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

[WSC4]

I was very interested to stumble upon Monroe's post, July 12, about Malwarebytes version 1.75.0.1300

First of all, I am running XP 64-bit and for years I have been using Malwarebytes version 2.2.1.1043.  This is the only one I could find that installs and runs on XP 64-bit.  Unfortunately, some time ago Malwarebytes decided to block the downloading of the latest definitions for this version,

I have tested this out, and All versions listed above 2.2.1.1043 will not install on XP 64-bit.

1.75.0.1300 installs fine on XP 64-bit

I found this to be important thanks to AstroSkipper: deactivate the automatic programme update to avoid receiving an unwanted programme upgrade!

This happened to me about about 4 times after each press of the Check for Update button..  Thanks to AstroSkipper again: If updating doesn't work directly, try again, and again, and again until it works! From now on, you will receive the latest virus definitions. 

Using the program and scanning files works great on XP 64-bit

Edited September 6, 2023 by WSC4

[AstroSkipper]

10 hours ago, WSC4 said:

I was very interested to stumble upon Monroe's post, July 12, about Malwarebytes version 1.75.0.1300

First of all, I am running XP 64-bit and for years I have been using Malwarebytes version 2.2.1.1043.  This is the only one I could find that installs and runs on XP 64-bit.  Unfortunately, some time ago Malwarebytes decided to block the downloading of the latest definitions for this version,

I have tested this out, and All versions listed above 2.2.1.1043 will not install on XP 64-bit.

1.75.0.1300 installs fine on XP 64-bit

I found this to be important thanks to AstroSkipper: deactivate the automatic programme update to avoid receiving an unwanted programme upgrade!

This happened to me about about 4 times after each press of the Check for Update button..  Thanks to AstroSkipper again: If updating doesn't work directly, try again, and again, and again until it works! From now on, you will receive the latest virus definitions. 

Using the program and scanning files works great on XP 64-bit

Hello @WSC4! I am glad that Malwarebytes 1.75.0.1300 is working for you under Windows XP 64-bit with the help of my instructions. I personally couldn't test it under this OS because I only use Windows XP Professional SP3. Therefore, thanks for your report! 

Edited September 6, 2023 by AstroSkipper
Update of content

[WSC4]

I tried a bit of a hack and installed version 1.75.0.1300 and version 2.2.1.1043 in different directories as: C:\Program Files (x86)\Malwarebytes_1  C:\Program Files (x86)\Malwarebytes_2

I ran version 1.75.0.1300 and successfully downloaded the latest definitions.  The definitions are in the rules.ref file in:

C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\Malwarebytes\Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware\rules.ref

 

The install of Version 2.2.1.1043 has a similar directory but without the apostrophe, and I copied rules.ref from the version 1.75.0.1300 directory into the Version 2.2.1.1043 directory.

 

Loaded version 2.2.1.1043 and the latest definitions are there.  

Unfortunately,  running a scan will get past Check For Updates, Pre-scan Operations and Scan File System.  But it will then loop back and loop back again.  I think the files in the Configuration folder could be wrong or not up to date.  Any ideas please?

Edited September 10, 2023 by WSC4

[AstroSkipper]

5 hours ago, WSC4 said:

I tried a bit of a hack and installed version 1.75.0.1300 and version 2.2.1.1043 in different directories as: C:\Program Files (x86)\Malwarebytes_1  C:\Program Files (x86)\Malwarebytes_2

I ran version 1.75.0.1300 and successfully downloaded the latest definitions.  The definitions are in the rules.ref file in:

C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\Malwarebytes\Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware\rules.ref

 

The install of Version 2.2.1.1043 has a similar directory but without the hyphen, and I copied rules.ref from the version 1.75.0.1300 directory into the Version 2.2.1.1043 directory.

 

Loaded version 2.2.1.1043 and the latest definitions are there.  

Unfortunately,  running a scan will get past Check For Updates, Pre-scan Operations and Scan File System.  But it will then loop back and loop back again.  I think the files in the Configuration folder could be wrong or not up to date.  Any ideas please?

@WSC4! I already investigated the possibility to port definition updates from Malwarebytes v1 to Malwarebytes v2 here:

On 7/19/2023 at 2:16 PM, AstroSkipper said:

The versions v1, v2 and v3 of Malwarebytes each have different formats in which the virus definitions are stored. Although MBAM v1 and v2 store the virus definitions in the file rules.ref, these files still differ. MBAM v3 has completely different files for storing virus definition called rules.mbdb, and additionally the files wprot.mbdb and wprot2.mbdb. In any case, their virus definitions cannot be exchanged among each other.

Cheers, AstroSkipper

That is the reason why I have come to this conclusion:

On 7/20/2023 at 12:32 AM, AstroSkipper said:

I also tried to reactivate Malwarebytes Anti-Malware v2, but every time I wanted to update the virus definitions, I got the message: "Unable to access update server". The reason seems to be a certificate problem. This is the official statement:

Quote

The cause is due to a recent build certificate that needed to be updated for all of our current software. The older versions of the software don't support adding the new certificate.

