Latest definitions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Menno Hershberger
  • Start date Start date
M

Menno Hershberger

Reading RD's earlier post about definitions being up to 5791 and not being
able to get mine to update past 5699, I wound up doing a complete uninstall
and reinstall. This put my definitons back to 5687 (I think it was). Anyway
an update took it back up to 5699 again. What's with the 5791? Does it
actually exist?
 
No--there's a bug of some sort--you'll see some posts from me with wierd def
numbers in them too--I wasn't making those up--they appeared in the gui and
had no resemblance to reality. Some bit is getting shifted and the result
is a number that isn't real--this thing is full of bugs.

--
FAQ for Microsoft Antispyware:
http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

Ron Chamberlin said:
Hi Menno,
Looks like 'typo virus' to me. :) 5699 is the current def set.

Go here http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;892519
for the latest def dates and hashes.

Ron Chamberlin
MS-MVP
 
Well, the definitions in Help About usually do not correspond with the ones
on check for updates.

--

Andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

Bill Sanderson said:
No--there's a bug of some sort--you'll see some posts from me with wierd
def numbers in them too--I wasn't making those up--they appeared in the
gui and had no resemblance to reality. Some bit is getting shifted and
the result is a number that isn't real--this thing is full of bugs.
 
Yup. "full of bugs" is what I said--and, no offense to the original
programmers-- it sure is true!
 
Bill Sanderson said:
No--there's a bug of some sort--you'll see some posts from me with wierd def
numbers in them too--I wasn't making those up--they appeared in the gui and
had no resemblance to reality. Some bit is getting shifted and the result
is a number that isn't real--this thing is full of bugs.

I'm showing '5699' as the current defs, Bill.
On two machines.

Silj

--
siljaline

MS - MVP Windows (IE/OE) & Security (AH-VSOP)
__________________________________________
Security Tools Updates
http://aumha.net/viewforum.php?f=31

(Reply to group, as return address
is invalid - that we may all benefit)
 
That's correct, but if you check often enough on a bunch of machines,
there's sometimes a jump--I'd wondered if it was 64 in the number, but I
think not. Strange, but I've seen it myself, and more than once.
 
Bill Sanderson said:
That's correct, but if you check often enough on a bunch of machines,
there's sometimes a jump--I'd wondered if it was 64 in the number, but I
think not. Strange, but I've seen it myself, and more than once.

I've run a manual attempting to re-create the reported glitch and I'm not
seeing it - will do, if it shows up.

Regards,
Silj

--
siljaline

MS - MVP Windows (IE/OE) & Security (AH-VSOP)
__________________________________________
Security Tools Updates
http://aumha.net/viewforum.php?f=31

(Reply to group, as return address
is invalid - that we may all benefit)
 
Back
Top