AstroSkipper

Thanks for the hint! Never heard of it! I'll have a look at this tool at the next opportunity. Cheers, AstroSkipper

I've got a licence of Malwarebytes for nearly 11 years. I loved Malwarebytes Anti-Malware 1.75 as an on-demand scanner. My licence is also valid for Malwarebytes Premium 3.5.1.2522, the last version for Windows XP. Unfortunately, I couldn't get this version running at all. It crashed and had problems in loading its components. This was a known issue and also discussed in Malwarebytes Forum. In the end, their experts couldn't provide a solution to fix this issue, though. I had several trials installing Malwarebytes Premium 3.5.1.2522 on different Windows XP partitions without any real success. At that time, I was very disappointed with Malwarebytes which always claims to be compatible with all programs. Anyway, I gave up on this version. Therefore, I use Malwarebytes Anti-Malware 2.2.1.1043, which works properly on Windows XP, but only as an on-demand scanner. In my opinion, Malwarebytes is not a full replacement for an AV program as, for example, Avast. But, as an on-demand scanner, to get a second opinion, it's useful although the old Malwarebytes Anti-Malware 1.75, which is no longer supported, was less bloated and much faster. Cheers, AstroSkipper

Very strange! I use avast! Premier Edition for more than 10 years and never observed such problems. No issues with YouTube, no errors in loading the Avast user interface, i.e. the Avast service. Maybe, your system lacks of some components which Avast needs to run properly. Or, Avast became faulty while installing, caused by another program which was interfering the installation. Did you use an offline installer? As far as I can remember (it's more than 10 years ago!), I had difficulties using the online installer. And, you have to configure Avast properly and carefully after installation. Anyway, I can confirm that Avast has been running perfectly under Windows XP for more than 10 years now. I disabled its firewall component to get it running in combination with Windows 10 Firewall Control Plus XP, my favourite firewall for Windows XP. The latest and last version in my system is avast! Premier Edition 18.8.4084.409 (18.8.2356.0). And if you had already installed Avast in the past, you should first use the avast! Uninstall Utility 18.8.4084.0, whose executable is avastclear.exe, in Safe Mode, of course, to get rid of all remnants of previous installations. Cheers, AstroSkipper

In my search for a replacement for ESET NOD32 Antivirus on my second XP partition, I also came across WiseVector StopX 3.07. Although I have considerable reservations about Chinese software in principle, I did some research on the Internet. The result of my research was very promising. I read many positive reviews and tests. Since Windows XP still seems to be quite common in China, I fear that one will not be able to do without software from this country altogether if one wants to continue using Windows XP. Not to be biased, I gave WiseVector StopX a chance in my system. I have deactivated its firewall component and it runs in combination with Windows 10 Firewall Control XP. After my first experience with this AV solution, I am really impressed. It runs much smoother than ESET NOD32 Antivirus, and it's free of charge. More impressions coming soon! Cheers, AstroSkipper

If Avast has been really swallowed up by Norton, then this means the soon end of any support for old Avast products. Norton was quite fast out of the AV business when official support of Windows XP was abandoned by Microsoft, so I fear bad things for the XP fan community. Besides, I never liked Norton AV products for Windows XP.

Maybe, it depends on the OS which is used. But, I don't think so. It is more likely that ESET abandoned updating virus databases on all editions up to and including version 9. That's the way ESET usually behaves.

Windows is basically able to switch summer and winter time by itself automatically. The user do not have to do that manually. This works with most applications except 360Chrome which has obviously a DST problem in Windows XP.

No problem! My Avast Premier is still working, and that's much more important. It was amazing how long ESET kept updating the virus database. I thought they would stop updating much earlier.

