nsanedown blocked by ESET

[ande]

fwiw: Norton IS (v18.7) not affected. 8)

Norton was, at some point, blocking files hosted on nsanedown, however I do not know if that is resolved.

[pweeseonichan]

lol garbage antivirus blocking best forum in the world.

[fretless]

i hope that purplebeaanz works on it: THE PUREFIX 2.02 WORKS WITH THE LATEST VERSION OF EAV AND ESS

I think, as purefix is the best fix for Eset ever made.i don't like mara fix because he puts the expiration date to 2014,and no one says what will happen after January 2014, if it stop working or not.in purefix it says"product is activated",without expiration date. you could say the developer to continue with purefix, starting from version 2.02,that works again

[shought]

i hope that purplebeaanz works on it: THE PUREFIX 2.02 WORKS WITH THE LATEST VERSION OF EAV AND ESS

I think, as purefix is the best fix for Eset ever made.i don't like mara fix because he puts the expiration date to 2014,and no one says what will happen after January 2014, if it stop working or not.in purefix it says"product is activated",without expiration date. you could say the developer to continue with purefix, starting from version 2.02,that works again

I'm pretty sure the expiration date is just a cosmetic change (it could be anything you want). The mechanism behind the automatic trial-reset isn't based on any date.

[fretless]

i hope that purplebeaanz works on it: THE PUREFIX 2.02 WORKS WITH THE LATEST VERSION OF EAV AND ESS

I think, as purefix is the best fix for Eset ever made.i don't like mara fix because he puts the expiration date to 2014,and no one says what will happen after January 2014, if it stop working or not.in purefix it says"product is activated",without expiration date. you could say the developer to continue with purefix, starting from version 2.02,that works again

I'm pretty sure the expiration date is just a cosmetic change (it could be anything you want). The mechanism behind the automatic trial-reset isn't based on any date.

but why not put 2058, then? :)

and what will happen in January 2014? stops working or there will be a new version?and in any case, since purefix 2.02 works, why not develop it again?you have to admit that after January 2014 will be bad to read that expiration date, uh? ;)

[fretless]

@shought:

you have to admit that read "product activated" with no expiration date, it is another thing, right? :)

I swear that if marafix removes the expiration date, or put it,for example,2059,I'll use it! :D

[liverpal]

box mara- is so good! Let's appreciate mara's work! After purplebeaanz was retired the only one who working on it is mara-! I love box mara- :) the cosmetic is not a big matter actually! That's just a couple of letters :D

Ummm...about the blocking nsane, I don't care about what those eset staffs did by blocking it! just need Nod32 for free :lol: it's easy to white list nsane! But I know being labelled as ''dangerous'' site by eset is not good for nsane's reputation! However, one thing I know is that nsane is the best forum in the world - thanks for the best people in nsane - and I will always love nsane! :showoff:

Nsane never dies

keep rockin' dude

cheers ;)

[fretless]

ok,but why put 2014?,or put OEM license or "product activated" as purefix,do not you think?we are different, and I can not stand the expiration date so close!why not do as purefix "product activated"?i hope that mara correct this aesthetic thing in future.

[Knightmare]

Who cares what it reads as long as it works? If you're using the fix on a computer that other people you don't trust can see, then you're a. dumb, and b. perfectly capable of finding another fix. It's not fair to ask why an author does what they do. Just accept it and move on.

[dcs18]

ok,but why put 2014?,or put OEM license or "product activated" as purefix,do not you think?we are different, and I can not stand the expiration date so close!why not do as purefix "product activated"?i hope that mara correct this aesthetic thing in future.

That's not a bug and is very a desirable cosmetic plus point for Professionals like me who serve Customers.

Using 2014 is more plausible than for example 2059. Either ways, the fix works beyond 2014 - it easy to test that.

[fretless]

ok,but why put 2014?,or put OEM license or "product activated" as purefix,do not you think?we are different, and I can not stand the expiration date so close!why not do as purefix "product activated"?i hope that mara correct this aesthetic thing in future.

That's not a bug and is very a desirable cosmetic plus point for Professionals like me who serve Customers.

Using 2014 is more plausible than for example 2059. Either ways, the fix works beyond 2014 - it easy to test that.

i understand it,but you have to admit that is a ughly thing to see,after january 2014 date!I just wanted to say that I question the need a superhuman effort to change the date or write "product activated" instead of 2014, right?

[dcs18]

What's ugly about that - most of us prefer that (in fact, this is the first time anybody has ever objected.)

When you buy a legitimate NOD32 - that's how your copy looks.

[fretless]

What's ugly about that - most of us prefer that (in fact, this is the first time anybody has ever objected.)

When you buy a legitimate NOD32 - that's how your copy looks.

for the developer do not think it's a problem to change the date or leave the words "product activated" as in purefix!.this is the last thing I want to say.however purefix 2.20 works perfectly, with written "product activated", and I keep it.

[shought]

Can we please keep this discussion on topic ;) :)

[rudrax]

Can we please keep this discussion on topic ;) :)

When we keep a discussion on topic, the quality of the thread remains maintained. Leading that to off topic, it harms the quality.

Say, a guest is reading a particular thread of his interest and suddenly he finds that the topic is going off the track. So, what kind of first impression will it show to him? Obviously, he will think that it's a forums of some n00bs and he won't be interested to sign up. So guys, try your best to be on the track while replying to a thread or post. :)

[Marik]

And the fiasco continues.

I guess people who don't regularly update their database won't find the site blacklisted and that do...well, we all know the rest of the story :tehe:

[liverpal]

FYI, my eset is only blocking nsanedown; so by adding nsanedown.com to whitelist, the blocking is gone! Easy as cake, huh :D

[Wissertje]

Eset Mobile Security is not blocking nsanedown on my android phone. :D

[mrkool123]

Still getting the problem when i attempt to add it to the exclusion list.I tried

*nsanedown.com*

"*nsanedown.com*"

[DKT27]

Still getting the problem when i attempt to add it to the exclusion list.I tried

*nsanedown.com*

"*nsanedown.com*"

Two things:

1. Have you added it to the allowed or exclusions list?
2. Is the "List active" checkbox marked?

[mrkool123]

Still getting the problem when i attempt to add it to the exclusion list.I tried

*nsanedown.com*

"*nsanedown.com*"

Two things:

1. Have you added it to the allowed or exclusions list?
2. Is the "List active" checkbox marked?

Thanks I didnt click on list active checkbox

[DKT27]

Thanks I didnt click on list active checkbox

You're welcome. :)

[Guest Guest]

I'm using mac osx, and using ESET Cyber Security Pro i try to add to exclusion list it wont work. anyone mac user here ??

[DKT27]

I'm using mac osx, and using ESET Cyber Security Pro i try to add to exclusion list it wont work. anyone mac user here ??

It should work. Not sure why.

Try these:

Add *nsanedown.com* only on one list, either allowed or exclusions.

Instead of *nsanedown.com*, try this link:

http://www.nsanedown.com/*

[Bizarre™]

@noreg-|Guest|-:

Try *.nsanedown.com* instead.