JorgeA

Don't worry about those errors reported in your quote above. They are quite well-known Dependency Walker false positives, which simply indicate you're using IE6 SP1. I'll skip the detailed explanation of the reasons behind those errors, because it's quite long winded. You can find discussions about them by searching the forum, if you wish. You can disregard those safely! dencorso, Thank you very much. This is reassuring. You folks are SO knowledegeable about these things. Very impressive, my hat's off to you. --JorgeA

georg, Very well. Sorry about that. Here we go. As I went through the list I realized that some modifications were necessary to the list format. The first date is the one you have. The next item, if "not listed," means that it did not show up on DW's list. If it is a date instead, it means that that's the date given in the file's Properties. That will be the Created date. The third item following the filename is the Created date in the Properties. In some cases, a fourth item is given, which is the Modified date when that's different from the Created date. As you will see, they prove conclusively that it IS possible to modify something even before it gets created!! MSOSS.DLL (5/11/98) (3/18/99) CRYPT32.DLL (5/11/98) CREATED (10/31/04) MODIFIED (9/12/02) !!! SQLITE3.DLL (6/19/08) CREATED (4/11/10) MODIFIED (6/19/08) !!! NETBIOS.DLL (5/11/98) (5/11/98) NETAPI.DLL (5/18/99) not listed (12/14/98) WSOCK32.DLL (5/18/99) CREATED (unknown) MODIFIED (12/14/98) WINMM.DLL (5/11/98) (5/11/98) COMDLG32.DLL (5/11/98) (5/11/98) WININET.DLL (5/11/98) (4/28/06) SHLWAPI.DLL (5/11/98) (8/31/05) SHELL32.DLL (5/11/98) CREATED (11/05/04) MODIFIED (12/06/01) !!! WINSPOOL.DRV (5/11/98) (05/1198) COMCTL32.DLL (4/30/99) (8/29/02) MPR.DLL (5/11/98) (5/11/98) VERSION.DLL (5/11/98) (5/11/98) USER32.DLL (5/11/98) (12/02/09) ADVAPI32.DLL (5/11/98) (5/11/98) KERNEL32.DLL (5/11/98) (5/11/98) GDI32.DLL (5/11/98) (5/11/98) OLE32.DLL (5/11/98) (10/21/02) OLEAUT32.DLL (5/4/01) (3/16/01) WS2HELP.DLL (5/11/98) not listed MSVCRT.DLL (11/14/03) (4/06/200) WS2_32.DLL (5/11/98) not listed MSWSOCK.DLL (5/11/98) not listed MSIMG32.DLL (5/11/98) not listed OLEPRO32.DLL (3/8/99) not listed (3/16/01) OLEACC.DLL (5/11/98) not listed CREATED (9/11/05) MODIFIED (10/09/98) !!! RPCRT4.DLL (5/11/98) CREATED (10/21/02) MODIFIED (3/29/99) !!! MAPI32.DLL (5/11/98) not listed created (01/26/10) MODIFIED (5/11/98) TOOLS.DLL (7/7/08) not listed URLMON.DLL (5/11/98) (5/08/06) HHCTRL.OCX (4/24/00) not listed (4/14/05) RICHED32.DLL (5/11/98) not listed CREATED (unknown) MODIFIED (5/11/98) TCIPADDRESS.DLL (12/24/07) not listed CHAI.DLL (3/4/08) not listed FENNEL.DLL (3/5/08) not listed MATE.DLL (2/26/08) not listed SHDOCVW.DLL (5/11/98) not listed In addition, a bunch of files were listed in DW that are not on your list: IMAGEHLP.DLL (9/14/02) NETAPI32.DLL (5/11/98) SPYBOTSD.EXE (1/26/09) CFGMGR32.DLL (5/11/98) LZ32.DLL (5/11/98) MLANG.DLL (8/29/02) MSI.DLL (1/26/02) NTDLL.DLL (5/11/98) SETUPAPI.DLL (5/11/98) TAPI32.DLL (5/11/98) Also, some files were not on DW's list that do exist in the Windows\System folder. Hope that this will provide enough information to proceed from. Thanks once again! --JorgeA

