What in the hell are they actually?

"More information" and "Support information" provide zero information.

Any insight would be appreciated.
--
Jeff Barnett

Jeff Barnett wrote:

> What in the hell are they actually?
>
> "More information" and "Support information" provide zero information.
>
> Any insight would be appreciated.

Both those updates have something to do with Microsoft Security
Essentials (MSE). Even if you don't have it installed, the update wants
to update system files that could be used by it.

https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Home.aspx
Could not find the updates there in a search, but then Microsoft
discontinued support on Windows 7 back in Jan 2015 for mainstream
support and Jan 2020 for extended support. Once a product is
discontinued, Microsoft starts to remove support pages.

I had the same issue with Skype. Despite that I never installed Skype,
and checked it was on not installed, updates still wanted to update
Skype support files. Back in Windows 7 where users still had a choice,
I would configure the update to not notify again (Hide Update) ... until
the next version of the same update since the Ignore flag only works on
a per-version basis, and when a later version shows up then the updates
reappear.

If you are using MSE then you want the updates. If you are instead
using a 3rd-party anti-virus program, make sure MSE is uninstalled (only
one AV should be active at a time), and hide any updates related to any
MS products you don't have installed (but which the updates might want
to update files that could be used by them). If you are using MSE but
don't want any updates to it, or you don't have MSE (it isn't installed)
because you use some other AV software, just select to hide those
updates. You won't get prompted about them again (until a later version
shows up for them).

On 4/10/2022 5:33 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
> Jeff Barnett wrote:
>
>> What in the hell are they actually?
>>
>> "More information" and "Support information" provide zero information.
>>
>> Any insight would be appreciated.
>
> Both those updates have something to do with Microsoft Security
> Essentials (MSE). Even if you don't have it installed, the update wants
> to update system files that could be used by it.
>
> https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Home.aspx
> Could not find the updates there in a search, but then Microsoft
> discontinued support on Windows 7 back in Jan 2015 for mainstream
> support and Jan 2020 for extended support. Once a product is
> discontinued, Microsoft starts to remove support pages.
>
> I had the same issue with Skype. Despite that I never installed Skype,
> and checked it was on not installed, updates still wanted to update
> Skype support files. Back in Windows 7 where users still had a choice,
> I would configure the update to not notify again (Hide Update) ... until
> the next version of the same update since the Ignore flag only works on
> a per-version basis, and when a later version shows up then the updates
> reappear.
>
> If you are using MSE then you want the updates. If you are instead
> using a 3rd-party anti-virus program, make sure MSE is uninstalled (only
> one AV should be active at a time), and hide any updates related to any
> MS products you don't have installed (but which the updates might want
> to update files that could be used by them). If you are using MSE but
> don't want any updates to it, or you don't have MSE (it isn't installed)
> because you use some other AV software, just select to hide those
> updates. You won't get prompted about them again (until a later version
> shows up for them).
>

One article says KB2902907 was "pulled".
But even that hint, explains nothing. It doesn't
say why they pulled it -- it could be pulled for
old age or supercedes.

I'd try tracking it in archive.org, but maybe there was
never really a KB article ?

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/890830 # canonical form

https://www.archive.org/web/*/http://support.microsoft.com/kb/890830 # golly, this works

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2902907 # but not the ops numbers
# not in archive.org either

I'm just holding it wrong. Right ?

I also tried looking in a few wsusoffline folders, and don't
see those numbers either. But that was a long shot, and I wasn't
counting on that working out.

And Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer (MBSA 2.3) no longer
works, because wsusscn2.cab is SHA256 signed, and the MBSA never
got an update to use that signing, so it stops when it cannot
verify the cab. MBSA used to be able to list the updates missing
from a computer, when it was working.

This is why we turn off Windows Update. Not worth the bother. Useful
tools broken. Etc. Screw security.

Paul

On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 11:42:39 -0600, Jeff Barnett wrote:
> What in the hell are they actually?
>
> "More information" and "Support information" provide zero information.
>
> Any insight would be appreciated.

Those are installers for different versions of Microsoft Security Essentials
(MSE).

KB2902907 is for v4.4.
KB3140479 is for v4.9.

Since MSE exists only as additional tool. It's not included in Windows.
And v4.4 is the last version which still support Windows XP.

