Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. I didn't talk about direct access, but about using a webproxy. I used http://proxycrime.com to have at least a sort of access. Good rendering is a different issue, although Opera has always User mode as ultimate remedium.
  3. I found Panda to be very similar to Avast when I tried it a while ago. This is off-topic for this thread anyway, which is specifically about MSE, not possible alternatives to it which is a discussion that could go on for many pages! There's are threads all about XP-compatible AV and security programs here and here. (The second thread is specifically about Avast).
  4. DrWho3000

    Microsoft security essentials and Windows XP

    If in an event ther eis No workround to get MSE defs again, what would be a lightweight friendly AV, alot I had in past like Avira, Avast wasn;t too kind and threw false positives. Norton embeds into system too much and Mcaffee is a No go, what about Black Ice or Panda
  5. Today
  6. dencorso

    Microsoft security essentials and Windows XP

    Well, for the moment, the safest thing to do is to stick with v. 1.291.2489.0 It may be. Than again, it may not. We simply don't know yet. However, if it validates its signature files every time it uses them for a scan, then we'll be in deep waters. If, however, it validates the files only at install/update time, we've got a good chance of bypassing that.
  7. I'm not taking about the old XP Windows Defender, but the one that comes with Windows 10. A very different animal, but it may still share the same definition files with MSE.
  8. My understanding is they are betas or something similar to nightlies pending the release of an updated version. I am not exactly sure but the last official Basilisk release may have been in March?? Again not positive but eventually there will be a new one minus Roy's changes to work with XP.
  9. alacran

    WinNTSetup v3.9.4

    @JFX I assume it is a command tool, would you please explain me how to use it. Thanks in advance alacran
  10. DrWho3000

    Microsoft security essentials and Windows XP

    I would think swapping to Defender will probably be same as MSE the definitions will not update
  11. DrWho3000

    Microsoft security essentials and Windows XP

    essentially alot of the files are the same opened with 7zip I wonder with a bit of manipulation you could swap file(s) I did try a windows defender definition update, didnt work it;s called mpas-fe instead of mpam-fe
  12. Silly question I'm sure, but the latest definition for Windows Defender on Windows 10 is 1.293.45.0. I presume that can't be used in MSE? I only very recently started using MSE on the XP side of my netbook because its original AV stopped supporting the last XP compatible version of its program. I don't know much at all about how its updating system works, but surely it's not just a matter of copying files across to make MSE think it's got the latest version?
  13. Mcinwwl

    What Are You Listening To?

    Theoretically Vinyls preserve much better, but yep, still "lossy" over time. Not as lossy as any streaming services, when they decide to shut down the servers, anyway
  14. DrWho3000

    Microsoft security essentials and Windows XP

    is there a possible way SHA-256 can be updated or have a newer in XP SP3 or be signed so updates for MSE works again, maybe there is a hotfix there is new kb updates/hotfix here https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Search.aspx?q=xp sp3
  15. Mathwiz

    Microsoft security essentials and Windows XP

    Well, @Bersaglio did say: You don't have the very latest, but the last update you got is still pretty current. If we can figure out a workaround, you don't need to worry about missing just that one very last update. If we can't, it won't matter anyhow, because MSE will soon be useless without updates.
  16. Probably not... CTR itself as an extension targets the Australis GUI (Firefox 29-56), not Photon (Firefox >=57.0); I believe updated versions of CustomCSSforFx should be applicable in the Photon iteration of Waterfox 68.0a, but any such talk is still very premature... In any case, Waterfox discussion, methinks, should be continued in a more "appropriate" forum, seeing that the browser requires at least Windows 7 64-bit...
  17. DrWho3000

    Microsoft security essentials and Windows XP

    I can't get to this link https://definitionupdates.microsoft.com/download/DefinitionUpdates/VersionedSignatures/AM/1.291.2489.0/x86/mpam-fe.exe this is what I am getting trying to get to the link I did wonder if teh MPStigstub was borked again
  18. Jody Thornton

    My build of New Moon (temp. name) a.k.a. Pale Moon for XP

    @cc333, the UI name is Photon. See I think Photon represents the flat look version of a classic browser.. I have mine set with tabs below the address bar (using usrChrome.css) and it goes sooooo well with Windows 8.
  19. Mathwiz

    Microsoft security essentials and Windows XP

    @heinoganda's MSE Definitions Updater will download and extract the latest definitions, but they won't install. I don't know how his program works, but I suspect installation makes use of Windows Update components that try to verify the signature, and that the installation fails there.
  20. Jody Thornton

    What Are You Listening To?

    But again, everything was lossy back then (not in the same way though). It didn't dismiss bits and bytes, but just rolled of highs or distorted.
  21. Does this mean that things like Classic Theme Restorer will work? I ask because I really like it because it makes Firefox (and, by extension, Waterfox and any fork based on FF => 3x.x) resemble a somewhat modernized version of the Firefox 24.x UI, before the Australlis UI, which I'm not super fond of, was introduced. That being said, I'm not very fond of Photon (is this the name of the new UI introduced with 57.x?), either. The custom CSS scripts made by the creator of CTR helps, but it's not the same, and customization, compared to earlier versions, is virtually nil. Also don't like the flat look (FF 56 and earlier have a subtle gradient in the toolbars, tabs, and (in macOS), the menu bar). Again the custom CSS helps, but it's not the same. c
  22. Mcinwwl

    What Are You Listening To?

    Problem with MC is that they are quite, eh, 'lossy' technology. So if you have the feeling it's not the same as what you've heard in the past... well, you're right
  23. ... Not quite ; "bootstrap" is just one category of "legacy" (i.e. non-WE) extensions, along with XPCOM, XUL overlay and jetpack; as such, they were indeed supported in Firefox 56.0.2 (last version with "legacy" support) and are still supported in latest Waterfox 56.2.9 ; what Jody wrote was actually: meaning that Waterfox v68α is Quantum based and will have the Photon GUI and WE support native to Quantum, but the Waterfox developer (Alex Kontos, of Greek descent) has somehow (?) managed to port to it "bootstrapped extensions" support... [ IIRC, early versions of Firefox Quantum, 57-58, especially in the Nightly and Developer/Beta branches, were able to support (at varying degree) classic extensions via flipping a pref (extensions.legacy.enabled); more here; as Quantum matured to > 58.0 version numbers, "legacy" extension APIs were eradicated to the point that pref, where still present, had no actual effect... ]
  24. dencorso

    Microsoft security essentials and Windows XP

    Try reading the 5 posts before yours, and you'll know all we currently do.
  25. DrWho3000

    Microsoft security essentials and Windows XP

    does anyone know If there is a problem with MSE updating, as it won't with me I have rebooted both PC's and router and restarted MSe yet it finds downloads but trying to install fails, I even tried the MSE_DEF_UPD_v1.5 and it fails, upto today it did it ok, i even tried doing a manual def update same there is deffo a Internet connection no problem is it M$ end
  26. dencorso

    Microsoft security essentials and Windows XP

    The latest definitions file is v. 1.293.20.0. There's nothing wrong with MSE v. 4.4.304.0, though: I have it installed also on 7 Ultimate SP1 x86 and, there, it does update to v. 1.293.20.0 and continues to work OK. I bet the issue is related to XP SP3 being unable to authenticate SHA-256 signed files. In case I'm right, full ability to authenticate SHA-256 signed files, which was not an issue till recently, now became a big one for XP (and maybe Vista, too?). Anyway, by comparing MSE v. 4.4.304.0's behavior on 7 SP1 and XP SP3 it may be found out what actually is going on. But that requires a kernel debugger in both, which I don't have set up...
  1. Load more activity
×