Hi georg, Thanks for resuming the investigation! The results are very interesting, although I'm not totally sure what I'm doing here. For convenience, I'm reproducing your list below, with the "File Time Stamp" dates for my corresponding files off to the right. FWIW, the files were listed by Dependency Walker in (mostly) alphabetical order, differently from yours. MSOSS.DLL (5/11/98) (3/18/99) CRYPT32.DLL (5/11/98) (9/12/02) SQLITE3.DLL (6/19/08) (6/19/98) NETBIOS.DLL (5/11/98) (5/11/98) NETAPI.DLL (5/18/99) not listed WSOCK32.DLL (5/18/99) (12/14/98) WINMM.DLL (5/11/98) (5/11/98) COMDLG32.DLL (5/11/98) (5/11/98) WININET.DLL (5/11/98) (4/28/06) SHLWAPI.DLL (5/11/98) (8/31/05) SHELL32.DLL (5/11/98) (12/06/01) WINSPOOL.DRV (5/11/98) (05/1198) COMCTL32.DLL (4/30/99) (8/29/02) MPR.DLL (5/11/98) (5/11/98) VERSION.DLL (5/11/98) (5/11/98) USER32.DLL (5/11/98) (12/04/09) ADVAPI32.DLL (5/11/98) (5/11/98) KERNEL32.DLL (5/11/98) (5/11/98) GDI32.DLL (5/11/98) (5/11/98) OLE32.DLL (5/11/98) (3/29/99) OLEAUT32.DLL (5/4/01) (3/16/01) WS2HELP.DLL (5/11/98) not listed MSVCRT.DLL (11/14/03) (4/06/200) WS2_32.DLL (5/11/98) not listed MSWSOCK.DLL (5/11/98) not listed MSIMG32.DLL (5/11/98) not listed OLEPRO32.DLL (3/8/99) not listed OLEACC.DLL (5/11/98) not listed RPCRT4.DLL (5/11/98) (3/29/99) MAPI32.DLL (5/11/98) not listed TOOLS.DLL (7/7/08) not listed URLMON.DLL (5/11/98) urlmon.dll HHCTRL.OCX (4/24/00) not listed RICHED32.DLL (5/11/98) not listed TCIPADDRESS.DLL (12/24/07) not listed CHAI.DLL (3/4/08) not listed FENNEL.DLL (3/5/08) not listed MATE.DLL (2/26/08) not listed SHDOCVW.DLL (5/11/98) not listed In addition, a bunch of files were listed that are not on your list: IMAGEHLP.DLL (9/14/02) NETAPI32.DLL (5/11/98) SPYBOTSD.EXE (1/26/09) CFGMGR32.DLL (5/11/98) LZ32.DLL (5/11/98) MLANG.DLL (8/29/02) MSI.DLL (1/26/02) NTDLL.DLL (5/11/98) SETUPAPI.DLL (5/11/98) TAPI32.DLL (5/11/98) Of ALL the modules given, only SPYBOTSD.EXE and SQLITE3.DLL are in the C:\PROGRAM FILES\SPYBOT - SEARCH & DESTROY162 directory; the rest are all in C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM. In addition, DW gave a rsult of, "Error opening file. The system cannot find the file specified (2)." for the following files. Find Files didn't find them, either: APPHELP.DLL USERENV.DLL Finally (and possibly related to the above), the bottom panel had two Warnings: "At least one delay-load dependency module was not found. "At least one module has an unresolved import due to a missing export function in a delay-load dependent module." I imagine that at least some of the differences in files and file dates can be accounted for by the different software that we have respectively installed over the years. In case it makes a difference, we should also note that I have left both Spybot and the PC in the limited functionality settings that you had me do last week. (Except that I did bring back some of the startup programs, as not even the CD drive was operating.) O.K., next step! What do you think? Gratefully, --JorgeA

