XPSP3_QFE_UpdatePack for Windows XP Post-SP3 20180109

Windows XP Professional Update Pack discussion.
Post Reply
User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Sat Sep 18, 2010 1:42 pm

the update pack DOES NOT touch SFC at all. it is at default = enabled

it is with an addon or nlite that you may have to look at.

User avatar
Outbreaker
Posts: 703
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 8:06 am

Post by Outbreaker » Sat Sep 18, 2010 5:23 pm

You correct it was nlite if i disable SFC in nlite it will also disable the "Driver Signing" option in Windows XP grrr.

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Sat Sep 18, 2010 11:06 pm

Microsoft says : driver signing policy CANNOT be disabled/enabled via registry... for XP.

it can be temporary disabled and reenables by itself or permanently disabled by following certain steps ... either by running gspedit.msc or through Administrative Tools (the same thing)


to set it enabled-default (Warn) or disable it (Ignore or Block) during win setup or anyapplication_setup ..you have to add something like:
DriverSigningPolicy=Ignore or Block or Warn into anf inf file...

or rather:

HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Driver Signing","Policy",0x00000001,00

and plant it in HIVESFT.INF file in I386 Folder under [AddReg] Section.

BETTER read this till the end:
http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/11230-d ... ing-setup/

I was searching for this once too 8)

User avatar
vmanda
Posts: 1634
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:25 pm
Location: TM.Romania

Post by vmanda » Sun Sep 19, 2010 2:08 am

Also you can use Winnt.sif
Section Unattended into Winnt.sif wrote:[Unattended]
UnattendMode=.........
.................
DriverSigningPolicy=Ignore
NonDriverSigningPolicy=Ignore

User avatar
=[FEAR]=JIGSAW
Posts: 390
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 11:54 am
Location: Cape Town, South Africa

Post by =[FEAR]=JIGSAW » Sun Sep 19, 2010 3:41 am

vmanda wrote:Also you can use Winnt.sif
Section Unattended into Winnt.sif wrote:[Unattended]
UnattendMode=.........
.................
DriverSigningPolicy=Ignore
NonDriverSigningPolicy=Ignore
But those lines also disable the "repair" function on the CD .....
I usually delete them, since "drivepacks" adds them default to Winnt.sif .... but i prefer to have a repair option to use in case I need it :)

User avatar
vmanda
Posts: 1634
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:25 pm
Location: TM.Romania

Post by vmanda » Sun Sep 19, 2010 6:31 am

vmanda wrote:
user_hidden wrote:1.42:
added KB2158563 replaced KB981793 & KB2297272

Vmanda originally reported MU scanning was slow, it should be a lot faster now.
No time to test it today, but tommorow i will try to see if MU slow connection are solved.
Tested now. Issue on accesing MU solved for me too. No more than one minute to get updates list (Ie8).

Good work. Thanks for update pack.

User avatar
mf3imp
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:15 pm

Post by mf3imp » Sun Sep 19, 2010 6:44 am

Can I ask what is changed to make MU faster?

User avatar
vmanda
Posts: 1634
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:25 pm
Location: TM.Romania

Post by vmanda » Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:28 am

The answer is allready contained into my post:
user_hidden wrote:1.42:
added KB2158563 replaced KB981793 & KB2297272
Vmanda originally reported MU scanning was slow, it should be a lot faster now.
It seems that some newer updates are specially designed to slow down XP, making Vista and Seven more attractive ...

User avatar
Outbreaker
Posts: 703
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 8:06 am

Post by Outbreaker » Sun Sep 19, 2010 1:39 pm

Deleted because wrong topic.

User avatar
Siginet
Site Admin
Posts: 2894
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:07 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Post by Siginet » Mon Sep 20, 2010 2:03 pm

vmanda wrote:The answer is allready contained into my post:
user_hidden wrote:1.42:
added KB2158563 replaced KB981793 & KB2297272
Vmanda originally reported MU scanning was slow, it should be a lot faster now.
It seems that some newer updates are specially designed to slow down XP, making Vista and Seven more attractive ...
I always knew microsoft was going to do this. Recently I had really expected they were doing this. I have been noticing many of my recent installs of XP seemed to be getting slower.
Image
--Siginet--

Techware
Your Virtual Technician
Computer Management Software

User avatar
ricktendo64
Posts: 3213
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:27 am
Location: Honduras

Post by ricktendo64 » Mon Sep 20, 2010 2:24 pm

Siginet wrote:I always knew microsoft was going to do this. Recently I had really expected they were doing this. I have been noticing many of my recent installs of XP seemed to be getting slower.
Tell me something, do these XP installs you have by any chance have .net 4 installed?

