So then, my questions are... is anyone else getting the same thing? Does this worry LFS racers without protection against phishing? Does this worry LFS in general? Am I ok? Are you ok? Just kidding

Or - did you just outed yourself as a cracker by posting a report of an obviously altered lfs.exe? Utrace says that IP adress belongs to some Hong Kong cloud service,which has nothing to do with LFS.

Quote from Eclipsed :

Or - did you just outed yourself as a cracker by posting a report of an obviously altered lfs.exe? Utrace says that IP adress belongs to some Hong Kong cloud service,which has nothing to do with LFS.

My LFS is pure demo, the only thing I have installed is LFSLazy... I have no idea what you are talking about?
EDIT: Maybe try checking the LFS.exe size to see if I'm in the wrong... if the size is the same I'm sure there's no crack in it
EDIT 2: Forgot to mention, the pop-up from Malwarebytes only appears when I search for hosts and alike.

Quote from Xzaratherg :

So then, my questions are... is anyone else getting the same thing? Does this worry LFS racers without protection against phishing? Does this worry LFS in general? Am I ok? Are you ok? Just kidding

One of server is host on this address
This Q one

Quote from Xzaratherg :

EDIT: Maybe try checking the LFS.exe size to see if I'm in the wrong... if the size is the same I'm sure there's no crack in it

File size is not a proof, 'crack' in lfs not change exe file size

That's interesting situation... not sure what LFS can do about it, if somebody is hosting LFS server on the same IP where some phishing server is also running (or maybe they run both operations on the same server).
(also it's IPv4, i.e. who knows how many machines are mapped to it, listening on different ports, maybe the phishing server is not even the same machine as the LFS server).

"Does this worry LFS racers without protection against phishing?"
No, not me. But I don't use antivirus and I don't use MS Windows and the chance of getting my machine successfully attacked through LFS is low enough to simply ignore it. Also I treat all games as low-quality code in terms of security, game devs usually don't have time to properly harden their code, also I guess they don't pay for pen-testing on regular basis, and life-span of game is usually way too short to catch and fix most of the bugs, i.e. expecting a game client to be not vulnerable sounds to me as really crazy idea. So I run games in away that any successful exploit will be probably contained in reasonable space of my system, not accessing/damaging anything important.

But if you are paranoid enough, maybe you shouldn't run any MP game...

you're having problems inside the game when you're running someone manipulating the game online