rilef, Thanks very much for the supplemental information. Yes, my Win98 FE has all the security updates Microsoft ever made available for that system. When I go on the Windows Update page now, instead of getting a list of available updates I get redirected to a new page suggesting that I upgrade to Windows 7. If I read your post correctly, you’re using three different browsers (Opera 10.51, Firefox 3.5, and IE6, or maybe SlimBrowser). Do you use each one for a different purpose? I checked out the Sybase website for a firewall (I’m still using NIS for that function), but didn’t find anything there with a likely-sounding name. Which Sybase product are you using? Also, what’s your view of ZoneAlarm? I found that it’s possible to download an older, basic version that works on Windows 98. Much appreciated! --JorgeA

georg, We’re back and I’m itching to keep working on this knotty Spybot issue. While we gear back up for that, in the meantime I want to address a couple of your kind suggestions. (Everything I don’t mention here, you can be sure that I will be looking into after we either solve or give up on the Spybot issue.) Numbers 6 and 7: I bought my Vista machine after my Win98 PC got sick in December ’08. Once I got the new system up and running, and things settled down, I started investigating what I could do about the Win98 computer. That’s when I started to really learn about modern computers (or semi-modern ones, anyway), as ever since Windows 3.1 came out and DOS receded into the background I had approached computers basically as black boxes that performed magic for me. When I discovered that it was possible to download USB drivers that would allow my Windows 98 PC to recognize today’s flash drives, I did a complete backup (including hidden files) to a 16GB USB thumb drive in case the system died completely. (I presently have two kinds of backup: an MSBACKUP – yup, I learned about the 4 GB file size limit – and two manual, right-drag backups, all to different flash drives.) (As an aside, the Spybot crash issue had started some 8-10 months before, so I doubt that it had anything to do with the computer’s problems at the end of 2008. After the computer sat completely unused for a couple months, it started booting normally again the next time I tried it. It worked even better after I blew out all the dust bunnies that had built up inside over the years….) Out of curiosity (and this is where it ties in to your suggestions), I plugged the thumb drive into my Vista machine and scanned it using Norton 360, Windows Defender, and (of course) Spybot: they didn’t find anything wrong. N360’s Site Safety feature where it rates Web pages with a green check mark or a red X is so cool that now, anytime I need to download anything to the Windows 98 PC, first I go to the site on my Vista machine to see what Norton has to say. Sometimes I download first to the Vista and then transfer via thumb drive, but lately I’ve been mostly doing this “dual visit” procedure and downloading directly to the old computer. As I said, I do intend to explore the other options you provided, but the Spybot issue has become a challenge and I’m eager to see if we can figure out what the heck is going on. Looking forward to working again with you and the other good folks on the MSFN forum! --JorgeA

georg, Once again, I greatly appreciate the detailed information you have provided. I have some homework to do, many thanks to you. I will definitely be back with follow-up questions. But for now, let me say that everyone who has pitched in to this thread, but you especially, have been a true model of what a person with a knotty problem to solve is hoping for when joining a help forum. You have asked good questions, given detailed instructions, and -- best of all -- stayed right in it throughout. What else could one ask for? We are going away for a few days this week, so I probably won't be able to post again right away, but that's all right because I need first to explore the several options you kindly suggested. I'll make sure to put Spybot in the title so that you know. Definitely do want to see if we can get to the bottom of the Spybot issue. --JorgeA

georg, Not to worry -- I'm not discouraged. I was actually fine with the whole process, steadily inching my way forward (and learning a ton, thank you), till at the very end of it I lost the reply to you that I'd been working on all afternoon because the forum website went down. That's what really tipped me over the edge. In the future, if I know that I'll be composing a reply that'll take a long while to prepare, I'll make sure to save it before hitting that "Add Reply" button! Anyway, I have now flushed the swap file and recreated it. I loaded Spybot, verified the settings you indicated, and made sure they are all as per the directions. Only the "Integrated search for spybots" is checked, even the Usage Tracking is unchecked. O.K., I did this twice. Both times the progress bar ran all the way to the end before SSD even had the chance to say how many (XX/XX) items it had gone through. (It read only, "Running bot-check".) And each time, within about 3 seconds (I was using a stopwatch), the whole screen froze, such that I had to switch off the power. Not a happy sight, but hopefully this will provide clues to help us move forward. BTW, I do have to say that with these settings the machine is booting a heck of a lot faster! Thanks again. --JorgeA

