Leaderboard

I see. Free antivirus is 1-2 programs that is why i ask for vfm antivirus

I kind of see both sides. There is the saying "you get what you pay for". And we are talking about XP. XP is a paid-for Operating System. But clearly a thread like this can't go out and buy twenty different antivirus programs just for the sake of MSFN Assistance.

Kaspersky Free Antivirus 19.0.0.1088 For all who are interested in KFA 19 (not me )! I found a download link to an offline installer for Kaspersky Free Antivirus 19.0.0.1088. I sent the link to @Dave-H to give his assessment whether I am allowed to post it here or not. He found an unwanted program inside reported by MBAM. Therefore, I decompressed (SFX-compressed) and unpacked the installer with UniExtract. Then I analyzed the installer. The installer was repacked by SolidShare. That's indeed a common practice by a lot of these websites. There was an SFX script inside which forced to start the file kur.exe. This file was not original and therefore deleted by me (and also the SFX script). I checked all files inside with MBAM, and they were clean except of course kur.exe, harmless, though, but nevertheless unwanted. I packed the files of the cleaned folder into a new 7-Zip archive KFA 19.0.0.1088.7z and uploaded it for you. Here is the download link: https://www.mediafire.com/file/5b41tc67a29vvbm/KFA_19.0.0.1088.7z/file The installation has to be started with the original file startup.exe. One thing is clear: all at your own risk. The archive is clean, but I didn't test the original files from Kaspersky. And I won't do that as I already mentioned here in this thread. Have fun! Cheers, AstroSkipper

So what antivirus is vfm so far

It was on 10.06.17: KB4022747, KB402432 and KB4024402.

That's one way to date XP. But I think of XP as being from 2008 because that's when SP3 was released. Unsure when the last official (non-POSReady) hotfix rolled out - 2014? 2017? Don't recall. Ubuntu users don't define their OS as being released in 2004, do they? I'm not even sure how to "date" Win 10. I kind of think of the different versions of Win 10 as "service packs". Potato, potahto (phonetics saying in the US).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existential_nihilism

If it's a private upload on a hosting site such as Mega or Dropbox it's probably OK. However if it's on a download site that contains warez it certainly isn't! PM me the link and I will check it out.

Never used it in an UXP browser! If I wanted to use such Google services, I would open them in a browser on my Android tablet. Google and Android is an endless love.

Front Note: "you" in the US is plural and I use it here in that fashion. "you" does not 'equal' AstroSkipper. I agree in the sense that if you "fully support" a program, you don't generally concern yourself with being "counted" by embedded telemetry doing that "counting" and reporting back to The Creator. But even as such, there are generally Opt-Out clauses where the consumer can decide for him/her self if they want to be "counted" or not. Some consumers are concerned that their anti-virus has data on them being, purely as an example, both as a church-goer and as a frequent visitor to "Web Site X" (or should I call it "Web Site XXX"?). I personally follow the philosophy that if you want "privacy" and not be "tracked" online, then you need to pull the plug and live in a cardboard box. Or something like that, lol.

Ok! I'm going to go a round further now as I'm getting fed up with this nonsense. Obviously @bluebolt is not willing to disclose any meaningful information here and share his knowledge with us in this forum. And that will have its reasons. First of all, here are the facts: The still downloadable online installers don't work anymore. BitDefender must have removed the online sources which these installers need to download. Offline installers are no longer available. All links seem to be removed. In one of @bluebolt's pictures, one can clearly see that a connection to My BitDefender is no longer possible. Here is a quotation from this picture: "My Bitdefender: Could not connect to server" Regarding these facts it is also pretty obvious why @bluebolt only spreads information here that is not really helpful. I assume or, even stronger, I am quite sure that even if such an offline installer exists, a successful activation of a new installation via the user interface won't be possible any longer. The reason for this was provided by @bluebolt himself: No connection to My BitDefender means no login into the user's account which unfortunately is necessary for a successful activation. Therefore, a new activation is no longer possible. I therefore consider BitDefender 1.0.21.1109 obsolete and no longer usable. No entry in my "list of working antimalware, firewall, and other security programs for Windows XP", but at most in the "list of programs that have recently been abandoned", although it actually was abandonded for more than a year. And further information is no longer necessary either, certainly not such pointless information that is not actually intended to help potential users of this program here in the forum.