@VistaLover! The prevoius post was not meant to be funny, and there is and was no dose of sarcasm. I have the greatest respect for you and always enjoy the detailed analyses you disseminate here. And, you actually should know that, hopefully! When I wrote about Advanced Chrome, I did not find information about the special XP compatible version 54 on its homepage anymore. Therefore, I searched in our forum and saw the string Chrome 49/52/54. It was my mistake not reading deeply your comment, which means I misread your statement. And, as I already stated, my next mistake was not using the Wayback Machine. Anyway, I have the greatest respect for you, appreciate your expertises and knowledge, which is rather rare in this forum. I am beginning to fear you have somehow totally misunderstood my comment. My conclusion: Either my English was not good enough, causing you to totally misunderstand me, or you read my comment with a misguided intention. Anyway, we are all human and subject to an age-old rule, which is: Errare humanum est. The old Romans were wise and already knew that! By the way, I am also well over 50 and know very well the problem with age-related memory. Kindest regards, AstroSkipper

I have two partitions with Windows XP Professional SP3 installed, both fully updated, the first with and the second without all POSReady updates. On the first one, I use Avast Premier for at least 10 years and it's simply great although a bit too bloated. The Avast Free Edition lacked of some important features and therefore, I chose the Avast Premier Edition. On the second XP partition, I used ESET NOD32 Antivirus as an alternative for a long time. It was satisfactory, too, but from the very first it had the problem of not being able to be uninstalled properly. Now, I've uninstalled it and going to try a new alternative. In any case, an AV based on virus definitions, which has to be downloaded by the program, must be updated regularly. If not, it is useless for me and reached its end of "life". Cheers, AstroSkipper

Update notification! The Root Certificates have been updated and are now from 27-09-2022. Here is a screenshot: Cheers, AstroSkipper

Unfortunately, I have to confirm your observation. ESET NOD32 Antivirus 9 can't update its virus definitions anymore. And, that's definitely the end for ESET on my computers. Due to this fact, I uninstalled it completely which is not as easy as it is for other AVs. As expected, it was impossible to remove ESET NOD32 Antivirus 9 via its uninstaller under the System Panel -> Software. Same problem if applying its entry in the Start Menu. Such experiences, I had made a lot with ESET in the past. Here are the steps how to uninstall ESET NOD32 Antivirus 9 completely in Windows XP: Download ESETUninstaller 7.0.7.0 (legacy version): https://help.eset.com/eset_tools/ESETUninstaller_7.0.7.0.exe Restart your computer in Safe Mode. Execute ESETUninstaller_7.0.7.0.exe. Read carefully the instructions and options in the cmd window. When finished, restart your computer. You can only uninstall ESET NOD32 Antivirus 9 in Safe Mode. Here is a link with a more detailed instruction for different Windows versions provided by ESET: https://support.eset.com/en/kb2289-uninstall-eset-manually-using-the-eset-uninstaller-tool Rest in peace, ESET! Cheers, AstroSkipper

Congrats! Glad it works for you!

My source must have had the wrong version numbers then. My source wasn't read correctly by me. It's simply much better to use original sources as you did. I didn't find the release info on the homepage anymore and didn't think of the Wayback Machine. Thanks for your research and correction! You can be relied on! Unfortunately, the process of dying of 360Chrome v11 is also in full swing. On VirusTotal (new interface), it no longer works at all, and on GitHub, it does not work properly, either. All in the last few weeks. And here, your post from August (my source! ): I wrote so much in the last days, I misread your post! Frankly and also tragically, I think it won't be long when Chromium-86-based forks don't work properly, either. Greetings from a "blind" man! AstroSkipper

Hello @VistaLover! You are absolutely right! Sorry again for my generalization regarding 360Chrome and DST! Next time, I will clearly define the conditions under which my statements are valid, as I usually do. Just strictly mathematical! To check my statements, I opened the web page https://browserspy.dk/date.php in Advanced Chrome. And here, the local time is displayed correctly. To illustrate this, here is a screenshot of Advanced Chrome's Date and Time Information on BrowserSPY compared to my system time: Advanced Chrome is based on Chrome 49/51/54 48/51/54, which seems to be more compatible with Windows XP, or, simply better ported than 360Chrome v11, and is able to show the correct local time. If there were a bug in Windows XP itself, Advanced Chrome wouldn't show the correct local time. According to this, I believe that neither Windows XP itself nor the POSReady updates are responsible for this error. Anyway, I can only confirm that on Windows XP Professional SP3 fully POSReady updated, the browser 360Chrome v11.0.2031 rebuild 8 (ArcticFoxie) does not show the correct local time if there is DST in the time zone as it is the case here in Germany. Without any claim of correctness, my conclusion is forcibly the following: The browser 360Chrome v11 is based on Chrome 69, which was not originally developed for Windows XP, either, and probably much more incompatible than Chrome 49/52/54 48/51/54. Thus, I suspect that something went wrong when restoring XP compatibility in 360Chrome. In contrast, establishing Vista compatibility apparently went smoothly. All of it only in terms of the local time in combination with DST, of course. Kindest regards, AstroSkipper