I dont use .net 4 on XP because it slows down my network startup significantly

User avatar
vmanda
Posts: 1634
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:25 pm
Location: TM.Romania

Post by vmanda » Mon Sep 20, 2010 2:27 pm

Siginet wrote:............

I always knew microsoft was going to do this. Recently I had really expected they were doing this. I have been noticing many of my recent installs of XP seemed to be getting slower.
I just put "Automatic Updates" to disabled state. I activate it only when i have enough time to wait. BITS are allways to manual.

Also i remember the beta versions of sp3 packs, if i'm remember correct, 3876, i have integrated and tested, and worked so nice, incredible speedy.
After sp3 became final, 5512, i have wondored what happens, where is previous version speed.
Since then I suspect that Microsoft sabotaged speed, nobody would have bought Vista when XP was so fast.

Maybe somebody will investigate what big changes are from 3876(?) and 5512, maybe some of changes can be reversed.

User avatar
=[FEAR]=JIGSAW
Posts: 390
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 11:54 am
Location: Cape Town, South Africa

Post by =[FEAR]=JIGSAW » Mon Sep 20, 2010 3:37 pm

ricktendo64 wrote:
Siginet wrote:I always knew microsoft was going to do this. Recently I had really expected they were doing this. I have been noticing many of my recent installs of XP seemed to be getting slower.
Tell me something, do these XP installs you have by any chance have .net 4 installed?

I dont use .net 4 on XP because it slows down my network startup significantly
+1

But the post made here by RicaNeaga did the trick for me - http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.p ... 7&start=50

RicaNeaga wrote:In my case it was the Microsoft .NET Framework NGEN v4.0.30319_X86 service. It's probably on automatic. Set it on manual and see if there is a difference. :)

User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Mon Sep 20, 2010 5:57 pm

updated 20100920 ....

1.43:
updated Adobe Flash Player 10.1.85.3 ActiveX Control

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Mon Sep 20, 2010 6:02 pm

Siginet wrote:
vmanda wrote:The answer is allready contained into my post:
user_hidden wrote:1.42:
added KB2158563 replaced KB981793 & KB2297272
Vmanda originally reported MU scanning was slow, it should be a lot faster now.
It seems that some newer updates are specially designed to slow down XP, making Vista and Seven more attractive ...
I always knew microsoft was going to do this. Recently I had really expected they were doing this. I have been noticing many of my recent installs of XP seemed to be getting slower.
do'no if they do it on purpose, although practically possible, but they would expose themselves too much.. there are many wise "decompilers" out there...that one day might recognize this , not to speak about microsoft workers themselves that might spread this if it would be true, and from such a poit on... it will be a small step for them to devolve some funds based on any judge's decision... BUT it is true from what I've myself saw during many years that Microsoft ideea about these two: security and stability confuses way too much with sluggishness, they've dropped too easy on performance chapter, for the sake of "security and stability" reasons... there is no secrecy that they are on a huge battle against infections, info theft... and so on, as they are the widest spread platform.. targeted by too many interests 8) so I saw the've adopted many and complex conditionating ways to do a simple thing... for this reason. What they seem not to understand is that no matters how many certificates rights you impose... no matter how many limitations of IP's connections, SFC, LUA, bua , sua... :twisted: the final decision is still left to the novice user...to infect his own comp... by approving certain things to be accessed, opened and/or executed.. so I developed a skillfull hunting approach to reverse all those many many limitations and solve them only by using a good updated antivirus, complete pack.. with antispyware and firewall ... :twisted: MS is trying to anticipate and guess the reaction of the common user :D .. although this not being enough ..it keeps the system less targeted by infections... I like hacked services and dll-s, protocols and all that limits the system with the "good intentions" from MS :evil:

also let's not overlook that we are in possesion of a very old OS... XP !

Hardware changes too fast.. to give you only a simple example... I now keep the Prefetch completely disabled... my actual processor does not like to run something under any directives such as prefetch.. he runs smooth left free... BUT if I install the same windows on an older PC the reverse is true... I need prefetch in order to quickly launch or relaunch applications :wink:

XP it began in an IT era...and still going on another era... nobody forseseen all the repercusion of all the hardware changes... and subsequent software adjustment to let them run at full speed

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Mon Sep 20, 2010 6:47 pm

thanx for the update u_h :) you gave me my drugs

User avatar
=[FEAR]=JIGSAW
Posts: 390
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 11:54 am
Location: Cape Town, South Africa

Post by =[FEAR]=JIGSAW » Tue Sep 21, 2010 6:06 am

Thanks.