georg, Well, what a frustrating day it was!!! After following your excellent, detailed instructions, and after a number of false starts and about 15 reboots some of them prescribed, others due to problems that cropped up as youll see I finally finished my reply to you and clicked on the button to post it, when all of a sudden the MSFN website goes down. As of this writing (Im preparing this in Outlook, to copy and paste when the site finally is up again), Ive been waiting for just about three hours. I suppose its Sunday night site maintenance. Anyway, I want to express my gratitude for the extensive protocol. Although I have completely lost my reply to you as Id originally written it, Ill try to reconstruct what I said. Basically I will be quoting your directions, and then providing my results or comments on each as we go along. For convenience, my comments are prefaced with a dash (--) and start in ALL CAPS. So here goes First, go to Control Panel > Add/Remove Programs > Click the Windows Setup tab. It should load successfully and let you add or remove Windows components. If your system gets screwed up, that's one of the things that often breaks. Works OK? --YES. Second, go to Start > Help That's another thing that breaks easily. Works OK? Then exit. --YES. Run Sysedit autoexec.bat should be empty config.sys should be empty system.ini should have no lines begining Run= Exit --AUTOEXEC.BAT is not empty, but it consists entirely of REM lines. CONFIG.SYS is not empty, but its mostly REM lines. However, there are three DEVICE lines, for SETVER.EXE, RTC.CLK +R, and HIMEM.SYS. However they might have gotten there (for all I know, theyve always been there), Im not brave enough to remove them. SYSTEM.INI did not have any lines starting with Run= Start > Programs > Accessories > System Tools > Scheduled Tasks > Delete any that exist --DONE. I had scheduled periodical tasks for defragging, ScanDisk, Disk Cleanup, and Norton SystemWorks One-Button Checkup. (None of them at the same time as any of the others.) Right click My Computer and choose the performance tab. In the middle of the box, it should say: "Your system is configured for optimal performance." --YES, thats how it reads. Under Advanced settings (at the bottom) click the File System button, and the Hard Disk tab: Typical role of this computer: Network server (no, mine isn't networked & it isn't a server, but if you have more than 16MB of RAM you can choose this setting to increase the size of the file and directory cache.) --DONE. I had that set to Desktop computer, and therefore changed it. Read-ahead optimization: Full --YES. Click the Troubleshooting tab. None of the boxes should be checked. --YES. Back to the Performance box, click the Graphics tab. Hardware acceleration: Full --YES, thats right. Click the Virtual Memory tab. Tick "Let me specify my own virtual memory settings)" and then check the box to "Disable virtual memory (Not recommended)" OK, Close, restart. When it comes back up, go back to Virtual Memory and Tick "Let Windows manage my virtual memory settings (Recommended)". OK, Close, Restart. This will flush and defragment your swap file to make certain you are not using one that has become corrupted. --I HAD a bit of trouble here. After disabling virtual memory and restarting, instead of my usual desktop I saw a Restore Active Desktop screen, where moreover nothing worked except (IIRC) I could move the cursor around uselessly. I ended up having to reboot with a floppy and restoring a previous registry CAB using SCANREG.EXE in DOS. Started the protocol all over again (in case any changes were lost), getting as far as disabling virtual memory, and the same thing happened again. I think Id better leave the virtual memory alone and let Windows manage it. Ran through the whole protocol (up to this point) once again. When the system comes back up, right click the desktop and choose Properties. Background should be: (None) Screen Saver should be: (None) Effects: No boxes checked. Web: No boxes checked. Settings: 800 x 600, True Color (24 bit) --DONE. The monitor settings did include a True Color choice, but it was 32-bit and not 24. There was, among others, also a 16-bit High Color option. I selected the 32-bit True Color. Double click My Computer and right click Drive C: 30% or more free space. On the Tools tab: "You last checked this drive for errors 0 days ago" --HDD space is ~6GB out of 12. It claims that I last checked the drive 135 days ago, but that must be because I had to resort to the backup registry with previous information. I last did a whole ScanDisk run just last week. ADDITION: Did a new ScanDisk and Defrag overnight while waiting for the site to come back up. Run msconfig. Nothing should be checked except System Tray. --DONE. Load Spybot Search & Destroy. Set to Advanced Mode. Tools > Resident > Check "SDHelper" but leave "TeaTimer" unchecked. Tools > System Startup > Nothing checked but SysTray.exe and Explorer.exe Settings > File Sets > Uncheck all indented file sets, leaving only the topmost box checked. Settings (at the top) click the Defaults button. --ALL DONE. At this point you should have no running programs except SSD and no icons in the System Tray. --YES. It does still show the Volume icon for the speakers. Click Search & Destroy and then Check for problems. --DONE. The status bar should read Running bot-check (29/29... On this run I got a green check mark in one minute 37 seconds. You? --UH-OH: Spybot ran through the entire progress bar in a fraction of a second and then the whole screen froze, even the cursor. So bad that I had to turn off the power. Tried it again, first going through the entire protocol again to make sure that no settings had gotten messed up or reverted to the previous value: same thing happened. SSD never did get as far as showing XX/XX, or even an error message of any kind when it crashed. It was at this point that I finished composing my reply to you (Id been adding items as I went along), then hit the button to post it and the MSFN page became unavailable. Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage is the exact phrase Im getting. (Other websites are working just fine, except for strangely enough the Win98banter.com forum.) Subsequently, as a test, I rebooted the PC, reloaded Spybot, and added some of the file sets back in, just to see what happened in this reduced memory load environment. It ran through the scan as before… and as before, it gave me the blasted illegal operation/invalid page fault message at the very end. AAARRRGGGGHHHHH!!! End of reply. A long and frustrating day. Now Im just waiting for MSFN to come back up so I can post the reply. And running ScanDisk again, in case thats needed in order to proceed properly from here on out. So Doc, what do you think? --JorgeA

