Antimalware, firewall, and other security programs for Windows XP working in 2023 and hopefully beyond

[AstroSkipper]

54 minutes ago, Multibooter said:

Thanks, AstroSkipper. But pw-protected "ProxHTTPSProxy_TLS_1_3_1_5_220717_PopMenu_3V3_CheckedByAstroSkipper.7z", containing your software package, has still the same issue (false positives by Kaspersky) which I posted on 14Jan2025,

https://msfn.org/board/topic/183352-proxhttpsproxy-and-httpsproxy-in-windows-xp-for-future-use/page/61/

cacert_updater.exe and cmdow.exe inside your package still get flagged as Trojan and riskware by Kaspersky.

mediafire: "This file was uploaded from Germany on January 14, 2025 at 9:50 AM"

I surely want to believe that your package is clean. Maybe you can make these two files look clean or replace them, not just password-protect them? Many good little files have disappeared into oblivion because they were flagged.

The archive is definitely virus-free. It was password-protected by me since MediaFire uses scanner which tend to produce many false alarms. Kaspersky is as bad as the virus scanner which MediaFire is using. These files are all clean and virus-free. The cacert_Updater.exe file has been fixed by me as the original version from @heinoganda stopped working. It is totally clean. And the cmdow.exe file is a DOS file from a trusted source and checked by me. Unfortunately, some scanners don't like it but it is totally clean, too. So, forget about Kaspersky and similar scanners. Set exclusions if you trust me. And if not, don't use it.  

In any case, I will not change anything in my packages because of faulty or overly cautious virus scanners. I have invested a lot of time in programming and am not going to start compensating for the inadequacies of certain virus scanners now. 
BTW, many virus scanners don't like exe files which have been generated by BatToExe converters due to their compression type. I use such converters and don't care about false positives of those scanners. Excluding such files from scanning is my way of dealing with this nonsense. 

Edited Saturday at 07:03 PM by AstroSkipper
Update of content

[Multibooter]

1 hour ago, AstroSkipper said:

The archive is definitely virus-free. It was password-protected by me since MediaFire uses scanner which tend to produce many false alarms. Kaspersky is as bad as the virus scanner which MediaFire is using....So, forget about Kaspersky and similar scanners....
In any case, I will not change anything in my packages because of faulty or overly cautious virus scanners. I have invested a lot of time in programming and am not going to start compensating for the inadequacies of certain virus scanners now. 

https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/767b877e735c425bf05c34683356abfde4070b092f17a4741ea5ac490611f3de
https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/9f805311953057a944567d9a2e45ee4d65ffb7804925115b3b05bf02d3ff7821

[AstroSkipper]

5 minutes ago, Multibooter said:

https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/767b877e735c425bf05c34683356abfde4070b092f17a4741ea5ac490611f3de
https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/9f805311953057a944567d9a2e45ee4d65ffb7804925115b3b05bf02d3ff7821

This confirms my statement:

1 hour ago, AstroSkipper said:

BTW, many virus scanners don't like exe files which have been generated by BatToExe converters due to their compression type. I use such converters and don't care about false positives of those scanners. Excluding such files from scanning is my way of dealing with this nonsense. 

And the moral of the story: don't trust scanners blindly. 

Edited Saturday at 08:07 PM by AstroSkipper
Update of content

[Multibooter]

17 minutes ago, AstroSkipper said:

And the moral of the story: don't trust scanners blindly. 

We finally agree on something!

[AstroSkipper]

1 hour ago, Multibooter said:

We finally agree on something!

I'm not so sure about that. If you take a closer look at the scan results for the completely clean cmdow.exe file, you'll see that Kaspersky flags the file, but Panda Antivirus and Avast do not. Everyone can draw their own conclusions from this. 

Edited Saturday at 09:43 PM by AstroSkipper

[AstroSkipper]

My article about Panda Antivirus Free has been updated to include all recent information: 

 

[Multibooter]

On 12/27/2025 at 1:10 PM, AstroSkipper said:

The activation of a Panda account needs a TLS connection. That's why you have to use ProxHTTPSProxy or similar technology under Windows XP.  No chance without it since Windows XP lacks modern, secure protocols natively.

in my next attempt to activate Panda under WinXP I have used a genuine gmail email address. After entering the email address in window "Activate Panda Dome", Panda Dome again displayed "Error checking the account. We're sorry but we were unable to access your Panda account. Make sure you have an Internet connection and try again."

[AstroSkipper]

17 minutes ago, Multibooter said:

in my next attempt to activate Panda under WinXP I have used a genuine gmail email address. After entering the email address in window "Activate Panda Dome", Panda Dome again displayed "Error checking the account. We're sorry but we were unable to access your Panda account. Make sure you have an Internet connection and try again."

Without a correctly installed and running HTTPSProxy, you will get this message each time under Windows XP when trying to activate Panda. Whether the proxy is working correctly or not, you can see in its console window. If you are not familiar with these proxies, then you should read my article ProxHTTPSProxy and HTTPSProxy in Windows XP for future use.

Edited 5 hours ago by AstroSkipper
Update of content