Thanks for your detailed clarification! I didn't notice that, indeed. I do not use Windows Vista, and logically I do not read threads in the dedicated Vista forum, either. Of course, I can only confirm that on Windows XP, 360Chrome does not show the correct local time if there is DST in the time zone as it is the case here in Germany. But New Moon 28 does. Therefore, I assume it is rather a problem of Chrome browsers in Windows XP than a bug in Windows XP itself. I read a lot of such posts and articles about Chrome and its DST problems in the internet. It does not seem to be a rare problem. Anyway, thanks again! Kindest regards, AstroSkipper

Certificates - CA and Root Certificates Although Windows XP was abandoned and updates of root certificates were not provided anymore by Microsoft for this OS, we still found ways to update them. And, if we want to install one of our TLS proxies, we have to install a CA certificate to get them working. In both cases, certificates are needed, and this short article is intended to shed some light on this certificate jungle with regards to our TLS proxies. The CA certficate of ProxHTTPSProxy A certificate authority (CA) is a trusted entity that issues digital certificates. These are files that cryptographically link an entity to a public key. Certificate authorities are an important part of the Internet's Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) because they issue the Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) certificates that browsers use to authenticate content sent from web servers. All popular web browsers use web servers' SSL certificates to keep content delivered online secure. They all need to trust certificate authorities to issue certificates reliably. SSL certificates are used in conjunction with the Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol to encrypt and authenticate data streams for the HTTPS protocol, and are therefore sometimes referred to as SSL/TLS certificates or simply TLS certificates. The first time ProxHTTPSProxy is started, it creates the keys for a certificate authority in its program directory if there is none. This file CA.crt is used for on-the-fly generation of dummy certificates for each visited website which are stored in the subfolder Certs. And, there is a second file called cacert.pem located in ProxHTTPSProxy's program directory. This file cacert.pem contains the currently valid root certificates (will be considered in more detail below) used by the proxy to verify the server connections. Since your browser won’t trust the ProxHTTPSProxy's CA certificate out of the box, you will either need to click through a TLS certificate warning on every domain, or install the CA certificate once so that it is trusted. It has to be installed in the Trusted Root Certification Authority of Windows XP and in some cases additionally in the Certificate Manager of a browser as in the cases of New Moon, Pale Moon, Firefox, and others. The Internet Explorer doesn't possess an own certificates store and uses the Trusted Root Certification Authority of Windows XP. Typically, digital certificates contain data about the entity that issued the certificate and cryptographic data to verify the identity of the entity, including the entity's public key and expiration date for the certificate, as well as the entity's name, contact information, and other information associated with the certified entity. Web servers transmit this information when a browser establishes a secure connection over HTTPS. In doing so, they send to it the certificate and the browser authenticates it using its own root certificate store. The following graphic illustrates the structure of a Certificate Authority as for example GlobalSign: SSL/TLS certificates are based on PKI as mentioned above, and there are a few key parts that need to be in place for the SSL certificate to work: A digital certificate (for example, an SSL/TLS certificate) that proves the website’s identity. A certificate authority that verifies the website and issues the digital certificate. A digital signature that proves the SSL certificate was issued by the trusted certificate authority. A public key that your browser uses to encrypt data sent to the website. A private key that the website uses to decrypt the data sent to it. Here is another graphic to illustrate the role that a certificate authority (CA) plays in the Public Key Infrastructure (PKI): When installing such CA certificates in Windows XP manually, then there is something else to note. It can be of crucial importance whether one installs a root certificate under the account of the Current User or Local Computer. In the first post of my thread, you can find more information on that. Furthermore, exiting ProxHTTPSProxy completely, deleting the old CA.cert file in ProxHTTPSProxy's program directory, and restarting ProxHTTPSProxy will result in the generation of a new CA certificate CA.crt that will be valid for another ten years. In addition, the certificate bundle cacert.pem should be updated, at best regularly. You can do that with the tool cacert Updater Fixed which can be found in the download section under Downloads related to cacert.pem Certificate Update in the first post of this thread. This tool is also included in my program package ProxHTTPSProxy's PopMenu. And, that is the moment to note something very important. Any change to a ProxHTTPSProxy installation regarding the CA certificate or a severe system crash while one of the proxies is running in the background always requires a reset of all dummy certificates in the Certs subfolder. The word "reset" at this point means deleting all certificates that have been created in the Certs folder, manually by the user. The next time the proxy is started correctly, all necessary certificates will be created again when the corresponding websites are accessed. Here are a few screenshots of ProxHTTPSProxy's CA certificate (German edition of Windows XP, sorry!): The Root Certificates of Windows XP In cryptography and computer security, a root certificate is a public key certificate that identifies a root certificate authority (CA). Root certificates are self-signed and form the basis of an X.509-based PKI. Either it has matched Authority Key Identifier with Subject Key Identifier, in some cases there is no Authority Key identifier, then Issuer string should match with Subject string (RFC 5280). For instance, the PKIs supporting HTTPS for secure web browsing and electronic signature schemes depend on a set of root certificates. A certificate authority can issue multiple certificates in the form of a tree structure. A root certificate is the top-most certificate of the tree, the private key which is used to "sign" other certificates. All certificates signed by the root certificate, with the "CA" field set to true, inherit the trustworthiness of the root certificate. A signature by a root certificate is somewhat analogous to "notarizing" identity in the physical world. Such a certificate is called an intermediate certificate or subordinate CA certificate. Certificates further down the tree also depend on the trustworthiness of the intermediates. The following graphic illustrates the role of a root certificate in the chain of trust: The root certificate is usually made trustworthy by some mechanism other than a certificate, such as by secure physical distribution. Root certificates are distributed in Windows XP by Microsoft and located in special certificate stores. These certificate stores may be viewed through the Certificates snap-in Certmgr.msc in the Microsoft Management Console (MMC). You can open the Certificates console focused on the Current User on a Windows XP computer by opening Certmgr.msc in the Run dialog box. Here is a screenshot of what you see running this command (German edition of Windows XP, sorry!): The root certificates of Windows XP can be updated by @heinoganda's Certificate Updater or by my self-created Root Certificate and Revoked Certificate Updaters, in both cases to the most recent ones provided by Microsoft. These updaters can be found in the download section under Downloads related to Root Certificate Updates in the first post of this thread. There is no automatism for this updating. It must be done manually by the user and, if possible, regularly. @heinoganda's Certificate Updater is also included in my program package ProxHTTPSProxy's PopMenu. Greetings from Germany, AstroSkipper