Prozactive, I thought I'd replied to you but it doesn't look like I did, sorry about that. A few weeks ago I discovered the Windows Memory Diagnostic tool. I used it and the RAM passed with flying colors. (The Spybot issue has been going on for almost two years.) My hard drive monitor reports a very healthy HDD. Is there any other hardware I should/can test with software? Thanks very much. --JorgeA

georg, Not to worry about the length of your posts -- I sure do appreciate your taking the time and interest to help me find out what's going on. I ran a Spybot scan in Safe Mode as rilef suggested: no dice!! Still got the invalid page fault. This was with the SSD settings as last I described them to rilef. I'm attaching a fresh screenshot of that. (Nothing shows up after the "stack dump" line.) Hopefully this will give us some clues. You're a heck of a lot better equipped, knowledge-wise, than I am to interpret what's going on there. The invalid page fault appears at the end of the scan and it doesn't matter how long I wait -- other than running some other program, the only thing I can do with Spybot at that point is to click on the Close button and then both the error message and the Spybot window go away. One other interesting (maybe) data point. Before one of the test scans today, I thought to load Dr. Watson to see if it could find anything when the "illegal operation" error inevitably came up. I ran the scan, and then promptly messed up my plan by hitting the OK button before saving the Dr. Watson log. Curiously, both the Dr. Watson box and the invalid page fault box disappeared immediately, while the Spybot window stayed on instead of closing as usual -- but it wouldn't do anything, just showed a cursor arrow with an hourglass. I let it sit for about an hour, and (as nothing was happening) then clicked to close it, which did work. You said that there are other options for anti-spyware programs. Originally I installed SSD as an anti-malware complement to Norton Internet Security. I let the Norton yearly subscription lapse in December '08 when I bought my Vista system. (Interestingly, the Norton firewall still operates, as does the virus scan but with outdated definitions of course.) I'm now using Avast! 4.8 for current AV definitions, but I'd like to keep using Spybot or some other supplementary malware killer because, as we know, no one program catches everything. And ideally it would be freeware or shareware. What would you recommend to replace Spybot and to complement Avast? Again, thanks very much for your ongoing interest. --JorgeA SpybotScreenshot041710.pdf

rilef, I've tried most of the choices you suggested, doing a Spybot scan after each one: Disabled SDHelper and TeaTimer -- new scan. I deselected all the items from the Settings menu, except for the two you mentioned -- new scan. I didn't have a lot of items ticked under Tools, but I went ahead and unticked them -- new scan. I downloaded and ran CCleaner, as had been proposed earlier in this thread -- new scan. All of these attempts have been defeated by the same blasted problem and error message. Next I'll run a scan in Safe Mode, and if that doesn't work I may have to look into your idea to compress the registry. (I'm assuming that CCleaner repaired it adequately? It did remove a bunch of dead entries.) Thanks very much for pitching in. --JorgeA

