Vistapocalypse

Just curious: Are definition updates for the legacy Windows Defender still available after 14 January 2020?

I'm glad Mathwiz brings up the IonMonkey type confusion vulnerability again. My question is about PM/NM 27, which was last patched on January 3 (unless my weary eyes missed it) whereas CVE-2019-17026 wasn't announced until January 8. Moonchild did say, "All versions of Pale Moon prior to v28.8.1" are vulnerable, so I assume that includes Tycho unless someone more knowledgeable corrects my misconception - and Tycho does have the javascript.options.ion setting. What to do?

Norton and ESET are certainly good brands: my only concern is whether such old versions can offer much protection in 2020 (and have you actually paid for a license?) I would suggest visiting AMTSO and taking the drive-by downloads test to see if your versions can prevent download of the (harmless) EICAR test file. Since sonicenforce likes to post screenshots, I'd like to see a screenshot of a Norton 2002 detection pop-up. Yes, Malwarebytes is mentioned many times in this thread. I prefer Malwarebytes Free 2.2.1 rather than 3.x. (To get Free, you must deselect the free trial of Premium during installation.) If I was interested in paying for their real-time protection, then I would install 3.5.1 (see Malwarebytes support for legacy Windows XP and Vista Operating Systems).

That is an extremely old version. According to System Requirements, Windows XP was officially supported by all versions 9.x and below (although I have no idea where to find such old installers). I was surprised when @Dibya mentioned on pages 2-3 of this thread (July 25, 2018) using then-latest ESET NOD32 version 11, but I later learned that installation on XP wasn't blocked until version 12.2.23 according to Changelog. (That was also the last version to officially support Windows Vista, which is why I learned about it.) Edit: I never used ESET NOD32 because it isn't free, but I occasionally use and would recommend the ESET SysRescue Live disk.

I learned on page 13 of this thread that Norton is not very popular among the local Windows XP diehards - but if anyone was interested in using Norton on XP, there is no need to resort to a 2002 version. See Norton Maintenance Mode for Windows XP and Windows Vista.

Here is a download link for the stable release of Microsoft's new Chromium-based Edge browser: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/edge The supported operating systems include Windows 7, 8.1 and 10, as well as Server 2008 R2, 2012, 2012 R2, 2016 and 2019. It will reportedly support Windows 7 for as long as Chrome does, i.e. for 18 months or more. A very favorable Computerworld Review was posted today also. Edit: The widely-quoted Neowin article has been updated (hence my strikethrough above):

Found a link for Microsoft Edge Supported Operating Systems posted 01/12/2020, but it does not discuss eventual end of support: Edit: The widely quoted Neowin article has been updated: Started a new thread about New Microsoft Edge Available.

In the absence of reliable news (and even the frequently cited Neowin article contains no Microsoft link), we can only speculate. My guess is that Edge will not support Windows 7 any longer than Chrome. Granted, if the Chinese can backport fairly recent Chromium versions to XP and Vista, then Microsoft should be capable of backporting future Chromium versions to Windows 7, or at least creating security patches for them - but why exactly would MS want to do that? If I am correct in thinking that MS wishes to block Chrome from gaining more market share, then their incentive ends as soon as Chrome support ends. Edit: But if Chrome ends support for Windows 8.1 before Microsoft's EoL date, what will then become of Edge support for 8.1? Even Microsoft probably doesn't have an answer yet.

Of course there were definition updates today, erpdude8. Post again tomorrow if you wish to tell everyone what Microsoft has already told us!

You may have overlooked the word "only" in Jody's question., which is not actually answered in that article.

Good question. Others may not be aware that Microsoft will reportedly support Edge on Windows 7 for the same timeframe as Google - which is a remarkable departure from Microsoft's usual EoL practices. (Perhaps they finally realized that using Internet Explorer support as a tool to force OS upgrades was a mistake that contributed to Chrome's current dominance, and now they don't want Chrome to gain even more market share among Windows 7 diehards.)

I quite agree. (In fact Avira's stated policy is to end support for Windows 7, 8.1 and practically everything else on November 1, 2022.) Of course some Windows 7 enthusiasts may regard Vista as the bathwater rather than the baby, thinking they dodged a bullet back then, and may feel the same way about Windows 8 - bringing sly grins to the faces Microsoft executives as they usher you up the gangplank to Windows 10, which they won't scuttle until practically everyone is on board - at which time a new version of Windows will no doubt be launched.

According to How Chrome is helping enterprises still using Windows 7, In the case of Windows XP, Chrome support was ultimately extended for a full 2 years after Microsoft's EoL date, ending in April 2016. (See Updates to Chrome platform Support. Also at that time, Chrome support for Windows Vista was terminated a full year before Microsoft's EoL date - a possibility that those running Windows 8/8.1 should perhaps beware of.) In all likelihood, Firefox will support Windows 7 longer than Chrome.

Since Mr. Tobin's Borealis is itself derived from SeaMonkey, roytam1's derivative might perhaps be branded MonkeySeaMonkeyDo.

