"Malwarebytes keeps blocking an IP address?"
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091023200702AADBXYE
It could be something minor, as the original poster in that
question discovered.
One of the other answerers, is basically claiming that Malwarebytes
blocks ranges of IP addresses. It's either that, or perhaps
Malwarebytes is subscribing to one of the services that collects
"bad guy" lists. A couple of the search engines keep their own lists,
and there are sites like
siteadvisor.com (McAfee). Here, I'm testing
"
google.com" to see if it is safe :-) So this is site specific, rather
than just blacklisting the ISP or host providing their services.
http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/google.com
I see that when I re-tried a site I searched for, a while ago,
siteadvisor had not indexed or tested it. So when that web server
has no information on a web site, there's no guarantee they'll ever
check it. I guess more than one person has to do a query, before
they waste the (automated) effort.
*******
To answer your question, you figure out how your machine has
been (very slightly) compromised. Maybe it's just something
updating cookies.
I use a packet sniffer (which would be a way to see what
conversations might be getting Malwarebytes upset), and
such a tool offers no guarantees about anything. Malware
could modify the response of such a tool, with great ease
(since the number of packet sniffer programs isn't that large,
and source is probably available for this one).
The packet sniffer collects a log of IP addresses visited.
I can sort of backtrack through that log, for the last couple
hours surfing, and sometimes figure out what's been happening.
A lot of the scummy activity on the web now,
the people behind it use providers like Akamai, and then the
node names are pretty well meaningless. So the odds of
seeing something in such a log, that answers your question,
is strictly limited. Still, I keep running mine, in the hope
that if my machine is compromised some day, I can at least
trace back to T=0 and figure out what site is hosting the
stuff (to warn others).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireshark
At one time, that tool was very easy on CPU. Now, I find it
using maybe 5-7% in the background, and I don't know why
it is doing that. It should really be event based, and
there should only be a tiny bit of activity, when a
packet is sent or received. I don't know why it's chewing
up cycles. But it's certainly better than just wondering
why the network light is flashing on the router. I don't like
to see flashing, that I can't account for.
Paul