Hello rilef, Thanks very much for the extensive roundup. I'll try each of your suggestions in turn and report back. Right now I am running a Spybot scan with SDHelper and TeaTimer disabled, everything else left untouched. CPU usage after disabling them and closing Spybot, and before reloading it, was 44% (56% free); after reloading Spybot it was 51% (49% free). (Total RAM is 384MB.) Hopefully it won't come to this, but I'm starting to think that ultimately I may have to do a clean install of Windows 98, just of get rid of the accumulated crud on that system. <shudder> The Safer Networking forum for Spybot is indeed an excellent one, but after several rounds of trying to solve my issue there (some of it via e-mail) we seemed to come to a dead end. That's how I ended up here. Thanks again! --JorgeA

Hello supem, Thanks for the link. I read the whole thread, and as you point out it looks like the software isn't quite ready for prime time yet. I've got enough stuff to deal with already! Plus, as a newbie here it looks like I have to get up to speed on Win98 innovations at MSFN. Don't know what RP9 (Revolutions Pack?) is, will have to check it out. Tell you one thing -- I wish I'd discovered this forum years ago!! Probably would have saved me a ton of time and frustration. --JorgeA

Hello dencorso, I ran SFC.exe as you asked. I don't recall ever doing that before, so I'm not sure what to look for, but the program didn't ask to replace any files. (Do I have it right that it will ask to do that, if it finds a corrupted file?) A few files had a "No" result for the CRC Match, but they didn't seem to cause SFC.exe to burp. They were: EXPLORER.EXE SYSTRAY.EXE USER.EXE BATMETER.DLL POWRPROF.DLL USER32.DLL mapi32.DLL DISKTSD.VXD IOS.VXD Any thoughts? --JorgeA

submix8c, Well, how bizarre. I tried rilef's idea -- deselected all the Trojans and the Heavy Duty, leaving just 116,560 files in the scan database. And this time, instead of crashing with an invalid page fault, my computer simply froze, also at the tail end of the scan (116560/116560). Tried this three times, and the same thing happened each time, having to physically turn off the PC. It's a busy time here, so I wasn't able to follow rilef's suggestion exactly -- didn't download the latest updates, although I'm fuzzy as to how that could come into play, especially since it's up to date as of last week. I would also need guidance as to the registry setting ajdustments on my particular system, wouldn't dare going in there blind. Maybe over the weekend. BTW, I can report that my PC, despite all its problems, has been running Norton Internet Security 2003 since that year, with no (apparent) problems. That includes the years 2003-2009, when the computer had just 96MB of RAM. --JorgeA

Maybe. But it's worth to try. Do post a good, legible screenshot, and let's see what ensues. Hello dencorso, Please see my reply to georg with the screenshots attached. Let me know if the image is (or isn't) clear enough. Thank you! --JorgeA

Hi georg, Thanks very much for the explanation and suggestion. Nope, the thread didn't die, I had a prior commitment yesterday so there was no opportunity to go online. I tried your ideas of setting the Spybot scan to the highest priority, and minimizing the window. (I also disabled Norton Internet Security, unplugging the Ethernet cable of course.) It really does speed things up -- loading SSD took less than 3 minutes, and the scan itself about 1:30. (I did peek a couple of times by maximizing it, then quickly minimized it again as soon as I saw the progress bar.) These are half the times (or less) that each action takes on my PC with the usual settings. Sadly, though, and despite doing it twice, it still came to the same old crash at the very end of the scan with the invalid page fault in KERNEL32.DLL. I'm attaching two representative screenshots of the error message from a few months ago -- two, so that you can see all of the info in the Details. Let me know if the image quality isn't up to snuff. (Eagle-eyed observers will see that both Avast! and Norton show up in the system tray, but I only installed Avast! back in December, whereas the problem we're discussing has been going on since the first half of '08, so that is not an issue. You'll also see a bunch of minimized blank windows, which has to do with the screen saver -- when the monitor goes black and I click on a key to bring it back, a blank thingamajig stays in the taskbar, which disappears as soon as I click on it. But that's not the issue we're focusing on, either.) I really appreciate your and everybody else's interest in this question! --JorgeA SpybotScreenshot2b.pdf

