast startup enabled there is going to be a small amount of power reaching the PSU, but with fast startup enabled, the power reaches past the PSU also flowing through the motherboard and to usb devices (I know this as I have a backlit gaming keypad which is powered solely via the usb from the computer, and if I shutdown my computer with fast startup enabled, it remains backlit, hence I don't have it enabled). Essentially what mta suggests will eliminate the computer as the cause if it still occurs while unplugged, it could be coming from the power transformer if it's a laptop and/or, it could be the power-board (assuming you use one) etc.
  7. Interesting about the only some people have it. I guess I'm one of the ones that has it (I just assumed it was part of the new version.) It does mention down the bottom it's a preview of quick clean, (i.e. when you select quick clean from the options on the side), however it is also in the release version (that I downloaded via the piriform site), so it's not to be confused with running the beta or a preview version of ccleaner, although the potential for that confusion is definitely high. @Granpa BARRY, to clarify, when you say it hangs at 17% do you mean during the analysis ?. (i.e despite personally not being on Windows 1809, the analysis part completed for me, I backed out after that as I like to know more detail on what is actually going to be cleaned before cleaning, so I didn't test the actual cleaning phase.) But figured I'd ask this, since there does appear to be two phases to the operation, not that you would know there was a second phase if it hung during first (analysis) one.
  8. Hi Chevyone, you can probably try again now. I downloaded it and norton, after doing one of it's "extended" checks, (which normally only happens when it's going to fail a file), ultimately, said ccleaner548.exe was safe so, they must have upped it's reputation. FYI that WS.Reputation.1 type of threat isn't worth a whole lot in my opinion. It doesn't indicate any specific type of threat, it's based on a reputation score attained from data from the community, and is assumed a threat due to that, but when you boil it down it's not technically a threat, it's just possibly a threat based on what others say, so is about the only one where restoring a personally trusted program from quarantine is viable IMO. If in doubt restore it then upload it to something like Virus Total for a 2nd opinion (but to do this you still have to restore the file since Norton doesn't let you upload quarantined files to something like virus total for a second opinion without restoring it first, it's almost like they don't want you to get a 2nd opinion).
  9. Fair enough, I did interpret your prior comment as blaming the users, so sorry about that, I guess mainly because IMO from a purely technical perspective I can see the point of view that it generally does boil down to the user but at the same time, realistically there is a fair bit of cajoling which helps the error to occur, hence my view is that it's unfair to blame the user in this case (or at least to solely blame the user), and figured I'd point it out. And yeah it could be considered lazy programming, personally I'd be inclined to think it's more due to a lack of consistency since MS insists on implementing things in a rather odd fashion, when compared to both other OS's, and even Older Windows OS's. They have this habit of trying to fix things that aren't broken, or changing things for the sake of change. Like I mentioned in my previous post they could force a redirect at the file system level which is how Linux does these things, and is how they used to do things in prior versions, only instead they changed it so now you can make a blank folder in the user directory with the same name as a redirected folder and you can fill both of them with completely different things. (I'm not really sure it actually qualifies as being a truly "redirected" folder, considering these conditions).
  10. While I'm sure the issue is in many cases inflicted by the user, it's not necessarily the only cause. Part of the issue is for some reason, MS decided to leave the actual default folders within the user directory despite the same folders being redirected. This naturally means those folders exist in two places on the same drive (when viewed from explorer), amplifying confusion when selecting a folder to save stuff too, i.e. "This PC\Documents" (redirect honored) vs "C:\Users\<username>\Documents" (no redirect), Ironically the legacy programmatically accessed "C:\Users\<username>\My Documents" would be redirected. Why they didn't force windows to create hard links (like My Documents) when redirection happens is beyond me, I can only assume this is part of what they were trying to address, by deleting the folders in the update. However, another thing that can happen is these actual folders which should be empty sometimes end up with stuff inside them without user interaction (even if they were empty when/just after the redirection occurred, and/or there wasn't some accidental user selecting the wrong spot issue). Basically some programs seem to end up storing stuff in the non-redirected folders. (again MS didn't force those folders to become file system hardlinks so this COULDN'T happen, for whatever reason), so, either the programs aren't using the correct procedure to get the user's (redirected) folders, or windows is failing to do the redirects under certain conditions. (I know this can happen as I have two programs that did this, although in my case they only created empty folders, but I'm sure there are some programs that do more than create empty folders). Naturally once this does happen, these folders are likely the automatically selected locations for saving from within these programs, so a user doesn't really have to select the "wrong" location, they have apps which help them do it ;).