Although in Germany the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) warned against the use of anti-virus software from the Russian manufacturer Kaspersky on 15 March 2022 https://www.bsi.bund.de/DE/Themen/Unternehmen-und-Organisationen/Cyber-Sicherheitslage/Technische-Sicherheitshinweise-und-Warnungen/Warnungen-nach-Par-7/Archiv/FAQ-Kaspersky/faq_node.html, I don't really share such concerns. The developers of Kaspersky software would ruin the entire company if they implemented malicious code in their software. For me, it's about a general statement, a sign of solidarity. And that may not always be fair, however Kaspersky has to thank for that a certain person.

If you want to be truly fair, then you have to say that about "all" antivirus programs, regardless of what country it came from. https://restoreprivacy.com/antivirus-privacy/ (April 2021) https://tweaklibrary.com/is-antivirus-tracking-on-you/ (August 2021) https://www.howtogeek.com/540658/is-your-antivirus-really-spying-on-you/ (January 2020) https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/antivirus-tracking-youd-surprised-sends/ (March 2020) https://www.pcmag.com/news/do-antivirus-programs-spy-on-you (December 2013, too old to be relevant but listed since PC Mag is a respected source, by most standards) https://www.securityweek.com/how-antivirus-software-can-be-perfect-spying-tool/ (January 2018, also old, but also the same time frame as most of these XP antivirus programs) "Security" and "privacy" go hand-in-hand. One has to be cautious that they didn't give up one in order to gain the other. Just my opinion, of course. Opinions are like butts. Everybody has one, doesn't mean everybody wants to hear them.

The language code identifier to locale name and locale name to language code identifier functions may not be needed anyway for the browser to work for WinME. 0x0C00 is a default LCID. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-lcid/926e694f-1797-4418-a922-343d1c5e91a6

Norton was actually spun off from Symantec before merging with Avast, so Symantec is not part of Gen Digital. There has long been a need for consolidation in the antimalware industry because there were too many unprofitable vendors competing. Now that the typical Windows 10 user simply relies on Microsoft’s excellent antimalware, Gen Digital just might be big enough to survive! I thought you disapproved of “discussions about concerns regarding the country of origin”? You make an exception for Russia, but apparently imagine that China exists to benefit Windows XP diehards.

Senzo Mall Hurghada Egypt Hurghada AirPort

How so? I have Windows Server 2003 and it looks exactly like XP Pro. The two can both be made to look exactly like each other, it's all just the "theme" and theme support exists in both. The 98SE crowd would always use the Win2k "classic" theme, but I myself disliked the classic theme and would use the same theme as XP Pro. I didn't have to install the Pro theme on Server, it was already there and only needed selected/enabled.

Did the "Virus signatures updated" page's signature number change? The "Last Updated" could still be misleading and the actual signature number be the same virus signatures from BEFORE the "update". The "My Bitdefender" clearly reads Could not connect to server, are you 100% sure that your virus signatures were updated? Wouldn't these come from the same server that was unable to be connected to?

My old friend VistaLover seems to have put me “on the spot.” Alright then: My dim recollections lead me to another forum where a Vista user who went by the name AndyTampa posted a query about Windows Mail in April 2019: https://www.vistax64.com/threads/yahoo-embedded-images-missing-damaged-in-windows-vista-default-mail-client.305570/ In the last line of the original post, he provided his exact antivirus version. I’m certain that I could unearth at least one more instance of someone using Kaspersky 19 on Vista if I searched long enough, but it wouldn’t necessarily follow that it was also compatible with XP (although one author of Kaspersky support articles certainly seems to think it was). In case I haven’t mentioned it lately, I never used Kaspersky myself. By all means attempt it! However, winvispixp stated January 22, 2021 “I couldn’t install it [KFA18] in a vm but on my real pc it works just fine.”

Unfortunately, no good news! I already wrote about WiseVector StopX. Here is my last post: And here is my list of programs that have recently been abandoned: No hope anymore! This program is dead. Sorry to report such bad news! Of course, it might be used for a while if it was already installed. But there are no new definition updates (since January!) which are important to let the program work properly, though. I already uninstalled it completely.

And one thing is clear. I won't test any Kaspersky security program. I never liked it and I made bad experiences using it when it was installed in my system. That is years ago, and in these days ...

We are definitely a dying bread. There are more than three of us. I think what a lot of visitors forget is that XP today is a lot like 98 x-number of years ago. By that I mean that 7 and 10 folks don't visit 98 threads and remind them that they run an insecure OS - but they will to an XP thread. Makes no sense to me.

Game over I think, it doesn't get better than this! Neneh Cherry onstage at the Glastonbury Festival after the laptop running her background video apparently crashed!