link icon
Ask The Community

Error: You established and aborted connections too frequently?



  • Ian
    Ian Posts: 1

    Wow, this is maybe the worst anti-Dos system I have seen, it affects everyone negatively. Will not pay for teamviewer until they fix this

  • angryhobbiest
    angryhobbiest Posts: 2 ✭✭

    give me the ability to disable this on specific remote clients that will fix bad connection situations and failed connections

  • Pallaros
    Pallaros Posts: 1

    This is very silly !!

    I am trying to recover my PC remotely that has been hit by ransomware, I have one millon issues to solve, and you are adding a layer of difficulty to my situation. Why? I didn't ask you to take precautions of how many times I will access MY pc.

  • LucVinck1
    LucVinck1 Posts: 1

    This is indeed a very stupid option. I want to give support to a client who does not start Teamviewer correctly a number of times and now I have to wait until this stupid option allows me to connect again. Disable this feature immediatly if the code sees that you use a registered and offical version! 

  • tibbz
    tibbz Posts: 2

    I will let my subscription lapse this year and run with [competitor link removed by moderator per Community Guidelines] . This serves about 90% of my calls. No one responded to my calls here asking for pay per session so stuff them - I'm off. Watch this post get deleted in quick time too.

  • tdenson
    tdenson Posts: 15 ✭✭
    edited August 3

    As an interesting aside, I'm curious about the automatic censorship on this forum software. What I actually said in that previous post was "**bleep** up" which in the UK is not perceived as swearing, however by replacing it with "*bleep* up" it makes it look like I used the F-word - which I didn't !

  • Elliott
    Elliott Posts: 9
    +1 this feature is wasting my time. Sometimes when I try to connect, I don't see the password prompt. Not sure why this happens, but sometimes I can get around it by clicking connect repeatedly. Now I am locked out of helping customers.
  • ebunick
    ebunick Posts: 4

    another **bleep**ed off customer here.  I'm sat late at work, my chinese colleague is up in the middle of the night and we can't use TeamViewer because it wont connect agaon for a mystery amount of time.


    Flakey connections are super common around the world - this "feature" makes me want to scream

  • remlei
    remlei Posts: 1
    edited November 2021

    whats with this stupid security feature.

    developers, just implement a **bleep** capcha already if your reason is security.

  • mooseman
    mooseman Posts: 1

    this terrible design is still going on... this is the worst attempt at bruteforce blocking i've ever seen. currently unable to connect to a client that needs help now, not some unknown time into the future from now.

  • smeads
    smeads Posts: 1

    Why would you want to block yourself from connectivty? I'm trying to get in to my machines - i'm autnenticated on your client, but it says I cannot connect due to too many frequent connections. It only takes a couple tries to get this annoying feature. Be nice to be able to disable it. 

    I agree...... it's a really unprofessional and annoying feature. I cannot imagine having to tell the customer that you are at the mercy of this software for an unkown amount of time. I only use teamviewer in places where 3389 is blocked. 

    5 mins, and it's still telling me blocked. This is why I won't pay for Teamtimewaster.


  • tdenson
    tdenson Posts: 15 ✭✭

    @jschiav wrote:

    Maybe put the ACTUAL TIME in so we know exactly how long to wait?

    Also, a WARNING would be really helpful. Like, "the next connection that is aborted will lead to a wait."

    I had no idea this was going to happen. Frustrating as **bleep**.

    Exactly !! There are so many ways in which this ridiculous *feature* could be made tolerable, but the longer this thread goes on the more I am beginning to think that TV do not listen to their users, or read their own community messages, and the more likely I am to switch to ConnectWise having signed up for a free trial when this first happened.

  • hottweelz
    hottweelz Posts: 5 ✭✭
    edited December 2021

    Found this thread after googling this stupid error.

    Congratulations, I"m never buying a license, and moving to **Third Party Product**.

    This was the most inconvenient thing I've ever seen.

    I went from new potential customer to "**bleep**" in a matter of 30 minutes.

    Great Job

  • Me too, paid Team Viewer 13, customers Team Viewer was taking forever to open so I clicked connect a few too many times it seems & the customer has been waiting with health patients sitting waiting for my team viewer to connect due to this silly overprotective mode without an eta for me to give to the customer ridiculous, luckily after it not connecting I realised I have 2 IP Address thanks to VPN & just switched off VPN & it worked as it was a different IP address... it's a lame security feature which a brute force attacker could easily switch IP Addresses.

    FYI to all if you are desperate & have vpn just either connect to vpn or disconect vpn if you were on it already this will be your work around till TeamViewer gets their act together if they ever do as I can see this thread has been open for a year or so...!

  • Scotty
    Scotty Posts: 493 Staff member 🤠

    Hi Jabuticaba,

    Brute force protection is a necessary part of the software and unfortunately for the protection of our users and the system this cannot be removed. We understand this thread is still open, but even though we understand the feature can cause some frustration, it must be kept in place.

    Also, please note that the IP switch method is not true for most cases.


    Senior Moderator
    Did my reply answer your question? Why not accept it as a solution to help others?
  • tdenson
    tdenson Posts: 15 ✭✭
    edited December 2021

    That's a very depressing answer if you represent TeamViewer. What about all the suggestions there have been in this thread of making it tolerable such as firstly warning it's going to happen and secondly giving an ETA of when one can try again. I think my decision to evaluate **Third Party Product** was a good one.

  • ebunick
    ebunick Posts: 4

    I have to agree - we regularly get connections dropping in China and I have team members regularly get locked out because of trying to connect on a poor quality connection.

