On Feb 19, 6:06Â am, Jose wrote:
> On Feb 19, 4:32Â am, "Ronin" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > A friend's son's machine is relatively new for XP (2005), but it is sorely
> > lacking in RAM, something that will be remedied as soon as Crucial delivers
> > on Monday. It was also wildly inundated with spyware, etc., but no viruses
> > according to Avast! Took a couple of days, but it seems relatively clean
> > now. Probably some permanent damage, but clean reinstall is something I'm
> > trying to avoid.
>
> > Meanwhile, being an impatient sort of person, I still tried to install SP3
> > before upping the RAM. The install failed at first due to permissions issues
> > which I thought I had remedied using SUBINACL as described here:http://www.askvg.com/windows-xp-service-pack-3-sp3-setup-error-access...
>
> > The install actually finished after several hours -- 256MB RAM for WinXP is
> > a
> > crime, Dell should be held responsible for even allowing such a
> > configuration. Anyway, when I rebooted, it showed itself updating things
> > before logging on (the way Windows Updates often do.) But after loggingon,
> > two command windows popped up. One did whatever and went away quickly, but
> > the other one showed a dozen or two responses, all of them "Access denied"
> > (may not be the exact phrase.)
>
> > I plan to reinstall SP3 when the new RAM arrives (unless that is
> > contraindicated), but I suspect that won't solve this issue. My assumption
> > is that the errors mean that the install wasn't entirely successful, but I'm
> > not stuck on that. Maybe the responses are expected in certain
> > circumstances. Still, if there is anything more I can do to ensure a clean
> > installation, please tell me all about it (or them.)
>
> > Much thanks,
>
> > --
> > Ronin
>
> You did not mention if you followed the SP3 installation directions.
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/950717
I did check that page, and the only thing that isn't SOP is the issue
about the two updates that need to be uninstalled. They're not
installed so that was that. I checked the error listings, and while it
gave me hints about earlier permissions errors, they don't appear to
cover my issue, the question about the post logon scripts. I later saw
the issue of DoRegistryUpdates failing, but only after I'd already
dealt with it based upon info from the site I mentioned in my first
post. It's fixed by installing SUBINACL.
> It includes solutions to the access denied issues that come about by
> not following the recommended installation procedures, why they happen
> and what to do about it.
> You should not need to download any third party solutions, ideas, etc.
> to install SP3.
>
> I would think that if I got a single error that defied explanation
> during any SP3 install, I would just start over.
Which I did, at least four times. Each time I researched and remedied
the error. It's just that this last time when the installation went
through to the end and I rebooted and then saw one console for a
couple of seconds with no text showing (usually normal), and then the
second console window that listed one "access denied" message after
another -- it's got me stumped. Daave says that if the winver says
it's SP3 then SP3 it is, but it just nags me that all those commands
returned those errors. Makes me feel all cold and clammy.
> I would recommend expanding your malicious software detection horizons
> a bit. Â No single program knows about everything and it is easy for me
> to infect my computer on purpose and Avast! will miss some infections
> every time. Â It is not terribly bright about some things, and I have
> concluded it is weak, a system resource hog and a waste of time. Â But
> that is my opinion.
I agree that no one program can catch all viruses. And when there's
any question I run lots of various scans with the usual players. But
you can only run one AV background scanner at a time, and Avast has
proven to be (in my own experience), easy to use and dirt cheap (hard
to beat a price of $0). I don't know what tests or comparisons you've
run, but I'd be interested in seeing the results, and knowing what
things you're talking about that Avast! isn't too bright about? As for
being a system resource hog, I'm not clear on your meaning. You can't
be talking about Windows Resources from the 9x models. Do you mean
RAM? Or is there some other part of the architecture you're referring
to?
> Depending on your Avast! installation options and what pieces you
> chose to install (or did you just let it install everything?), you
> probably have a bunch of Avast! things running you do not need and can
> thwart an SP3 installation and reduce your performance - a lot. Â If
> you decide to stick with Avast! you may want to uninstall it all,
> clean up the mess and  then uninstall/reinstall SP3 properly so there
> are no errors (using the directions), then rethink how to install
> Avast! again with less overhead for your system resources.
Avast is no different from most major-brand AVs and their "pile it
higher" mentality. In fact it's rather at the top of the list in this
regard when comparing "suites". And no, I don't install all scanners.
Even if they are all installed, I generally only enable Standard, Web,
and Network scanners. For home users, I often don't even bother to
install that last one if the home's machines aren't sharing. On the
other hand, the owner of this machine needs as much protection from
himself as I can build into it, so I'll enable the rest of the shields
as well, except the mail shield which I'm pretty sure is unnecessary
when there's no local email client being used. Heck, it's unnecessary
even when there *is* a local email client and the user is minmally
educated, but like I said...
> 256MB RAM is fine for some people. Â It has served me well for many
> years but I run a pretty lean configuration.
>
> You do not want your system to be relatively clean, you want it to be
> squeaky clean.
1. It's not my machine, thank Gates.
2. The owner is very likely to have this thing reinfected to the gills
within weeks, anyway, even after a perfectly clean install and as much
protection as I can pile on. If relatively clean manages to pass my
own tests, it's going to have to be good enough, at least until I have
more spare time to do it right and to give the guy the training he
needs.
> Perform some scans for malicious software, then fix any remaining
> issues:
>
> Download, install, update and do a full scan with these free malware
> detection programs:
>
> Malwarebytes (MBAM): Â http://malwarebytes.org/
> SUPERAntiSpyware: (SAS): Â http://www.superantispyware.com/
>
> They can be uninstalled later if desired.
>
> If you want some ideas about your configuration, start here:
>
> To eliminate questions and guessing, please provide additional
> information about your system.
>
> Click Start, Run and in the box enter:
>
> msinfo32
>
> Click OK, and when the System Summary info appears, click Edit, Select
> All, Copy and then paste the information back here.
>
> There will be some personal information (like System Name and User
> Name), and whatever appears to be private information to you, just
> delete it from the pasted information
I don't see anything there that could possibly be of any further use.
Just a couple of things that have already been covered quite a bit
(RAM and WINVER). But thanks! I didn't respond to your post earlier
because it didn't show up on the msnews servers. I really am
interested in a more detailed account of your experiences with Avast,
and I know it's time I did another massive review of the field. Last
one I did was four years ago, having been out of the business
(actually more like outside civil society altogether).
Thanks again,
--
Ronin
Here's my reply: