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

[AstroSkipper]

I think for a free version Panda Dome is ok. If it is running correctly, the impact is low on RAM and CPU compared with Avast or other security suites in the past. And once again, it is free of charge in the basic version. BTW, I do not need a firewall or VPN. I have already been using the best firewall, Windows 10 Firewall Control Plus XP. And I have several paid VPN services. 

Edited 22 hours ago by AstroSkipper

[Dave-H]

Well I don't need a firewall or VPN either, but I would like to have website malware scanning, as Malwarebytes has always provided.

I will try the Essentials version I think, it's not expensive.

I do have ProxHTTPSProxy of course BTW, as you well know!

[AstroSkipper]

19 minutes ago, Dave-H said:

I do have ProxHTTPSProxy of course BTW, as you well know!

Of course, I know. Did you also have to use ProxHTTPSProxy for the activation of Panda Dome? 

[Dave-H]

Well I certainly didn't have to do anything special, it just worked, but I guess it wouldn't have done without the proxy being there.

I've now upgraded to Panda Dome Essential, and finally uninstalled Malwarebytes!
I was almost sad to see it go, but as it hadn't been receiving any updates for more than a year, I guess it was time.
All looking good so far.

[AstroSkipper]

2 minutes ago, Dave-H said:

Well I certainly didn't have to do anything special, it just worked, but I guess it wouldn't have done without the proxy being there.

Are you running ProxHTTPSProxy in the background by default? And if so, in which mode?  I had to configure Panda Dome to use the proxy.

4 minutes ago, Dave-H said:

I've now upgraded to Panda Dome Essential, and finally uninstalled Malwarebytes!
I was almost sad to see it go, but as it hadn't been receiving any updates for more than a year, I guess it was time.
All looking good so far.

Which version is your Panda Dome Essential of? 

[Dave-H]

5 minutes ago, AstroSkipper said:

Are you running ProxHTTPSProxy in the background by default? And if so, in which mode?  I had to configure Panda Dome to use the proxy.

I'm not sure what mode it's in, how can I tell? 
I certainly have it always running in the background, as my ancient e-mail client won't display images without it.

7 minutes ago, AstroSkipper said:

Which version is your Panda Dome Essential of? 

It's version 21.01.00.
The 'About' page says copyright 2021, I guess they never got round to updating it!

 

[AstroSkipper]

14 minutes ago, Dave-H said:

It's version 21.01.00.
The 'About' page says copyright 2021, I guess they never got round to updating it!

I asked that as the most recent version of Panda Dome is actually 23.00.00.

[Dave-H]

Well I did install it using a file I downloaded some time ago!
I will download it again and see what version the new file is.
I would have thought it would have updated itself, but perhaps not.

[AstroSkipper]

38 minutes ago, Dave-H said:

I'm not sure what mode it's in, how can I tell? 
I certainly have it always running in the background, as my ancient e-mail client won't display images without it.

Just running the proxy in the background doesn't mean it is also used by a programme. What I meant is whether you're running ProxHTTPSProxy system-wide or not. In any case, Panda Dome has to use the proxy. Thats why I had to configure Panda Dome to use it, however, for activation only.

Edited 20 hours ago by AstroSkipper
Update of content

[AstroSkipper]

2 hours ago, Dave-H said:

I would have thought it would have updated itself, but perhaps not.

As far as I noticed, Panda seems to automatically update the programme only if it is too old. The version 21.01.00 wasn't updated on my system. OTH, the version 18.07.04 was updated to 20.02.01 which, however, isn't the most recent.

Edited 17 hours ago by AstroSkipper
Update of content

[VistaLover]

13 hours ago, Monroe said:

This version is the last one to support Windows XP, even though Microsoft links to an older version. There was never a 2015-2022 redistributable installer for Windows XP.

Per abbodi1406, 

https://github.com/abbodi1406/vcredist#windows-xp-notice

Quote

VC++ 2019 version 14.28.29213.0 = VisualCppRedist_AIO v0.35.0 is the last version compatible with Windows XP (NT 5.1), and Server 2003 / XP x64 (NT 5.2).