  11. Yeah I definitely agree with you there. It's not like MS is known for it's ability to fix problems caused by upgrades within 10 days, so it really shouldn't be enforcing a no backsies policy for a timeframe they also can't adhere to. Not to mention it would be somewhat trivial for them to offer a setting which effectively alters the run time of a task that is going to do the work. Especially when you consider the task that controls this functionality doesn't actually allow the trigger time itself to be altered via task scheduler, it only allows toggling whether it's disabled/enabled. I know I'm willing to put up with a problem that's introduced for around a month (assuming it's an intermittent issue, not some major always happens problem) but if it takes much longer I'd be inclined to roll back, the issue with 10 days, is sometimes the intermittent problems aren't even apparent till it's too late.
  12. Regarding Windows.old removal, Assuming system sense is to also include the same options to do the same thing as the "old" disk cleanup. Windows.old cleaning was always handled via a separate option named something along the lines of "remove previous windows installations" (which was a dynamic option in that it only ever existed as an option when there was a windows.old to clean. also disk cleanup needed to be run as admin, or the clean system files button needed to be clicked). The delivery optimization & Windows Update cleanup options, were and still are always present, but didn't (and I assume won't) do anything with windows.old when the old chestnut crops up again. Also regarding the 10 days auto cleanup, you can stop it from happening, it's controlled by a task in task scheduler. I can't remember 100% which task it was, But it's relatively easy to find if you use something like Nirsofts taskscheduleview.exe which lists all tasks in a sortable listbox view (i.e sort on next run time). When it's active it will be scheduled to run in approx 10 days and it's a one off task (i.e. not monthly or weekly), and will likely be the only one that is set to run this far in the future. The problem with saying exactly which task it is, is that currently whatever task it is (I suspect "start component cleanup") isn't set to run at any future time, along with many others, and also my suspicion could be wrong, and the task itself may self delete after being run, I just remember when I did it, it seemed fairly self-evident which task would control it, and disabling that task did in fact work until I decided the update was safe, so I re-enabled the task, just in case it was needed for other cleanup stuff. Anyway just thought I'd mention it in case it's something someone might find useful and want's to investigate after the next feature update. I wouldn't recommend it over a backup, but it could be convenient keeping the rollback option around a bit longer.
  13. To be fair this has little to do with European regulations, or even the software invading ones privacy. It's actually highlighting a potential privacy issue, which could occur if the end user fails to sign out of signed in accounts, before letting someone else use the device, even though they've shut down the browser. Which is only logical since the browser was set to load the last opened pages. What I find ironic here is this already happens even if you don't have pages open automatically, it's simply that the pages you're signed into aren't "advertised" by being opened automatically. Currently with many pages if you fail to sign out, and just close them you'll still be logged in the next time you open that page, irrespective of which browser you use or if you've shut down the browser or computer in the mean time (it does require the same browser to be used and for it to not be clearing cache cookies etc on exit, as this is where that login info is usually stored, it also often requires you to Uncheck the "remember me" setting on a given site i.e. Opt-out if you don't want that login to be restored, since many sites have it checked by default). Very little to do with firefox IMO, more the nature of the web, and users often never actually logging out of sites, instead simply closing them assuming that will ALWAYS log them out.
  14. It depends on exactly what is being discussed here, a shortened url which has been shortened by using shortening service, as per the OP, won't be resolved to the true url by a mouseover, copy link etc, you'll only get the link provided by the service (which was posted by someone) which when clicked will be resolved by the shortening service to the original address by clicking it. Things like regular links or the "quote" in this forum used as an example aren't shortened via a service, they are more like regular html links in that they have a displayed name or tag for the url they reference, and these will take you to the location displayed when moused over. So I kind of agree with both, Nukecad and Andavari, as it's always best practice to check where the link will take you, but when it comes to url's shortened with a service, you don't know where it will take you other than to the shortening service then on to the magical mystery location, which could easily be malicious but may not be. And if you see a shortened link which leads to a link shortening service, odds are even greater that it's a location you probably wouldn't go to of you're own volition. Bottom line is I don't like shortening services, they seem kind of unnecessary considering these days you can just put in a regular link with a tag to display in a post if you need a link to appear short, and if you can't then it's probably an archaic site. I have no idea about twitter, but I'd imagine you could do it this way too.
  15. Thought I was going crazy for a minute as I could have sworn I'd been using the registry address bar longer than that. Seems I wasn't, the article has an update as it was the original creators update (i.e. November 2017) it was added, but it's one of those simple features that really should have been done even earlier than that IMO. Also to revisit my prior post here, my system freeze when gaming issues have been resolved. Not 100% sure what changed to fix it, I suspect it was HWiNFO which I use to monitor temps etc as others seemed to be experiencing similar things when used in combination with latest (at the time) Nvidia drivers and both have had updates since then, so that's my best guess as to the real cause. I'm actually looking forward to the next update now, hoping that tabbed window/workspace feature MS have apparently been working on for the last 2 updates makes the cut. I forget exactly what they call it, but essentially it's meant to allow windows to be grouped in a single window and represented with tabs in that window. I don't care so much for having different windows grouped but I do hope it means I can just use explorer tabbed without relying on a 3rd party file explorer or explorer add-on to achieve it.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.