I am talking about downloading a release from the assets on GitHub. Worked fine with palefill 1.21 the last time in the latest release of New Moon 28. I did not say anything about ZIPs from the repos.

Hello @mockingbird! The last time I downloaded files from GitHub all was fine with palefill 1.21 installed. I do not use the WC polyfill add-on from JustOff anymore. Kind regards, AstroSkipper

You're right! Same here! 360Chrome is originally a Chinese browser. There is no multilanguage support. It lacks of localization and can't show the correct local time if there is DST in the time zone. Of course, one could change the system's time zone. But, why should one do that? The correct time zone in Windows itself is much more important. I would recommend to leave the system time zone as it is for the real location. There are other browsers which can do that correctly. Cheers, AstroSkipper

Yep! They did new changes. From now on, 360Chrome v11 don't work with Virustotal's new interface anymore, either.

Thanks for your hints! I do not have important settings in uBlock Origin which are worth to be saved. Therefore, I cleaned my profile deeply before reinstalling uBlock Origin. I use eCleaner to delete all settings in terms of uBlock's entries in abour:config and I delete manually ublock0.sqlite in the subfolder extension-data of my profile folder. But, you are right. All users who have important, individual settings or rules should backup them before cleaning their profile folder. On the dashboard page, there is an item called "Back up to file"" to save settings via uBlock itself. Cheers, AstroSkipper

