for the record, I thought I'd say that the displayed 'efficiency' on any quark p2pool is .. not correct
example:
176.221.46.81:8372 reports 99.79% efficiency, with 659 shares, 111 dead
5.9.24.81:8372 reports 99.36% efficiency with 6102 shares, 39 dead
it's some issue with pool rate and local rate not being the same # (as they should be, since all these are operating independently)
.. re: minerd, I don't recall seeing that in malwarebytes, but it flags cgminer, 'cause of same issue
oh, also, i have 5.9.24.81:11973 set up with connection max 250, with 220 incoming connections allowed. it's, ah, full right now, but if you need to DL blockchain it should be fairly fast off of there. i may restart it later with 700'ish connections, same as bitcoind used to run