Update: Surprisingly enough, I now have Microsoft/Rovi guide data extending to January 21 at 6 PM. Will Microsoft give us the entire month of January then, or do we dare to hope that Microsoft has changed its mind about retiring its EPG service in January 2020 - perhaps thinking of those who paid for Windows 8 with Pro Pack? Of course I do have a Plan B, but for now I will stick to Microsoft/Rovi like a pesky flea who is still running Windows Vista! Edit: Microsoft EPG data updated to January 29 at 6 PM. Microsoft appears to have taken down the online Guide Terms of Service.

Just curious really, since I have a Vista system but no Server 2008 key. In theory, you should be able to use anything that still works on Vista (and R2 should be able to use anything, since Windows 7 is still supported by everything, at least for the time being). On the other hand, a lot of security software does not officially support any server, and there may be artificial blocks - or issues related to Server 2008 updates released after Vista's EOL in April 2017 (e.g. the Meltdown and Spectre patches). Server 2008 will of course become an unsupported operating system very soon, so security software seems like a timely topic for diehards to discuss. I'm sure you could use Avast 18.8 (which I'm using on Vista), or its near-twin AVG 18.8 if you prefer. There was a serious compatibility issue with these legacy versions when Server 2008 SP2's build number changed to 6.0.6003 after the April 2019 updates, but Avast became aware of the issue thanks to a spiceworks thread and issued a micro-update to correct it on June 4, 2019. I'm especially curious if anyone is using Microsoft Security Essentials 4.10.209.0 on Server 2008. MSE never officially supported any server, and I believe that Microsoft blocked installation - but that can reportedly be overcome. MSFN member @Werewolf's March 24, 2017 post showed MSE working on Server 2008 without the pre-EOL nagging that affected users running Vista, but did not discuss installation procedures. Definition updates for MSE will reportedly continue after January 14, but no one knows for how long. I also wonder if anyone is using Sandboxie on Server 2008. The Meltdown and Spectre patches reportedly caused issues with Sandboxie, at least at one time. (I'm using Sandboxie 5.22 on Vista 6002 without the M&S patches.)

At both of your VirusTotal links, Microsoft's engine detects Trojan Win32/Occamy C. In the past, I have submitted fake "Flash Player Updates" offered as drive-by downloads by strange URLs I was mysteriously redirected to (i.e. couldn't possibly be legitimate) that were only detected by 2 or 3 engines. I'm with caliber, and would never consider using a program that is detected by 23 engines!

Update: I just downloaded Microsoft/Rovi EPG data for over-the-air channels extending to 6 PM January 14.

Confirmed: Microsoft/Rovi guide data is history. No more wondering if Microsoft actually meant January 14.

At VirusTotal the Microsoft engine does not detect the Process Hacker setup file, but various other engines do - and twice as many engines detect 2.39 as 2.38. Perhaps you should have more faith in your chosen antimalware solution. This is probably OT since OP never mentioned Process Hacker 2, but OP does use MSE.

Martin Brinkmann wrote a December 19 article for ghacks on this topic.

@Werewolf: In a March 24, 2017 post you were successfully using Microsoft Security Essentials on Windows Server 2008. Since MSE does not officially support any server, I wonder if any special installation procedures were necessary, such as compatibility mode and/or installing via command line with /disableoslimit flag? According to recent reports, MSE will continue to receive definition updates after January 14, so it might continue to be useful for fully-updated Server 2008 SP2.

Granted, "MSE" has other meanings, but this thread's Jarhead title could easily be overlooked by anyone searching for information about Microsoft Security Essentials. (Edit: I approve of the thread's new title.) The GUI should "show MSE as being up to date in Windows 7" with respect to definition updates for an unknown period of time after January 14. As recently as December 11, my assumption was that MSE definition updates would cease after January 14. (Windows 8.1 and 10 have Windows Defender, MSE was never officially supported on any server, and today's Microsoft is a leaner and meaner corporation than the MS of yesteryear.) However, my assumption has been proven wrong: The official Microsoft Extended Security Update FAQ mentioned in the above-referenced article was indeed updated on December 18: Nearly all MSE users running Windows 7 are no doubt using version 4.10.209.0, which cannot be installed on XP and is only half as old as the version that many XP diehards are nostalgic about.

I see no reason why good news for MSE users should be introduced with cursing, but I like erpdude8's diligence. As @dencorso correctly predicted back in January, MSE definition updates will continue after January 14, although no specific grace period has thus far been announced AFAIK. The page FAQ about Extended Security Updates for Windows 7 mentioned in my previous post was updated December 18: The last part about "the MSE platform will no longer be updated" isn't very surprising, since there hasn't been an MSE upgrade in more than 3 years. I was happily using 4.10.209.0 on Vista until it started to nag in January 2017. My question about MSE nagging was answered to my satisfaction 2 months ago, erpdude8. Page 2 of this thread is actually another MSE-related topic, which is fine with me.

Marine Corps Communication-Electronics School?? Edit: See MSE still works?