O.T. eBay malware/virus?

I've got this twice now when I
clicked my favorites link to
logon to eBay

http://i64.tinypic.com/16lhede.jpg


So does eBay have a problem? It's
one of the sites I frequent allot.

Robert

Mark Twain wrote:
I've got this twice now when I
clicked my favorites link to
logon to eBay

http://i64.tinypic.com/16lhede.jpg


So does eBay have a problem? It's
one of the sites I frequent allot.

Robert

That thread is a day or two old. Other people are seeing
what you are seeing.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Ebay/commen...irectorbmutrj/

Not the exact same redirector is reported in this thread.
It gives the appearance of being a false positive,
if you look at a virustotal sample for a selected URL.

https://community.ebay.com/t5/Techni...7724701/page/3

https://www.virustotal.com/ru/file/8...is/1542467129/

However, you're detecting this with SuperAntiSpyware, and
in that virustotal example of a false positive, SuperantiSpyware
isn't triggering. Maybe it really is a redirector.

One poster seems to feel the enabler, is using
your bookmarks entry. If you enter ebay this way:

https://www.ebay.com

do you still get the message ?

Paul

No, I was running a SuperAntiSpyware scan at
the time and Avast is the program that spotted
it.

It doesn't happen every time I go on eBay but
I just noticed it a couple of times and was
concerned I may be infected.

I typed the address as you suggested and no
issues but the problem is that I have all sorts
of bookmarks for eBay. So what am I to do?

I run scans daily and it never detects anything?

Thoughts/Suggestions?
Robert

It has nothing to do with the problem
but I ran a HDTune scan and thought you
might like to see it.


http://i66.tinypic.com/2e543h0.jpg


Robert

Mark Twain wrote:
It has nothing to do with the problem
but I ran a HDTune scan and thought you
might like to see it.


http://i66.tinypic.com/2e543h0.jpg


Robert

That doesn't look "bad".

Some of the spikes could be from other activity
on the computer in the background.

None of the spikes "touches down" onto the baseline.

You also want to keep pictures like that for later,
to compare to future traces. So you can see any
"progression".

I've had drives, brand new, where the trace was
quite rough on the edges. So if I scan such a drive
later, I have to compare the plot, to when the drive
was new.

The best OS I have here for drive testing is... Win2K :-)
On Windows 10, that version of HDTune no longer works
perfectly any more. The transfer curves are maybe 10MB/sec
lower than they're supposed to be. If I need to know
exactly what the transfer rate on a drive is, I have
to switch back to Win7 or something (that's on the
other machine).

Paul

Here's the HDTune scan of the 780,
I'm running a Kapersky scan on the
8500.

http://i65.tinypic.com/28wfdso.jpg

Robert

Mark Twain wrote:
Here's the HDTune scan of the 780,
I'm running a Kapersky scan on the
8500.

http://i65.tinypic.com/28wfdso.jpg

Robert

That's not looking very good.

Check the Health tab, the Reallocated or
Current Pending "Data" column. A value of 0
in the Data column is good. A value of 5500
would be bad. The value is thresholded, and
isn't an absolute measure of affected sectors.
There could have been 100,000 bad sectors, before
the counter comes off the 0 value and increases.

That graph suggests you should be able to "feel"
an effect when it's like that. If you have your
spare handy (the spare you were threatening to buy),
you could clone over and replace it.

It's really up to you, when to replace it. You have
good backup practices, so I'm sure you have an image
you can use if the drive stops working completely.

When I had a drive here, that "felt" slow, I replaced it.
The health indicator (Reallocated) data column was
still 0 (says drive is good), but the drive was
obviously in bad shape, because you could feel
the slowness in everyday use. I wouldn't even have
run HDTune, except it felt bad, and then I could
see in HDTune, the benchmark told the tale.

The drive varies between 80MB/sec on one end and
40MB/sec on the other end. From a generational
perspective, the drive could be ten years old.
I still have drives in the pool like that (a
couple 250GB ones) with that level of performance.

I would do something about that, if it's at the
"annoying level" now.

Paul