wesh Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 running win 8.1 x64 , KIS 2015 (v15.0.1.415) I did the steps many times, and believe me , i can still catch a trial key. But 1035 key remains UNBLOCKED.I did another test in a VMware machine, same configurations, but this time i did not create any blocking rule for kaspersky. Of course , once i tried to insert the 1035 key, it was immediately blocked.Conclusion : your method works 100% as for now, but i don't know why i can still get the trial key. I will try again, repeating the same steps and will report backThe thing is if u r able to activate trial license, this means there is a leak.And hence it would fail within 24hrs when it would make contact to this IP : 218.213.94.62Thats why i said there is a problem in your follwing the guide.If u want i could help u over team viewerotherwise i will eagerly await for ur result.p.s. just for having more grip block it in packet rules as well.Same results after re-installing, adding as well to packet rules (in addition to app rules) the ips. It is as if there was another address which kaspersky use to contact activation server..Thank you for the help suggestion but i believe ( correct me if i'm wrong ) since i already successfully managed to create a block rule for IDM as suggested in this thread, i'd be able to do so with KIS also.Perhaps other people should report back and tell us their results.Anyway, thank you so much again for this method, i will standby and watch closely other people's reports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cortana Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Same results after re-installing, adding as well to packet rules (in addition to app rules) the ips. It is as if there was another address which kaspersky use to contact activation server..Thank you for the help suggestion but i believe ( correct me if i'm wrong ) since i already successfully managed to create a block rule for IDM as suggested in this thread, i'd be able to do so with KIS also.Perhaps other people should report back and tell us their results.Anyway, thank you so much again for this method, i will standby and watch closely other people's reports.I can tell u this thing that the IP used for contacting trial server is 218.213.94.62 only.well if it has to fail it will fail in the next 24hrs only.Although in my system, i have been running it successfully for weeks.Can u advance ur system date to one month and then try and update and see if it retains activation ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted October 23, 2014 Author Share Posted October 23, 2014 On my system everything works like a dream - however, point to be noted is that UAC has always been left disabled on my system (I have a better alternative for UAC - ask kantry123.) :secret:and on mine it works, even with UAC left to default settings.So i guess, maybe a problem on W7 systems :dunno:Windows 7 does not possess the level of security that ships with a Windows 8 (x64-bit) iteration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wesh Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Same results after re-installing, adding as well to packet rules (in addition to app rules) the ips. It is as if there was another address which kaspersky use to contact activation server..Thank you for the help suggestion but i believe ( correct me if i'm wrong ) since i already successfully managed to create a block rule for IDM as suggested in this thread, i'd be able to do so with KIS also.Perhaps other people should report back and tell us their results.Anyway, thank you so much again for this method, i will standby and watch closely other people's reports.I can tell u this thing that the IP used for contacting trial server is 218.213.94.62 only.well if it has to fail it will fail in the next 24hrs only.Although in my system, i have been running it successfuly for weeks.Can u advance ur system date to one month and then try and update and see if it retains activation ?yep , key blocked as soon as date is pushed forward..... :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cortana Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 yep , key blocked as soon as date is pushed forward..... :(as expected bcoz there was a leak....the IP(218.213.94.62) is not being blocked correctly in ur sys. dunno abt others.plz make sure u follow the guide step by step.otherwise i will be happy to help via Team Viewer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wesh Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 will uninstall completely and come back to you via teamviewer. i'll pm you after restart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mona Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 @ one & allPlease do not enable the Secure Boot feature on your WFC - it is buggy and causes failure . . . . . . . . . . . .orted due to a lack of adequate response (post # 1496.)I can confirm Secure Boot being buggy and causing troubles (Win7 x64) when trying this feature of previous version of WFC.Isn't there a simple workaround by just disabling or substantially delaying connecting internet automatically after boot ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven36 Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 On my system everything works like a dream - however, point to be noted is that UAC has always been left disabled on my system (I have a better alternative for UAC - ask kantry123.) :secret:Does this alternative fix the problem that happens on windows 8x? When you try to run a VM with UAC off it want run . When you disable it it turns off something in your boot that is required for some programs to run . If you try to turn it back on in the boot it does no good . You have to reformat or use and old image to fix it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted October 23, 2014 Author Share Posted October 23, 2014 @ one & allPlease do not enable the Secure Boot feature on your WFC - it is buggy and causes failure . . . . . . . . . . . .orted due to a lack of adequate response (post # 1496.)I can confirm Secure Boot being buggy and causing troubles (Win7 x64) when trying this feature of previous version of WFC.Isn't there a simple workaround by just disabling connecting internet automatically after boot ?Even if the Secure Boot feature is left disabled on WFC, no workaround is required - more than 3 dozen folks (including myself) are testing the ESET implementation in this very state.There is absolutely no leakage of any IP (please disregard any misinformation) - whenever, ESET moves in with a change (any sort of change) we shall update the tutorial on an immediate basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven36 Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 What is there to change but removing update ips from the allow list and not getting updates anymore If your firewall was working right they would be no need to add new ips to your block list because rule 6 covers that already the only reason I have 91.228.167.125 and 91.228.165.81 blocked is if I try to block it with out no ips it want update. My Allow rule is the one thats fending off unknown IPs . If your having to add new block ips every time you turn around your having and on going problem with your allow rule leaking . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted October 23, 2014 Author Share Posted October 23, 2014 @ one & allPlease do not enable the Secure Boot feature on your WFC - it is buggy and causes failure . . . . . . . . . . . .orted due to a lack of adequate response (post # 1496.) I can confirm Secure Boot being buggy and causing troubles (Win7 x64) when trying this feature of previous version of WFC.Isn't there a simple workaround by just disabling connecting internet automatically after boot ?From the technical point-of-view, the single-most factor (at boot) that really prevents ESET from making a server call (before your firewall is functional) is simply the following step:-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mona Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 @ one & allPlease do not enable the Secure Boot feature on your WFC - it is buggy and causes failure . . . . . . . . . . . .orted due to a lack of adequate response (post # 1496.)I can confirm Secure Boot being buggy and causing troubles (Win7 x64) when trying this feature of previous version of WFC.Isn't there a simple workaround by just disabling connecting internet automatically after boot ?Even if the Secure Boot feature is left disabled on WFC, no workaround is required - more than 3 dozen folks (including myself) are testing the ESET implementation in this very state.There is absolutely no leakage of any IP (please disregard any misinformation) - whenever, ESET moves in with a change (any sort of change) we shall update the tutorial on an immediate basis.I'm neither ESET nor Kasperski user, so my remark was of general nature - for all those folks being concerned of ANY firewall on-boot leakage..Just said. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted October 23, 2014 Author Share Posted October 23, 2014 @ one & allPlease do not enable the Secure Boot feature on your WFC - it is buggy and causes failure . . . . . . . . . . . .orted due to a lack of adequate response (post # 1496.)I can confirm Secure Boot being buggy and causing troubles (Win7 x64) when trying this feature of previous version of WFC.Isn't there a simple workaround by just disabling connecting internet automatically after boot ?Even if the Secure Boot feature is left disabled on WFC, no workaround is required - more than 3 dozen folks (including myself) are testing the ESET implementation in this very state.There is absolutely no leakage of any IP (please disregard any misinformation) - whenever, ESET moves in with a change (any sort of change) we shall update the tutorial on an immediate basis.I'm neither ESET nor Kasperski user, so my remark was of general nature - for all those folks being concerned of ANY firewall on-boot leakage..Just said. :)It is only a few security programs such as ESET which possess the kernel permissions to precede the Windows Firewall, at boot - other programs such as IDM, Skype, etc., etc. are not even supposed to startup with Windows.Nevertheless, it is still recommended at the tutorial on post # 1, to configure IDM to not startup with Windows (as a precautionary step.)BTW, I repeat there is no leakage of any IP, so far published on any of the programs fixed by a firewall - any such leakage claimed, is nothing but a figment of imagination, from being unloved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven36 Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 The thing is what Im doing is working for me the plain every since they came with step 6 . If it were working for you right too there be no reason to chase no ips . Mines not broke Im not fixing it no more tell it breaks . :) you can worry yourself to death with why your chaseing ips that should not be geting though to begain with . Im not unless it breaks . :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted October 23, 2014 Author Share Posted October 23, 2014 On my system everything works like a dream - however, point to be noted is that UAC has always been left disabled on my system (I have a better alternative for UAC - ask kantry123.) :secret:and on mine it works, even with UAC left to default settings.So i guess, maybe a problem on W7 systems :dunno:I am now trying to research why the Secure Boot feature on WFC works great, on my own production system, but - screws up for some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cortana Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 I am now trying to research why the Secure Boot feature on WFC works great, on my own production system, but - screws up for some. hope ur focus is W7 bcoz thats where most of the failure reports are coming from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted October 23, 2014 Author Share Posted October 23, 2014 Trying it out on both - my Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 and Windows 8.1 Update 2 Pro, as well (ouch - hate the bloody UAC.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cortana Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 btw as a result of censorship u may want to edit your links again, although they ultimately bring u to the end point but the start is not gud.for e.g the eset guide link at post#2 starts of with page-79 and then revert back to page-78. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted October 23, 2014 Author Share Posted October 23, 2014 Please check now (cannot make out at my connection speed) - have changed a total of 4 links (Kaspersky included.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cortana Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 ya working fine nowjust one more entry that requires a change: //www.nsaneforums.com/topic/222515-prevent-idm-other-programs-from-dialing-home/page-67?do=findComment&comment=851160the link in it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted October 23, 2014 Author Share Posted October 23, 2014 Ok yeah, done - if you spot any more long-assed links, please bring the same to my notice for due amendment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kantry123 Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Same results after re-installing, adding as well to packet rules (in addition to app rules) the ips. It is as if there was another address which kaspersky use to contact activation server..Thank you for the help suggestion but i believe ( correct me if i'm wrong ) since i already successfully managed to create a block rule for IDM as suggested in this thread, i'd be able to do so with KIS also.Perhaps other people should report back and tell us their results.Anyway, thank you so much again for this method, i will standby and watch closely other people's reports.I can tell u this thing that the IP used for contacting trial server is 218.213.94.62 only.well if it has to fail it will fail in the next 24hrs only.Although in my system, i have been running it successfuly for weeks.Can u advance ur system date to one month and then try and update and see if it retains activation ?yep , key blocked as soon as date is pushed forward..... :(You also might be using WIn 7 ryt?bcoz the method failed in mine tooo, eventhough blocking still kaspersky establishes connection out of nowhereSO..this method will only work for win 8/8.1 users Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted October 23, 2014 Author Share Posted October 23, 2014 @ kantry123Have you switched from ESET to Kaspersky bro? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kantry123 Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 HAPPY DIWALI FELLAS!!!Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cortana Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 @kantry edit ur post u bugged the thread againremove spoiler and quote only 1 person not all as in the above.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.