I see KB975558 has been included since 1.40 .... but after integration of 1.43 WU finds KB975558 as a "High-priority update" ... any good reason why i'm getting this ???

User avatar
5eraph
Site Admin
Posts: 4619
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Post by 5eraph » Tue Sep 21, 2010 6:31 am

You're integrating WMP11 which needs different files from KB975558 that are not included in the update pack.

User avatar
=[FEAR]=JIGSAW
Posts: 390
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 11:54 am
Location: Cape Town, South Africa

Post by =[FEAR]=JIGSAW » Tue Sep 21, 2010 7:44 am

5eraph wrote:You're integrating WMP11 which needs different files from KB975558 that are not included in the update pack.
Aah Cool, thanks ....
Only noticed now that THIS Addon has been updated to v2.3.0. (To include 975558) ... not sure how I missed this :rolleyes:

Thanking You Kindly. ;)

yumeyao
Moderator
Posts: 1718
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 9:24 pm
Location: Taiyuan, Shanxi, PR China

Post by yumeyao » Thu Sep 23, 2010 7:49 am

You missed KB982000.
Image
My work list(Hosted by dumpydooby)

User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Thu Sep 23, 2010 3:46 pm

yumeyao wrote:You missed KB982000.
didn't miss it opted out of ADAM in last pack, will have it in next patch tuesday release unless something else comes up.

goldznnz
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 11:11 am

Post by goldznnz » Fri Sep 24, 2010 7:33 pm

/\ /\

thanks for the update pack again! :mrgreen:

quick question to verify that the update pack was installed properly do i just follow rvm faqs:
browse to HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Updates. becasue when i do that i do not see "Updates" i only see a folder called sp4. I'm guessing this is the update pack? can someone verify this?

thanks guys!

User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Sat Sep 25, 2010 6:32 am

goldznnz wrote:/\ /\

thanks for the update pack again! :mrgreen:

quick question to verify that the update pack was installed properly do i just follow rvm faqs:
browse to HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Updates. becasue when i do that i do not see "Updates" i only see a folder called sp4. I'm guessing this is the update pack? can someone verify this?

thanks guys!
goto MU after install, if you get no prompts for critical updates the pack is installed.

you can check what updates are installed by going to a cmdprompt and typing "qfecheck" without the quotes. the qfe updates in the pack will be listed as "current on system".

goldznnz
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 11:11 am

Post by goldznnz » Sat Sep 25, 2010 3:45 pm

/\ /\

user_hidden I tried the qfechecks and works like a charm! just wondering if checking in the registry will work too?

User avatar
vmanda
Posts: 1634
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:25 pm
Location: TM.Romania

Post by vmanda » Sat Sep 25, 2010 3:55 pm

Use Nirsoft WinUpdatesList to get more detailed informations about installed updates and about the updated files/versions.

User avatar
ricktendo64
Posts: 3213
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:27 am
Location: Honduras

Post by ricktendo64 » Sat Sep 25, 2010 5:07 pm

goldznnz wrote:/\ /\

user_hidden I tried the qfechecks and works like a charm! just wondering if checking in the registry will work too?
Thats what qfecheck uses, if the file version does not match the one in the kb# regkey it will tell you that you need to reinstall the hotfix (also if its not digitally signed, this happens if you patch it with icons or are missing a .cat file)

User avatar
Outbreaker
Posts: 703
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 8:06 am

Post by Outbreaker » Sun Oct 03, 2010 5:30 am

HI :)

On some Computere with a dual core processor the CPU in device manager is showing as unknown device.
Without the update pack i have not this problem anyone else have this problem?

User avatar
mr_smartepants
Posts: 824
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 5:56 am
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK

Post by mr_smartepants » Sun Oct 03, 2010 7:46 am

Well I don't have a dual-core to test, but my quad-core Intel works fine.

Code: Select all

============ 
ACPI Devices 
============ 
ACPI\GENUINEINTEL_-_X86_FAMILY_6_MODEL_15\_0                : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU    Q6600  @ 2.40GHz
ACPI\GENUINEINTEL_-_X86_FAMILY_6_MODEL_15\_1                : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU    Q6600  @ 2.40GHz
ACPI\GENUINEINTEL_-_X86_FAMILY_6_MODEL_15\_2                : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU    Q6600  @ 2.40GHz
ACPI\GENUINEINTEL_-_X86_FAMILY_6_MODEL_15\_3                : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU    Q6600  @ 2.40GHz
Are you using an AMD dual-core? You'll need a driver for that then.
Image
Some heroes don't wear capes, they wear Kevlar and dog-tags!

marzsyndrome
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 6:01 am

Post by marzsyndrome » Sun Oct 03, 2010 6:23 pm

Thought I'd start a little query.