    I wish we had not pushed TeamViewer to our colleagues abroad in years gone by, as we're now stuck with third parties who expect us to use it.

    Very dissapointing reply from TeamViewer.

  • hottweelz
    hottweelz Posts: 5 ✭✭

    Are you serious right now?  That's the answer? 

    CLEARLY, Team Viewer was created and desgined by team members who are no longer existent within your company.

    You guys are unable to update and change the code, I'm willing to believe that.

    If you'd like some consultation on proper DR Testing, Dev, QA, ...any ITIL needs at all... reach out to me.

    Your answer solidified my desire to NOT use this software anywhere currently...

    Didn't realize you were still in Beta as it's clearly not Production-Ready.   You should probably warn users of that before roping them in.

  • D_
    D_ Posts: 4


    Who are you trying to fool?
    This "brute force protection" is counting connection attempts that never even got to the password exchange phase and connection attempts to computers that are assigned to us with easy access.

  • hottweelz
    hottweelz Posts: 5 ✭✭

    ^ Very good point!   Plus, what's the value in "adding" to our list if that's not the case?  Is our own credentials not worth some sort of whitelist?

  • cirEOak
    cirEOak Posts: 5 ✭✭
    I recently engaged with my salesperson who wanted to sell me on the latest version (currently using v.12). I politely told her that I wasn't interested in buying anything until they listened to their customers about this very issue.

    Her response:
    "Thank you for the reply and feedback.

    I do see the posting was initially submitted on 04/06/2017 and we addressed it the same day. The response is below:

    This is actually an important security feature in TeamViewer, which has existed for quite a long time. The feature exists as one of the methods we use to protect TeamViewer from brute-force attacks from botnets or would-be hackers.

    If someone tries to make multiple connections to the same TeamViewer ID over a short period of time, they will automatically be blocked, for several minutes, from making further connections. This will happen if you click the "Connect to partner" button repeatedly.

    You will need to wait for the indicated amount of time before being able to connect again.

    I did speak with high level support and they suggested I create a ticket for you in order to determine if a weak internet connection or something else is causing this. You will get an email with the ticket # which will request the logs from both of sides of the connection. If you can reply with these logs are support team will be able to tell you exactly what is going on. As a customer you qualify for live support vs. the free version community.

    I hope you are able to get this resolved with support and please do reach out to me regarding any licensing concerns."

    Their support team did reach out to me, but wanted me to install something else on my computer that collects information and refused to provided ANY information about the data it collects.

    My continued annoyance is due to them thinking that their one response (which was rubbish, and didn't provide any more details than we already knew) qualifies them of "answering the question."

    This and the latest issue about them not being clear to their paying customers regarding downtime is really leaving a bad taste in my mouth.

    Believe me, I am looking for other solutions. Changing is painful, but I am trying to determine which is more painful, long-term.
  • Scotty
    Scotty Posts: 493 Staff member 🤠

    Brute force protection is not only there to protect the remote side.

    Even if you try to establish too many connections quickly to multiple different devices, this is still covered by brute force as there are too many requests being sent to the server that can be used to overload our servers, this is why there is no "Override" button.

    Also, please read up the thread. One of our supporters, Jeremy has replied multiple times to this thread with the same answer. I am definitely not the first staff member here.


    Senior Moderator
    Did my reply answer your question? Why not accept it as a solution to help others?
  • hottweelz
    hottweelz Posts: 5 ✭✭
    So it’s for your protection.

    There’s some alternatives you should explore to resolve this. Apparently the masses of spoken.
  • cirEOak
    cirEOak Posts: 5 ✭✭
    Emphasis on YOUR.

    See this is the thing. There are other ways to protect your servers, but how is disrupting a paying customer without warning or notification the right thing to do?
  • Scotty
    Scotty Posts: 493 Staff member 🤠

    Making sure that the server is not overloaded or attacked is clearly to our customers advantage.

    I'm not sure how you could argue that making sure the service works is purely to our advantage and not to our customers.


    Senior Moderator
    Did my reply answer your question? Why not accept it as a solution to help others?
  • hottweelz
    hottweelz Posts: 5 ✭✭
    So a few thoughts:

    You need to actually tell YOUR CUSTOMER "Please wait 10 seconds before reconnecting..."

    That would've probably stopped this entire thread right here.

    Secondly... do you think a hacker is going to manually "click connect" on a button a million times in order to flood a network?

    Is the human finger that fast anyway?

    Even an autoclicker, would fail, if you had that warning about 10 seconds.

    If there IS A DDOS somehow via the frontend... thats a vulnerability in the software you're not telling us about that you can't figure out how to fix.

    Which raises 197 more questions.... do we need to uninstall now?
  • D_
    D_ Posts: 4


    "Brute force" is a term that refers to password cracking, not denial of service attacks. Are you saying that a human manually tapping the refresh button 10 times in 10 seconds is enough traffic to be classified as a denial of service attack by the teamviewer network? That requires a lot more explanation before it will be plausible.

    But if we assume that's true, that implies the teamviewer network is way too small to meet its demands due to being underfunded or poorly architected.

    But let's assume that this network problem is actually intrinsic to all remote desktop systems rather than just teamviewer and any higher performance on other services is a result of them temporarily operating at a loss in order to try to compete with teamviewer. In that case, the development team should take a long hard look at the use cases "flaky or intermittent connection", "old or overburdened pc", and "intermittent pc uptime". It should be designed so people can connect and stay connected in these cases without having to manually poke the button until they get connected or banned.

    Or they can just keep telling their PR people to spin it as a good thing.