NotHereToPlayGames

https://www.isunshare.com/faqs/bitlocker/what-triggers-bitlocker-recovery-to-require-a-key-entry.html https://www.aeanet.org/why-is-my-computer-asking-for-bitlocker-recovery-key/ https://windowsforum.com/threads/bitlocker-recovery-key-demands-practical-troubleshooting-guide-for-quick-recovery.393333/ https://www.elevenforum.com/t/info-only-what-can-trigger-bitlocker-recovery.13695/ Technically, all it takes is a monthly WINDOWS UPDATE to trigger a request for the BitLocker key. ie, you could be dealing with this each and every Update Tuesday. If the elderly runs the laptop's battery down to where the laptop shuts itself off, that will trigger BitLocker.

"Above my paygrade", as the saying goes. I can only assume it is so that IT can use the same exact "image" for laptops as they do for laboratory desktops. But strictly just a guess (as 60%+ of the "decisions" made by IT are "dumb" in my opinion).

Ultimately, your BitLocker's goal is NOT to protect the "value" of the laptop. If it gets stolen, it gets wiped and reinstalled, BitLocker does not prevent that! A stolen laptop does not get "returned" just because it has BitLocker (or even thumbprint) enabled. Your BitLocker's "goal" is to protect what is "on" that laptop. And if a thief is wanting grandma's/grandpa's Facebook, they don't even need the laptop for that.

If you're asking about the elderly-use laptop, you tell us, does it have a thumbprint reader? More importantly, just how "secure" does that Teams and Facebook need to be? We have browser threads where people go through "great lengths" to appease their own paranoia. Is a thumbprint reader for grandma's/grandpa's Teams and Facebook "above or below" that level of paranoia? Is the laptop getting carried from airport to airport? Or just from a living room couch to the kitchen table?

Good point. Our company USED TO force us all to use BitLocker. Lasted for over one year but less than two years. We would have to enter a THIRTY TWO DIGIT access code after every reboot, THEN enter our password. And reboots are frequent and often (due to forced updates from IT, not only Windows Updates, but other company software). But the way they had it set up, we would have to enter those THIRTY TWO DIGITS after even just closing the lid of our laptop. Many of us (myself included) found that we could ENABLE HIBERNATION, set to hibernate if lid closed, and we'd only have to enter those 32 digits after forced reboots. It took IT close to TWO YEARS before GLOBAL HQ basically told them, "You cannot spend so much of your time re-imaging hard drives when employees forget their 32 digit BitLocker access code, you cannot keep hiring new people just to keep up with these re-imaging tasks, our employees lose TWO DAYS of real work every time you cannot get them back online because of forgotten 32 digit BitLocker access codes." BitLocker was removed from all company laptops and we all had to use a "rolling password" system instead. Our password literally changes every 60 seconds and we need to use a mobile phone app to see what our password is at time of login. Sure, that's a hassle also. But it's only SIX digits instead of 32. But it literally changes every 60 seconds.

Comparison #4: Reverted to default File Explorer (ie, uninstalled Directory Opus). Lowest idle RAM, lowest idle process/threads/handles. Dropped to 0.6 RAM, 39 processes, 464 threads, 16206 handles. Granted, the difference between 0.8, 0.7, and 0.6 RAM is negligible. BUT... There is SIGNIFICANT responsiveness IMPROVEMENT. The best way to "visually see" the improvement is via System Informer. Open any multi-process Chromium-based browser, strictly as an example. When you close that browser and *watch* System Informer, all of those processes close much FASTER now, there used to be a significant and observable lag. Truth be told, I did not run separate tests to ISOLATE whether this responsiveness GAIN is due to uninstalling Directory Opus or to disabling StartMenuExperienceHost. (I'm inclined to tie it to StartMenuExperienceHost, but I did not verify through experimentation [because of other justifications to replace a program from 2010].)

Next, disable StartMenuExperienceHost.exe (and the RuntimeBroker.exe that it requires to run alongside itself). There are plenty of FREE, non-stolen, third-party tools for this. I like Open-Shell Menu (used to be called Classic Shell). I prefer to not install the Classic Explorer, Classic IE, and Open-Shell Update options, strictly installing only the Open-Shell Menu. From here: https://github.com/Open-Shell/Open-Shell-Menu But this is purely a preference, any ol' third-party tool should suffice. This doesn't "by itself" get rid of StartMenuExperienceHost and its RuntimeBroker piggyback. Save as a .bat file and run as Admin: taskkill /f /im explorer.exe taskkill /f /im StartMenuExperienceHost.exe move %windir%\SystemApps\Microsoft.Windows.StartMenuExperienceHost_cw5n1h2txyewy %windir%\SystemApps\Microsoft.Windows.StartMenuExperienceHost_cw5n1h2txyewy.old explorer.exe

Disabling that pesky SearchApp.exe. Despite being "suspended", I don't want it even sitting there eating up RAM. Save as a .bat file and run as Admin: sc.exe config WSearch start= disabled taskkill /f /im SearchApp.exe move %windir%\SystemApps\Microsoft.Windows.Search_cw5n1h2txyewy %windir%\SystemApps\Microsoft.Windows.Search_cw5n1h2txyewy.old This gets rid of SearchApp.exe and also the RuntimeBroker.exe that it requires to run alongside itself. It's key that you run this as a .bat because Win will try to restart SearchApp.exe when you kill it so you have to get the folder renamed BEFORE it has a chance to restart. We didn't delete anything and can always revert if needed (just remove the .old from the folder name that we renamed so that Win cannot "find" SearchApp.exe).