On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 at 09:14:44, JJ <jj4public@gmail.com> wrote (my
responses usually FOLLOW):
>On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 11:42:39 -0600, Jeff Barnett wrote:
>> What in the hell are they actually?
>>
>> "More information" and "Support information" provide zero information.
>>
>> Any insight would be appreciated.
>
>Those are installers for different versions of Microsoft Security Essentials
>(MSE).

Thanks for that.
>
>KB2902907 is for v4.4.
>KB3140479 is for v4.9.

Was there a later version still compatible with 7?
>
>Since MSE exists only as additional tool. It's not included in Windows.
>And v4.4 is the last version which still support Windows XP.

I don't _seem_ to have 3140479 (I can't see any obvious way of actually
_searching_ the update history): I may never have installed MSE (always
had some other AV - AVG I think on this machine). Are there any
_dis_advantages to getting it (assuming I still can)? Such as, maybe, it
breaking any well-known useful hacks, fighting AV, etc.?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Do you want to be right, or friends?"
- a friend quoted by Vicky Ayech in UMRA, 2018-12-4

On 4/11/2022 4:50 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 at 09:14:44, JJ <jj4public@gmail.com> wrote (my
> responses usually FOLLOW):
>> On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 11:42:39 -0600, Jeff Barnett wrote:
>>> What in the hell are they actually?
>>>
>>> "More information" and "Support information" provide zero information.
>>>
>>> Any insight would be appreciated.
>>
>> Those are installers for different versions of Microsoft Security
>> Essentials
>> (MSE).
>
> Thanks for that.
>>
>> KB2902907 is for v4.4.
>> KB3140479 is for v4.9.
>
> Was there a later version still compatible with 7?
>>
>> Since MSE exists only as additional tool. It's not included in Windows.
>> And v4.4 is the last version which still support Windows XP.
>
> I don't _seem_ to have 3140479 (I can't see any obvious way of actually
> _searching_ the update history): I may never have installed MSE (always
> had some other AV - AVG I think on this machine). Are there any
> _dis_advantages to getting it (assuming I still can)? Such as, maybe, it
> breaking any well-known useful hacks, fighting AV, etc.?

When I started to update with one of them thinking it was the standard
definitions update, I got a nasty surprise: I was asked to read and
accept a bunch of conditions that looked looked like permissions for M$
to fish. Since, as I said in my original message, `"More information"
and "Support information" provide zero information.', i.e., I had no
idea what it did, I blew the whole process off.

I'm not answering the questions you've ask I know; I'm just advising
caution with this stuff.
--
Jeff Barnett

On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 11:50:26 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>
> I don't _seem_ to have 3140479 (I can't see any obvious way of actually
> _searching_ the update history): I may never have installed MSE (always
> had some other AV - AVG I think on this machine). Are there any
> _dis_advantages to getting it (assuming I still can)? Such as, maybe, it
> breaking any well-known useful hacks, fighting AV, etc.?

Windows 7 already includes Windows Defender, but since it and MSE are both
made by Microsoft, and AFAIK there's no warning about having both installed,
I could only assume that both are already designed to be aware of each
other. Meaning that they won't hinder each other's way.

It would be a different story if there's a third party AV. It's not a good
idea to have multiple realtime AV engines active at the same time,
especially if any one of them is not aware of other AVs. FYI, most don't. In
this case, keeping only one realtime AV engine active, is highly
recommended. Other AVs can be installed in the system as long as there is
only one active realtime AV engine in the system. Meaning that, the rest of
the AVs only serve as an on-demand AV scanner. That's one important rule for
having many AVs in one system. Though, installing other AVs when there's
already an AV engine active in the system, can be challenging (but not
impossible). It should never be tried by those who aren't well experienced
in trouble shooting and system recovery.

On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 11:50:26 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>
> Was there a later version still compatible with 7?

MSE v4.10 was the last version. It's compatible with Vista and Win7.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=5201

On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 at 22:42:40, JJ <jj4public@gmail.com> wrote (my
responses usually FOLLOW):
>On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 11:50:26 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>
>> Was there a later version still compatible with 7?
>
>MSE v4.10 was the last version. It's compatible with Vista and Win7.
>
>https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=5201

Thanks.