I used your update pack with a fresh XP SP3 installation a few weeks back (forget the date on the release) and it pretty much worked with flying colours. :)

However, recently I wanted to use ajua's switchless installer for Windows Live Messenger to do an easy and quick installation of Messenger without all the extra junk WL usually expects you to install. Although it installed well, when I attempted to get connected it wouldn't even try, and instead popped up a "couldn't connect" error. I clicked for more details, and it pointed me to this page, explaining a possible msxml3.dll issue. It links to the SP7 release but I'm aware you included SP10, so I don't know whether it's essentially asking me to downgrade. I couldn't sort out the problem so I uninstalled it. Do you know if it's definitely an issue it has with a newer msxml3.dll?

I should point out, however, that Pank's custom installer works without a problem, and it allowed me to connect up with Live. So I'm wondering if it has anything to do with the Communications platform it installed along the way. I'm confident ajua wouldn't do rubbish installers, and as far as I know nobody mentioned any problem with his WLM installer in the comments. So it's just piled on more confusion for me.

Still, I'd love to know if it's possible to install Pank's version silently. He uses msnpp.exe, which loads three MSIs included in the archive, and it all installs mostly silently save for one or two pop-up windows.

User avatar
mr_smartepants
Posts: 824
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 5:56 am
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK

Post by mr_smartepants » Mon Oct 04, 2010 1:41 am

Hmmm, well U_H would have the definitive answer, but looking at the first post this pack doesn't included msxml3 but msxml4 instead.
Yet looking in the pack, lo and behold, there's msxml3.dll sp10(8.100.1052.0). I'm not sure where it came from because M$ lists SP7 as the current version.

According to this M$ page, msxml4 doesn't replace msxml3 and both can be run concurrently.
MSXML 4.0 SP2 does not replace MSXML 3.0 because some obsolete and non-conformant features are no longer supported. You may run MSXML 4.0 and MSXML 3.0 and earlier versions concurrently
Strange, very strange. Sometimes newer does not equal better.
Image
Some heroes don't wear capes, they wear Kevlar and dog-tags!

yumeyao
Moderator
Posts: 1718
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 9:24 pm
Location: Taiyuan, Shanxi, PR China

Post by yumeyao » Mon Oct 04, 2010 2:44 am

You should also install "Windows Live Requisites Switchless" if you use ajua's installer.
Image
My work list(Hosted by dumpydooby)

User avatar
5eraph
Site Admin
Posts: 4619
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Post by 5eraph » Mon Oct 04, 2010 3:24 am

mr_smartepants wrote:Hmmm, well U_H would have the definitive answer, but looking at the first post this pack doesn't included msxml3 but msxml4 instead.
Yet looking in the pack, lo and behold, there's msxml3.dll sp10(8.100.1052.0). I'm not sure where it came from because M$ lists SP7 as the current version.
MSXML3 is indeed listed in the first post, mr_smartepants. It's just that Microsoft does not explicitly specify the version in the description, even though that particular KB addresses only MSXML3.
user_hidden wrote:KB2079403 - Vulnerability in Microsoft XML Core Services Could Allow Remote Code Execution
marzsyndrome wrote:It links to the SP7 release but I'm aware you included SP10
As far as I know, marzsyndrome, SP7 is no longer supported by Microsoft. The most recent update package used by user_hidden clearly updates any existing version of MSXML3 to SP10. And MSXML3 is not installed as a side by side assembly; SP7 and SP10 cannot coexist in system32.

User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Mon Oct 04, 2010 7:37 am

5eraph beat me to the answer......

msxml3 is at SP10 and has been in the pack since version 1.37_20100810

marzsyndrome
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 6:01 am

Post by marzsyndrome » Mon Oct 04, 2010 1:56 pm

yumeyao wrote:You should also install "Windows Live Requisites Switchless" if you use ajua's installer.
Thanks for the tip, I wondered if there was something else I was supposed to install first. The title is rather obscure for someone like me. Maybe if ajua made it a bit more clear on his site...

adric
Posts: 581
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 5:51 am

Post by adric » Fri Oct 08, 2010 8:49 pm

Looks like user_hidden is going to have some work on his hands.