Hi georg, Thanks very much for the tips. I'm trying to follow them -- this is deeper than I've ever dug into any of my computers! I opened up the Process List under SSD. Everything that's there appears to be something that's supposed to be there. If I understand the purpose of your suggestions, I should be looking for memory conflicts, where processes or hardware are competing for the same RAM turf. Do I have that right? If that's the case, then I can say that I've gone through the hardware portion under System Information, and am slowly making my way through the software part. In terms of hardware, all I could find was the following: xF4100000 - xF4100FFF ATI Rage Pro AGP 2X xF4100000 - xF45FFFFF Intel 82443BX Pentium® II Processor to AGP controller Those are the only two components that seem to be working in the same memory range. But these are the originals that came with the computer 11 years ago, so if that's the problem then I suppose it's been a problem since the beginning. However, Spybot did run fine for about five years (2003-2008), only developing its problem since sometime in the spring or summer 2008. Would I be correct in ruling out a hardware conflict? In terms of software, the only 32-bit modules that even have 2008 dates (the year the problem started) are from Norton Internet Security. Two points about that: they are from January 2008 (months before the problem started), and I've been running NIS on that computer since before I ever heard of Spybot. (Note: I've tried running a Spybot scan with all the Norton features disabled, but it doesn't help.) Would it help to upload a screenshot of the "invalid page fault" details? Thanks again for your help. --JorgeA

georg, Spybot behaves much the same on my computer -- about 7-8 minutes to load, then between 2 and 3 hours to scan. (3:15 the last time, but some times it's taken 8 hours) The main difference is that the program actually finishes the process on yours, while on mine it crashes at the very end. --JorgeA

submix8c, My Win98 PC won't finish a Spybot scan even in Safe Mode. Keep getting that same Invalid Page Fault. I agree with you, though, that the program could be designed better. --JorgeA

Hi georg, Thanks for the idea. The PC came with two 48MB RAM modules installed. Back in January I took them out and put in three new 128MB modules, hoping that that would do the trick, but it didn't seem to make any difference to Spybot. --JorgeA

Hi patclash, Very interesting thread you pointed me to, thanks! A couple months ago I tried manually setting the swap file at high settings, but now I'll try setting it real low for both minimum and maximum, and then see what happens. --JorgeA

Hi dencorso, Unfortunately, I've tried that before and it didn't help, but thank you anyway. Every one of my attempts at fixing the problem has been defeated by the computer. SO FAR. (I'm not giving up yet.) --JorgeA

My Windows 98SE computer is running with Pentium III 500 MHz and 384 MB of RAM too. You're welcome. Charles. Hi Charles, I'm sorry to report that, after uninstalling Spybot as per the instructions, running the utility you uploaded, and downloading and re-installing Spybot -- it still did the same thing: it ran the scan, reached the last file after 3 hours 15 minutes... and then crashed with the same Invalid Page Fault error as before. I rebooted the PC to verify the info on the CPU. It's an Intel Celeron running at 400 MHz. (System Properties under Control Panel calls it a Pentium II but that's not the case.) The data provided by Norton SystemWorks says it's a Family 6 Model 6, which fits. Could the difference in our processors be the deciding factor in whether Spybot will run or not? I doubt that it could be the OS -- that it would still run O.K. on 98SE but not on FE as I have. Anyhow, thanks for trying. Are we out of ammo? --JorgeA

Hi Charles, Thanks a bunch for the instructions and the cleanup file, I'll try them. I remember that Spybot kept taking longer and longer to complete the scan, even before it stopped finishing them. Toward the end it was taking like 5-6 hours!! Now the scan is down to "just" 2 hours or so, but of course it's not actually finishing the job. Hopefully the cleanup and re-install will help. Thanks again. --JorgeA