Direct link: 

https://download.visualstudio.microsoft.com/download/pr/566435ac-4e1c-434b-b93f-aecc71e8cffc/0D59EC7FDBF05DE813736BF875CEA5C894FFF4769F60E32E87BD48406BBF0A3A/VC_redist.x86.exe

MDL forums reference: 

https://forums.mydigitallife.net/threads/repack-visual-c-redistributable-runtimes-2020-11-10.76588/page-27#post-1630817

Quote

FYI: 

For old Windows XP PCs - last v2019 without issues = 14.28.29213.0 = VisualCppRedist_AIO_x86_x64_35.zip..

At later v2019 versions (14.28.29231+), msvcp140.dll has unresolved imports from kernel32.dll (generally non-critical):

ReleaseSRWLockExclusive (Vista+)
AcquireSRWLockExclusive (Vista+)

I can confirm that the installer is dual-signed (both SHA1+SHA256), thus it can be verified on XP SP3 (which ONLY supports SHA1 file signatures).

As for the installer of version 14.29.30139.0 referenced in the "community.pcgamingwiki.com" site, this has the direct link below (courtesy of abbodi1406): 

https://download.visualstudio.microsoft.com/download/pr/b929b7fe-5c89-4553-9abe-6324631dcc3a/4C6C420CF4CBF2C9C9ED476E96580AE92A97B2822C21329A2E49E8439AC5AD30/VC_redist.x86.exe

but it is only SHA256-signed, so I'm not sure if its signature can be verified under XP SP3 : 

Just my 2c  ...

[AstroSkipper]

Here is a short report on the Panda Dome version 20.02.01 currently installed on my computer.



This version runs very well under Windows XP without any performance problems. This Panda Dome version also does not significantly delay Windows startup. It only takes approx. 2 min. This is a good value for my old box. However, I have not yet been able to solve one problem. The application background remains green. No images can be loaded. Although it's not important, I don't understand why this is the case. Here is a screenshot of this issue and one taken from the settings where the image can be selected:





This issue has been the case in all versions of Panda Dome (18.07.04, 20.02.01, 21.01.00, 22.00.00, 22.02.01 and 22.03.05) installed on my Windows XP partition with all POSReady updates. This issue doesn't exist on my Windows XP partition without POSReady updates.

Edited 4 hours ago by AstroSkipper
Update of content

[NotHereToPlayGames]

I am in-process of installing XP POSReady2009 on a "demoted" 'spare' 18yr old computer.

Found this - https://msfn.org/board/topic/184770-howto-create-a-windows-xp-sp4-dvd-with-all-driverpacks-and-some-apps-repost/

This will be my very first POSReady.

 

Which version of Panda Dome shall I install first?

[NotHereToPlayGames]

On 1/11/2026 at 9:34 AM, Dave-H said:

I'll wait and see if you get a response from them before perhaps trying RogueKiller again.
If they say what is the last version which should work with XP, and whether it still gets pattern updates, then we can go from there.

This is my Panda Dome interface -

I do have all the POSReady updates installed BTW.

Still catching up.  Appears AstroSkipper's partition has other issues.  Not to state the obvious if it has already been discussed.  TON of action here lately in this thread and just getting started.

[Dave-H]

@AstroSkipper

Thanks for the report.
I'm using version 21 with no apparent impact on boot times, but I do have a quite powerful, although old, setup.
I have found an offline installer which is supposedly for version 23, but if I run the installer it says it has to first uninstall the version I've already got, which I'm not keen on doing as it's working so well. A shame that it won't just update. Strangely, the version numbers of the 21 and 23 installation files seem to be identical in the file properties, although they are obviously not the same, the 23 version is quite a bit larger.
There appears to be no mention of version numbers on the Panda site, which is unusual.
I might ask their chatbot what the latest version actually is, and whether 21 should have updated itself.