For fun, I also tried a connection via my TLS 1.3 proxy, unfortunately also without any success. The version I tried was Malwarebytes Anti-Malware 2.2.1.1043. The last database version was apparently 2022.5.20.4.
Rest in peace! 

Therefore, I don't think there will be ever a working solution for porting definition updates. 

Cheers, AstroSkipper 

[WSC4]

Thanks, AstroSkipper, for letting me know about this.

I did not know about your post on July 19.  I wish I had, as it would have saved me countless hours of trying to get it to work.

The more I think about it, I am not surprised it does not work.  Malwarebytes probably changed the design of the definitions file to be different and more efficient for their later programs.  Also, they probably don't want people to use their old, outdated (their opinion) programs and encourage you to buy their latest pro version.

I'll keep Malwarebytes 1.75.0.1300 installed, but I think I need to try more that you recommend.  Your second choice is Panda Antivirus.  I'll try this and let you know.

Edited September 10, 2023 by WSC4

[Vistapocalypse]

5 hours ago, WSC4 said:

I think I need to try more that you recommend.  Your second choice is Panda Antivirus.  I'll try this and let you know.

There appears to be contradictory information about Panda’s system requirements with respect to Windows XP. It is said to be compatible with “SP3 or higher” here (as mentioned by AstroSkipper in his page 1 article on Panda), which would seem to exclude XP x64. On the other hand, the  minimum requirements here specifically mention “32 and 64-bit,” but might perhaps refer to a different Panda product. (I’m not very familiar with Panda’s products due to a bad experience 8 years ago.) So yes, confirmation from an XP x64 user would be enlightening. 

[mina7601]

49 minutes ago, Vistapocalypse said:

On the other hand, the minimum requirements here specifically mention “32 and 64-bit,” but might perhaps refer to a different Panda product. 

If you go to the bottom of that website from that link, you will see: "Panda Security for Desktops is installed from AdminSecure. Read more about the requirements for installing Panda AdminSecure installation.", so yes, it is referring to a different Panda product.

Edited September 10, 2023 by mina7601

[Saxon]

Panda product should work as intended because XP SP3 x86 = XP SP2 x64, no worries.

 

[George King]

2 hours ago, Saxon said:

Panda product should work as intended because XP SP3 x86 = XP SP2 x64, no worries.

 

Nope, XP x86 is 5.1 instead of XP x64 which is 5.2.

[Vistapocalypse]

6 hours ago, mina7601 said:

so yes, it is referring to a different Panda product.

It would be very strange if some Panda products support XP x64 while others only support XP SP3 x86. Not inconceivable perhaps, but the contradictory information is more likely attributable to a writer who is not very knowledgeable about Windows XP. It will be interesting to hear from WSC4 if he tests Panda.

[Dixel]

4 hours ago, George King said:

Nope, XP x86 is 5.1 instead of XP x64 which is 5.2.

Just like NT 6.1 and 6.2! But it's even better, means the software will definitely work on a higher OS build.

[AstroSkipper]

If a manufacturer specifies the following as system requirements

Quote

Compatible with: Windows 10, Windows 8/8.1, Windows 7, Windows Vista, and Windows XP (SP3 or higher)

then the programme, in this case Panda Free Antivirus, should actually run under Windows XP 64 Bit. But let's face it, most manufacturers probably don't really test their programmes under all old, abandoned operating systems anymore. Therefore, the users simply have to test it themselves.  And that means we have to do a part of the manufacturers' job if we want to use their programmes under these legacy OSes. 

Edited September 11, 2023 by AstroSkipper
Update of content

[VistaLover]

15 hours ago, Vistapocalypse said:

It will be interesting to hear from WSC4 if he tests Panda.

6 hours ago, AstroSkipper said:

Therefore, the users simply have to test it themselves.

Agreed on both ; as a consequence, I find the recent discussion in this page a bit "premature" ; as a Vista user, I have found out by now (often the "painful" way ) that both "officially" and "non-officially" (more so ) advertised OS compatibilities with "legacy" MS OSes are to be taken cum grano salis ; as the old adage goes: "the proof is in the pudding"; @WSC4, you shall have the last word on this ...

[AstroSkipper]

4 hours ago, VistaLover said:

both "officially" and "non-officially" (more so ) advertised OS compatibilities with "legacy" MS OSes are to be taken cum grano salis ; as the old adage goes: "the proof is in the pudding"

Right!  I love such Latin phrases as you already know. And the proof is (as always) in the pudding. 

[Saxon]

On 9/10/2023 at 11:24 PM, George King said:

Nope, XP x86 is 5.1 instead of XP x64 which is 5.2.

The original XP64 (2001) is not 5.2, and what you mean is the one that was based on Server 2003.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP_editions

"Windows XP 64-Bit Edition". Not to be confused with Windows XP Professional x64 Edition, which was designed for AMD64/EM64T (x86-64) architecture."

And if you want to be that pedantic, the developers of Panda wrote "Windows XP (32/64 bits)", not Windows XP Professional x64 Edition.

https://www.pandasecurity.com/en/support/card?id=40003

The main point is that both 64 editions are clearly off-topic here.

Have a nice day.