I've made new modified versions of uBlock Origin Legacy. All is described here: These versions are tested by me and work as they should. Cheers, AstroSkipper

uBlock Origin Legacy modified by @AstroSkipper - Part 2 (obsolete) In the first part about uBlock Origin, I fixed the issue of the incorrect dashboard's display. After that, a member of this forum came up with the idea to replace the file with the available filter lists in my modded version of uBlock Origin due to loading problems that could be observed lately with these lists. A good idea, in my opinion. He replaced the file assets.json in the folder \assets with the one from the current web extension uBlock0_1.44.5b0.firefox.signed.xpi in my corrected version uBlock0_1.16.4.30.firefox-legacy-mod-by-@AstroSkipper.xpi. Thanks for that to @nicolaasjan! I had a closer look and came to the conclusion that in case of such a modification not only this one file but also all related filter lists should be replaced in the folders \assets\thirdparties and \assets\ublock, for consistency reasons. Freely according to the motto "Who says A, must also say B" (German saying! ). Furthermore, @VistaLover drew my attention to an unofficial, more recent version of uBlock Origin Legacy with the version number 1.16.4.31b2: This xpi file has already been updated with regards to its filter lists and is now the basis of my new, modified version of uBlock Origin Legacy. Here is the complete changelog of what I have modified: The file dashboard.css fixed as described in my post "uBlock Origin Legacy modified by @AstroSkipper - Part 1". The file assets.json replaced by the most recent one. Missing filter lists in the folders thirdparties and ublock added. Existing filter lists in the folders thirdparties and ublock updated. This is a screenshot of the location inside the xpi file where all filter lists related files can be found: And, here is the download link to my new, fixed version of uBlock Origin Legacy 1.16.4.31b2, credits to @nicolaasjan and @VistaLover: https://www.mediafire.com/file/rv4cdfsm9ddqq30/uBlock0_1.16.4.31b2.firefox-legacy-enhanced-mod-by-%40AstroSkipper.xpi/file I compared this new modded version to the old one, and it works really great. The updating of the filter lists are now much faster than before, meaning flawlessly. No eternal waiting for update end! But that's not all! And again it was @VistaLover, who pointed me to another solution for fixing the glitch in the dashboard page. Thanks for that again, @VistaLover! In the Pale Moon Forum, a solution is described how to fix this glitch using the advanced settings of uBlock Origin: https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=28882 Open the dashboard page, under the item Settings, enable the option "I am an advanced user", click on the icon at the end of this option, and change the value for uiStyles from unset to font-family: sans-serif. That's all! From now on, the dashboard page works as it should. And, here is the next download link of uBlock Origin Legacy 1.16.4.31b2, only modified in terms of the filter lists, credits to @nicolaasjan and @VistaLover: https://www.mediafire.com/file/zy1dpmtv2py9tws/uBlock0_1.16.4.31b2.firefox-legacy-filter-lists-mod-by-%40AstroSkipper.xpi/file Furthermore, two posts with all deeper information provided by @VistaLover: https://msfn.org/board/topic/182647-my-browser-builds-part-3/?do=findComment&comment=1226700 and https://msfn.org/board/topic/182647-my-browser-builds-part-3/?do=findComment&comment=1226717 Additionally, a link to the wiki of uBlock Origin's advanced settings: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Advanced-settings It seems to be the case that in the next releases of roytam1's UXP browsers the glitch issue in the dashboard page will be presumably fixed. If that is the case, all modifications due to the glitch issue won't be necessary anymore. But, I think they won't harm, either. And finally, an important recommendation to get a new installation of uBlock Origin Legacy working properly and flawlessly. After uninstalling the previous version (yes, the old version should be uninstalled), delete all remnants via about:config and in your profile folder! The remnants of uBlock Origin which can be viewed via about:config can be easily removed by the extension eCleaner. And in your profile folder, there is a file in the subfolder extension-data called ublock0.sqlite which has to be removed manually. Delete the browser cache, too! If doing so, the updating of the filter lists will work like a charme after installing one of my modified versions. All users who have important, individual settings or rules should backup them before cleaning their profile folder. On the dashboard page, there is an item called "Back up to file"" to save the user's settings via uBlock itself. Cheers, AstroSkipper

Update notification! My favourite registry editor Registry Workshop has been updated and its current version is now 5.1.0. Link: http://www.torchsoft.com/en/rw_information.html It is still supported in Windows XP, but it's commercial. This program is definitely worth its money. You can try it 30 days for free. Here are the download links of the English and German version 5.1.0 (other language versions are also available): English version: http://www.torchsoft.com/download/RegistryWorkshop.exe German version: http://www.torchsoft.com/download/RegistryWorkshop_deu.exe Cheers, AstroSkipper