Any Reported Conflicts with Other Security Softs ?

[Umbra]

when we can get a "stable" new beta build?

[fixer]

We've got a couple more issues to fix and to test these fixes. I think this or next week new RC build will be ready.

[aDVll]

We've got a couple more issues to fix and to test these fixes. I think this or next week new RC build will be ready.

Nice, good to hear. Just let us know what it was fixed so we can test and confirm if possible.

[Umbra]

No more issues with HMPA , well done.

[paulderdash]

I did a search but can't find a mention of Emsisoft.
If I run Emsisoft Anti-Malware with ReHIPS 2.2 Beta installed on my Win 7 Pro x64, the interface will not opene and I don't know if EAM is otherwise working normally though services / processes appear to be running.
Uninstalling ReHIPS solves the problem. Exiting or disabling does not.
I have not tested whether adding mutual exclusions would allow these two softs to run together.
Any advice from the experts?

[aDVll]

I did a search but can't find a mention of Emsisoft.
If I run Emsisoft Anti-Malware with ReHIPS 2.2 Beta installed on my Win 7 Pro x64, the interface will not opene and I don't know if EAM is otherwise working normally though services / processes appear to be running.
Uninstalling ReHIPS solves the problem. Exiting or disabling does not.
I have not tested whether adding mutual exclusions would allow these two softs to run together.
Any advice from the experts?

I had the same issue paul but it was fixed. Atm i am not using EAM to test but fixer will sort it again if it broke. Will bump the topic on beta forum i had in case he doesn't notice this reply. Will also test it tonight and see if i can reproduce paul.

EDIT: Can confirm it's broken. Don't remember if i tested the fix when it happened but i am bumping the topic so devs can check the bug again.

[HJLBX]

I have not tested whether adding mutual exclusions would allow these two softs to run together.

You can only make all EAM processes "Allowed" for the HIPS; there is no "exclusion" for process monitoring in ReHIPS like there is in an AV that does process scanning.

Anyhow, creating Allow rules for EAM in ReHIPS will not fix the issue; it is something that the developer has to fix.

[paulderdash]

Thanks @HJLBX
I had previously run ReHIPS in training mode for a day or so, and EAM would have done updates and a scan in that time. But I don't think I actually opened the interface at that time. Or subsequently in standard mode, to 'Allow'.
But if a developer fix is required, and from @aDVII's post it seems they have encountered this previously, I will keep an eye out here.

[paulderdash]

I had the same issue paul but it was fixed. Atm i am not using EAM to test but fixer will sort it again if it broke. Will bump the topic on beta forum i had in case he doesn't notice this reply. Will also test it tonight and see if i can reproduce paul.

EDIT: Can't confirm it's broken. Don't remember if i tested the fix when it happened but i am bumping the topic so devs can check the bug again.
[/quote]
Thanks @aDVII - would appreciate if Fixer, or yourself, can post back here ...

[aDVll]

I had the same issue paul but it was fixed. Atm i am not using EAM to test but fixer will sort it again if it broke. Will bump the topic on beta forum i had in case he doesn't notice this reply. Will also test it tonight and see if i can reproduce paul.

EDIT: Can't confirm it's broken. Don't remember if i tested the fix when it happened but i am bumping the topic so devs can check the bug again.

Thanks @aDVII - would appreciate if Fixer, or yourself, can post back here ...

Lol i meant to say i can confirm it's broken. No clue why i typed can't. Sorry for the confusion paulderdash but no worries i bumped the beta topic for EAM. It will get fixed if possible.

[fixer]

Don't worry, I didn't miss it, it's in our TODO list. Will take a closer look as soon as I finish with some other issues.

[paulderdash]

Thanks fixer. Will wait in eager anticipation
Looking good otherwise!

[fixer]

I looked into this issue. Actually it's their bug because of unsafe DllMain of a2framework.dll. If anyone has an account on their forum or knows some of their developers, I can file a bugreport. But nevertheless this issue should be solved, so I'll try to devise some workaround.

[aDVll]

I looked into this issue. Actually it's their bug because of unsafe DllMain of a2framework.dll. If anyone has an account on their forum or knows some of their developers, I can file a bugreport. But nevertheless this issue should be solved, so I'll try to devise some workaround.

I have an account on their forum. I can try posting on malwaretips and their forum if you give me the info. One of their devs is active on both.

[fixer]

MSDN https://msdn.microsoft.com/ru-ru/library/windows/desktop/ms682583(v=vs.85).aspx recommends

The entry-point function should perform only simple initialization or termination tasks. It must not call the LoadLibrary or LoadLibraryEx function (or a function that calls these functions). Similarly, the entry-point function must not call the FreeLibrary function (or a function that calls FreeLibrary).

and https://msdn.microsoft.com/ru-ru/library/windows/desktop/dn633971(v=vs.85).aspx#general_best_practices

You cannot call any function in DllMain that directly or indirectly tries to acquire the loader lock. Otherwise, you will introduce the possibility that your application deadlocks or crashes.

They call some dangerous API functions like GetFileVersionInfoSize and GetFileVersionInfo that call LoadLibraryEx and FreeLibrary thus acquiring loader lock. It may be OK by itself, but in conjunction with other software it may cause undesired effects like deadlocks.