Microsoft Security Essentials & KB955430

[slayor]

Windows Update decided that I needed update KB955430, so it installed it. This was 4 days after I'd installed MSE (which was working fine). After a reboot the computer would freeze (solid) not on the connecting to the internet (dialup) but when starting any program to access the internet (email, chat, browser). The first couple times it did this I picked a restore point prior to the KB955430 install, and everything was good. Then the computer decided to have a crash (reason unknown) and not only was this update installed, all my prior restore points were lost. I ran sfc /scannow & found a hash missmatch for a single file 'wdma_usb.inf_loc' that couldn't be corrected as it says that both the file & backup file were corrupted. (Am using a file from an update in 2008 - it's comparing it to a file from 2006).
Yesterday ran eventvwr.msc and found that when my machine starts I have a 'image hash not valid' for 3 different files - one instance each of
\device\harddiskVolume2\windows\system32\drivers\S SPORT.SYS & DGIVECP.SYS and 12 instances of
\device\harddiskVolume2\program files\microsoft security essentials\drivers\mpfilter\MPFILTER.SYS.
So, I uninstalled MSE. Computer is again happily online and I've now got a few more grey hairs.

[jscher2000]

So, I uninstalled MSE. Computer is again happily online and I've now got a few more grey hairs.

Do you think that if you reinstalled MSE all would be well going forward? Perhaps it was just a one-time corruption.

(Either way, I hope you have chosen another form of real-time virus protection in place of MSE.)

[wmgoat]

Do you think that if you reinstalled MSE all would be well going forward? Perhaps it was just a one-time corruption.

(Either way, I hope you have chosen another form of real-time virus protection in place of MSE.)

Im also not a fan of MSE. Too many other products are free and are far more effective. It was a nice try, but even most PC mags say that it misses the mark, and not to bother. And Murphy's Law sub rule says that anything that can screw up a good running system - will.

Imaging is your friend.

[JoeP517]

Im also not a fan of MSE. Too many other products are free and are far more effective. It was a nice try, but even most PC mags say that it misses the mark, and not to bother. And Murphy's Law sub rule says that anything that can screw up a good running system - will.

Imaging is your friend.

MSE is very lightweight and from what I've read very effective at detection and removal. Far more effective in what way? Misses the mark how? What would you suggest instead?

Joe

[wmgoat]

MSE is very lightweight and from what I've read very effective at detection and removal. Far more effective in what way? Misses the mark how? What would you suggest instead?

Joe

as I said, I use the McAfee freebie that comes as part of my ISP subscription. And If I had to use other products, Id go with AVG, Comodo or Black Ice, and probably Malwarebytes or superantispyware.

And I stand corrected (kind of) about MSE. Author of this article says the MS finally got it right; some comments positive, others neg: http://www.pcworld.com/article/17280...rus_again.html

Personally, based on my experiences with Defender, for now, its not anything I I will recommend to my clients. But I will put it on a machine and give it an honest try, and will wait for some professional testing results from a reputable source.

[CLiNT]

Not too bad for free.
I'm considering it, I'm still considering it.

Microsoft Security Essentials ranked No 2 out of 25!

Did I mention that I'm still considering it LOL

[satrow]

Microsoft Security Essentials ranked No 2 out of 25!

Just a comment on your choice of linked website

Don't believe everything you read Clint; a quick check shows that the lowest score is based on a very old version of NOD32, v2 but v4 is the latest; it wouldn't surprise me to see a lot more gaffes (or deliberately misleading comparisons) on that site. They seem to make a big deal about not taking into consideration of false positives

4. Our detection rates represent the TRUE POSITIVE detection rates. The results do not take into consideration the false positive rate of a given tool, and thus a tool that declares everything to be infected would appear to have the highest true positive percentage rate.

It's probably not difficult to flag all files on any PC as infected ...

If you have time, checkout some of the other comparisons, there may well be more that are skewed.

[JoeP517]

If you have time, checkout some of the other comparisons, there may well be more that are skewed.

The latest tests at Virus Bulletin : VB100 award and logo show MSE as passing along with most others. There were a few that did not pass.

See the results at AV-Comparatives - Independent Tests of Anti-Virus Software - Comparatives & Reviews. MSE is consistently highly ranked.

See Independent Tester: Microsoft's Security Essentials 'Very Good' - CIO.com - Business Technology Leadership.

Joe

[stewyg]

after installing security essentials i found that i was having all sorts of problems.i uninstalled it and my compute is running fine now.

[JoeP517]

after installing security essentials i found that i was having all sorts of problems.i uninstalled it and my compute is running fine now.

Care to share what the problems were?

Did you have another A/V program running at the same time?

Joe

[MurrayW]

I too would be most interested to learn about any problems folks have been having with MSE.

As an Admin in PC Tech/PalTalk, this message is posted by myself many times per day

Instead of Spywareblaster, Spybot, Adaware, IOBit 360 and AV scanner, use MSE http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/ as a one tool solution to Malware problems. View 2 tutorials http://tinyurl.com/y9kyrw8

I have been using MSE since the final release after using many other malware solutions and find MSE to work extremely well with no problems as of today.

Alternatively, since its improvement, Avast is offering its own one stop solution to malware and thus a program that is also freeware and usable as much as MSE.

[Medico]

I have had such goos success with MSE that I installed it on 5 different PCs to date. $ have Windows 7 and 1 has Vista. No problems on any. I have also read many reviews which all rank MSE near the top. McAfee and Norton are resource hogs, probably Trend Micro as well. MSE is not. I can not beat the price. I bought bit defender and what a disaster that was. I'll stick with MSE, thankyou.

[jscher2000]

McAfee and Norton are resource hogs, probably Trend Micro as well.

Norton has improved its resource footprint considerably in recent years, and I have no complaints about Trend Micro Internet Security Pro (used for 2+ years). I think these sorts of off the cuff generalizations do not serve other users well.

[CLiNT]

I've decided to check out MSE...
No problems with the install. It's been up and running at default settings for 4 days now
with no issues to speek of. Updates appear to be regular (daily). MSE automaticaly disables
Windows Defender, as advertised. process shows working set of 30,000 to 37,000 K.

[viking33]

Care to share what the problems were?

Did you have another A/V program running at the same time?

Joe

See my http://lounge.windowssecrets.com/ind...dpost&p=812573 post and others regarding MSE. The only reason that I'm trying to stick with it at all, is to see if MS can indeed come up with an answer. For now, I'm back with Avast freebie.