"Microsoft has planned its biggest ever Patch Tuesday for October, with a total of 49 vulnerabilities set to be fixed."

Al

User avatar
5eraph
Site Admin
Posts: 4619
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Post by 5eraph » Fri Oct 08, 2010 9:48 pm

I guess that explains the absence of any other updates for XP/2003 over the past four weeks. But we're really only looking at 10 bulletins/packages for the update packs; not including .NET, Office, et cetera.

yumeyao
Moderator
Posts: 1718
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 9:24 pm
Location: Taiyuan, Shanxi, PR China

Post by yumeyao » Fri Oct 08, 2010 9:54 pm

I suppose 9, not 10?
Well, I see it, your XP x64 needs 10.

And there is still a non-security update counts.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/894199/en-us
Image
My work list(Hosted by dumpydooby)

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Sat Oct 09, 2010 1:16 am

adric wrote:Looks like user_hidden is going to have some work on his hands.

"Microsoft has planned its biggest ever Patch Tuesday for October, with a total of 49 vulnerabilities set to be fixed."

Al
I think updating pack may be something more automatic for u_h, that's why 5 or 50 shouldn't matter so much for him :D , except a few special updates...anyway this twesday he shouldn't plan to leave the house too far 8)

User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:33 am

anyone got coffee :?:

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:37 am

:) about the rumor of those 50 updates... maybe microsoft wants to transform xp intp w7 8)

User avatar
DaRk MaDnEsS
Posts: 168
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:15 pm
Location: Port Said,Egypt

Post by DaRk MaDnEsS » Sat Oct 09, 2010 9:34 am

nah MS wants to destroy XP want people to move to 7 by now

i already moved on kept XP for computer that can't handle 7

and they are really old pc :P

phox
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 1:45 pm

Post by phox » Tue Oct 12, 2010 12:28 am

@user_hidden

"Wondershare PC Health Check" found 57 system vulnerabilities (missing updates) in version 1.4.3 Update Pack, starting with KB950582 and ending with KB943729.

What kind of joke is this?

Thank you for great work!

User avatar
mr_smartepants
Posts: 824
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 5:56 am
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK

Post by mr_smartepants » Tue Oct 12, 2010 1:47 am

phox wrote:"Wondershare PC Health Check"
What kind of joke is this?
Indeed! "Wondershare"? That's the joke! :D
Image
Some heroes don't wear capes, they wear Kevlar and dog-tags!

User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Tue Oct 12, 2010 7:24 am

phox wrote:@user_hidden

"Wondershare PC Health Check" found 57 system vulnerabilities (missing updates) in version 1.4.3 Update Pack, starting with KB950582 and ending with KB943729.

What kind of joke is this?

Thank you for great work!
hope you didn't pay for the software :!:

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Tue Oct 12, 2010 12:23 pm

sharing a wonder... there is no update yet, I've checked MU :rolleyes: what time they have ? :x

User avatar
gabo
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 5:04 pm
Location: Biggest city in the world, Mexico City
Contact:

Post by gabo » Tue Oct 12, 2010 6:08 pm

vodacuza wrote:sharing a wonder... there is no update yet, I've checked MU :rolleyes: what time they have ? :x
Vodacuza, the list of updates for October is up. It contains the list of fixes for this month with their respective KB number.

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/securi ... 0-oct.mspx
gabo

User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Tue Oct 12, 2010 6:11 pm

updated 20101012

1.44:
updated Microsoft Malicious Software Removal Tool Key to v3.12
added KB979687 replaced KB923561 & KB957263
added KB981957 replaced KB2160329
added KB982132
added KB2279986 replaced KB980218
added KB2296011
added KB2345886 replaced KB982214
added KB2360937 replaced KB982802
added KB2360131 replaced KB2183461
added KB2378111 replaced KB979402
added KB2387149

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Tue Oct 12, 2010 6:33 pm

http://bayimg.com/gapOkaAcM
mine(s) detected :wink:
thanks u_h

User avatar
shiner
Posts: 655
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 4:18 am
Location: SE Asia

Post by shiner » Tue Oct 12, 2010 7:13 pm

Thanks again, u_h.
Much appreciated as always.
"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink."

Sm0ker
Posts: 107
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 5:45 pm
Location: UK

Post by Sm0ker » Tue Oct 12, 2010 7:14 pm

that was quick u_h. Thanks for the prompt update.

Post Reply