XP4ever

Sorry, I personally do not agree. If I see someone starts searching in my bedrooms and cabinets - I do not need any additional "proves" for "legitimate security concerns", even if I myself let him in on my porch. Nope, even the police has to present "proves" for such action or ask for permission. So that's why we are talking that this suspictious behaviour should be at least mentioned. Oh, really? Should we be grateful for ANY work? Virus and malware makers spend a lot of efforts to infect our PCs "for free", should we thank them as well?

For this purpose it's just enough to give that registry entry a name of some SHS256 hash from some random number. However: Never ran any "360chrome" besides of one "portable" mentioned in my first comment here. Oh that brave new world we are living in now! Unportability is called "portability", spyware is "security featue"... "War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength"

That's why modern browsers have more and more spyware features: their outgoing traffic looks so natural and appropriate...

Not really. Portability has nothing to do with leftovers that are not affecting the functionality. The first one is called "standalone". The portable is the second one. The word "portable" is then misleading: that is STANDALONE installation. And it has nothing to do with "windows security "feature"", since all really portable browser installations (such as old firefox and opera) do not have this pervert "security feature". Though it may leave registy entry, for instanse, if you assign it as default browser. Very strange reaction from developers: it is difficult to reproduce, really? And then just silently closed as "obsolete", huh... looks more like intentional "feature", and very few people actually care... No, really: how many users do actually care about botnet on their PCs, if it does not overheat the CPU more, then antivirus-spyguard-blah-blah-security-feature, that reports nothing?

Well, sorry to be telling this, but it does not seem to be neither portable nor free of some "spying" features. First, when I start it from different drive on different system - it loses all cookies (=all settings and registration on sites). And when I move it back again - the same, it loses all new and does not find old ones. Second, I have a "cold storage" drive in my system, which is almost all the time in "sleep" mode. When I start this browser - it wakes up that drive. What for? None of other browsers neither other SW I use does not do so. Very strange behaviour.

Hi Dietmar, Thanks for info, it really helps. Now when I looked closer, it turns out that one of chipset support driver INF files installed has the following header: ; **************************************************************************** ; **************************************************************************** ; ** Filename: PantUSB3.INF ; ** Abstract: Null driver for Intel(R) USB 3.0 devices ; ** Last Update: December 06, 2011 (Version 9.3.0 Build 1018) ; **************************************************************************** ; **************************************************************************** huh, quite strange... looks like it intentionally has some USB3 stubs... Anyways, I still believe there must be a way to remove that deriver without reinstalling entire system, as I did before for storage and other stuff when I relocated this SSD from eventually died X220 to this X230. Another thing I'm concerning about - when I, say, broke somehow this USB driver, it requires specifically usbd.sys and usbhub.sys, may be it does not matter but I afraid it will not see AMD USB drivers anyway. All, does anyone know the correct way to completely revert Intel INF Chipset Support installation?

Could you please precise what driver are you talking about? If one that was possibly bundled with SW I used previously to access RAM above 4GB - I removed it completely before patching, and AFAIK 3.5+ patch does not install any drivers but patch Win files directly. Well, there is not much information actually, not even which file(s) so I could not backup it (or restore from XP disk). It does not seem to be a problem with patch either, because everithing else works as before, and I even able to load more then 4GB (by launching several copies of heavy SW). I wrote, none of previous drivers is working. Unfortunately I did not uninstall one from Lenovo before patching. I uninstalled and reinstalled it after - no effect. It also worked before without those drivers (only with minimal included with XP SP3) with very limited functionality - but not after patching, which seems strange because it is a default driver from Windows and definitely this should be noticed by someone else. Buth this also might be only related to particular board/chip, that's why I ask Dietmar, who has the same (or very similar) board. As I also mentioned, none of the drivers in pack are recognized as valid drivers for this device by Windows. That is obviously due to the lack of corresponding VID&PID string(s) in .inf files, but I have no idea, in which ones.

Hi Dietmar, sorry if I disturb you... Could you please elaborate a little, which USB3 driver you used for your Lenovo x230, and how? I have almost the same x230 (laptop, not tablet) and I'm trying to patch existing installation on it but have no success, and the ReadMes for patches in pack are scarce. It worked flawlessly for years with minimal driver set from Lenovo site with the only drawback as lack of USB3, only USB2 worked properly; up to 4GB was available out of the box with key /PAE in boot.ini, and all above (up to 16GB I installed) I used as virtual drive for Temp folder and Page file. And access to GPT drives by replacing disk.sys and partmgr.sys from W2K3. So that was passably until the web sites completely abandoned old browsers and became terribly overweighted. Thus I applied PAE 3.5+ RAM Unlock patch, and the fun began. USB2 stopped to work as well, and bluetooth as a consequence, since it is connected internally to USB2. Reinstalling drivers did not help: neither ones from lenovo, nor the minimal driver of WinXP. None of drivers in the patch pack seem to know this usb chip, I installed Kernel Mode Framework and what it requires, but nothing helps. So I'm not even sure the KMF is really needed. My guess is I probably should add my PIDs and VIDs into some .inf files but I have no idea which where, under Win7 I can see at least 3 different PIDs (and fourth probably from bluetooth), and may be my guess is wrong. Thanks in advance.