(It said

"Version: 4.10.0209.0 Date Published:
11/29/2016
File Name: File Size:
MSEInstall.exe 14.4 MB
MSEInstall.exe 11.7 MB", so I didn't know whether to get MSEInstall.exe
or MSEInstall.exe, but subsequent poking around showed - as I expected -
that the smaller one is the x86 one, the other being the amd64 one.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Practicall every British actor with a bus pass is in there ...
Barry Norman (on "The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel" [2011]), RT 2015/12/12-18

On 4/12/2022 9:41 AM, JJ wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 11:50:26 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>
>> I don't _seem_ to have 3140479 (I can't see any obvious way of actually
>> _searching_ the update history): I may never have installed MSE (always
>> had some other AV - AVG I think on this machine). Are there any
>> _dis_advantages to getting it (assuming I still can)? Such as, maybe, it
>> breaking any well-known useful hacks, fighting AV, etc.?
>
> Windows 7 already includes Windows Defender, but since it and MSE are both
> made by Microsoft, and AFAIK there's no warning about having both installed,
> I could only assume that both are already designed to be aware of each
> other. Meaning that they won't hinder each other's way.
>
> It would be a different story if there's a third party AV. It's not a good
> idea to have multiple realtime AV engines active at the same time,
> especially if any one of them is not aware of other AVs. FYI, most don't. In
> this case, keeping only one realtime AV engine active, is highly
> recommended. Other AVs can be installed in the system as long as there is
> only one active realtime AV engine in the system. Meaning that, the rest of
> the AVs only serve as an on-demand AV scanner. That's one important rule for
> having many AVs in one system. Though, installing other AVs when there's
> already an AV engine active in the system, can be challenging (but not
> impossible). It should never be tried by those who aren't well experienced
> in trouble shooting and system recovery.

One of the symptoms problems I noted with my systems was an Action
Center notice that I did not have an AV program. I was taken to an
"online list" of potential 3rd party candidates. That list provided by
M$ was empty. I believe that is there way of making a mess of useless
alerts unless you except their software, et al.

Two relevant things I said in prior messages: 1) I have been and am
using ESET NOD32 and 2) one of three updates offered at the time wanted
me to accept "terms and conditions" that looked rather unwholesome and
that was when I knew this was not an ordinary definition update and blew
the whole thing off.
--
Jeff Barnett

On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 11:17:43 -0600, Jeff Barnett wrote:
>
> I believe that is there way of making a mess of useless
> alerts unless you except their software, et al.

Specific Action Center notification can be disabled in Action Center's
setting.

> 2) one of three updates offered at the time wanted
> me to accept "terms and conditions" that looked rather unwholesome and
> that was when I knew this was not an ordinary definition update and blew
> the whole thing off.

Good perception.

On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 17:51:01 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>
> (It said
>
> "Version: 4.10.0209.0 Date Published:
> 11/29/2016
> File Name: File Size:
> MSEInstall.exe 14.4 MB
> MSEInstall.exe 11.7 MB", so I didn't know whether to get MSEInstall.exe
> or MSEInstall.exe, but subsequent poking around showed - as I expected -
> that the smaller one is the x86 one, the other being the amd64 one.)

It's a good habit to always hover over a link to see what URL it is pointing
to first, before clicking it. It'll help us from falling into scam/ad sites,
and downloading a software downloader instead of the actual software itself.

On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 at 14:24:43, JJ <jj4public@gmail.com> wrote (my
responses usually FOLLOW):
>On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 17:51:01 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>
>> (It said
>>
>> "Version: 4.10.0209.0 Date Published:
>> 11/29/2016
>> File Name: File Size:
>> MSEInstall.exe 14.4 MB
>> MSEInstall.exe 11.7 MB", so I didn't know whether to get MSEInstall.exe
>> or MSEInstall.exe, but subsequent poking around showed - as I expected -
>> that the smaller one is the x86 one, the other being the amd64 one.)
>
>It's a good habit to always hover over a link to see what URL it is pointing
>to first, before clicking it. It'll help us from falling into scam/ad sites,
>and downloading a software downloader instead of the actual software itself.

I think that's the "poking around" I did. But rather poor design of that
particular list, all the same.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Given an infinite number of monkeys you won't _just_ get Shakespeare,
unfortunately...
Ray (@SkiingMouse) on Twitter, 9:21 am ú 11 Aug 2020