Comparison #3: Installed Directory Opus. I "like" Directory Opus, been using it since 2010, but it has crashed more and more in recent years (only when the preview pane is also open). Note that indexing is DISABLED on all my computers. SearchApp.exe is "suspended". And my computers "with" Directory Opus do respond slightly slowly than my computers "without" Directory Opus. BUT... I also made more than one variable change to regain that responsiveness. I highlight those changes in the next two posts.

You may never know. It could just be something that the elderly user did, that seems perfectly normal to him/her, but "that" is what triggered all of this.

I always avoid setting up with an MS account. But yeah, I would say that "most people" aren't aware that it IS possible to NOT have an MS account.

"You" might not. BUT... That does not mean that your BROWSER is not set up to search from the address bar. MOST browsers ARE pre-configured, out-of-the-box, as-is, to search from the address bar.

Bitlocker is not required. It will enable itself if you don't disable it manually. I don't remember offhand how to disable, but I know it's disabled on all three of my laptops. It's intended for corporate laptops, it's "over-KILL" on home laptops, especially one for an elderly not spending every other day in an airport cafe.

That does make me wonder - are the users that are seeing this, do they have their address bar acting as a search engine input field? Just stabbing in the dark. If I'm following correctly, this redirect is only caused when msfn.org/board is entered in the address bar. It is not happening if https://msfn.org/board is entered in the address bar. And it is not happening if only msfn.org is entered in the address bar. I actually wish that I could replicate, just to see if I can see something that nobody else is seeing as far as why it is happening, but I have simply not been able to replicate. There's gotta be a common denominator that we are overlooking. Only affects Discord users? Only affects extended kernel users? Only affects a specific DNS Server (which would be lightening-strike odds to be the same on all affected)? Only affects users with a specific extension installed? Specific ad-block list?

Comparison #2: I admit that I find this one to be a tad bit of relief. I would have had to "rethink" a few things if this made any "improvement". Removed test-version 10's desktop wallpaper, restored real Windows mouse icon theme, set OS to custom colors (dark Win but LIGHT APP instead of full dark mode), disabled transparency effect, set accent for start/taskbar/title bars. Didn't think those preference would have an effect, but wanted to cite as changes made. I would have really been between a Rock and a Hard Place if idle RAM jumped just by going from Dark Mode to Custom with LIGHT APP, lol.

Comparison #1: UNINSTALLED StartIsBack - nothing for or against, I just feel that it is "stolen property" when it comes *pre-installed/pre-activated* inside a test-version of Win10. Default Start Menu seems to be an IMPROVEMENT over StartIsBack. Again, nothing for or against, per se. 17 minutes of idle had processes at 40, RAM dropped to 0.7, threads at 413, and handles at 17496.

So I've been using a program called "Directory Opus 9" since 2010 as a FULL REPLACEMENT for Win XP's and Win 10's "File Explorer" (also briefly for Win 7). It was paid for by a previous employer and the license has carried over to other installs. I kind of have been using it more out of "habit" than out of it being my best option. I've always LOVED IT. I'm just recently viewing it as a tad bit "heavy" and maybe, just maybe, something "lighter" will serve my needs better. I have not compared to recent versions, it's just the one I had and so I kept dragging it along as my OS changed over the years. I have always used Q-Dir at work (company IT has a tendency to never catch "portable" software that they did not pre-approve so long as that software never connects to internet). Baseline Frame of Reference: Win10 Pro 22H2 VM with 2 GB RAM, default File Explorer, Start Menu pre-replaced with StartIsBack++ 2.9.19 (pre-installed in the "lite" version of 10 being used for testing). 0.8 GB RAM, 44 processes, 536 threads, 20142 handles. RAM fluctuated and dropped to 0.7, processes dropped to 42, threads dropped to 444, handles dropped to 19057 in 38 minutes of Up Time but not doing anything but watching Task Manager.

Are there any other "common denominators"?

I cannot replicate. Brand new Win7 install, brand new Iron v109. Cleared cache, exited, retried two dozen times. Cannot replicate here.

Must be added only in newer versions. I wouldn't have even suggested to give it a try if I knew people were going to get hit with an ad-based version. It was something I only used in my XP Days and never really needed it in 10.

So it only happens to people with Discord? (I don't have Discord.) I did try to replicate in Supermium on XP and in Iron on XP. Could not replicate. I was hoping to be helpful, but looks like nothing I can do to even try to force this redirect. I'll sit back and wait for the experts to have time to investigate. I may install a Win7 VM this afternoon (for nothing more than curiosity and kind of "wanting" to replicate).

Disregard... It's definitely not tied to Supermium...

What about "certificate" that is being used in Win7 versus what is being used in Win10? Okay, I'll shut up now, I can only speculate as I'm on 10 and not able to replicate.

Not to state an obvious, but it looks like a DNS issue to me. Like the browser is using it's "own" DNS and not the OS's. Other than DNS settings specific to Iron, I wouldn't know how to intercept either.

Are any other Supermium users seeing this sort of behavior? https://msfn.org/board/topic/187750-sometimes-redirecting-to-spamgamble-site-when-accessing-msfnorgboard/