Microsoft AV Update Labels Chrome as Malware, Deletes Browser

Microsoft AV Update Labels Chrome as Malware, Deletes Browser

What do you do when good security programs go bad? You freak out and raise holy hell on the Internet, that's what. And that's exactly what several users of Microsoft Security Essentials did after a faulty definitions update honed in on installations of Google Chrome and labeled the browser as malware. Oops!

The good news is Microsoft is aware of the problem and has already issued another update, one that tells MSE to chillax and leave Chrome alone.


"On September 30th, 2011, an incorrect detection for PWS:Win32/Zbot was identified. On September 30th, 2011, Microsoft released an update that addresses the issue. Signature versions 1.113.672.0 and higher include this update. PWS:Win32/Zbot is a password-stealing trojan that monitors for visits to certain Web sites. It allows limited backdoor access and control and may terminate certain security-related processes," Microsoft said in a statement.

Without the new update, attempts to reinstall Chrome are blocked, though it appears beta builds of the browser are immune. According to Microsoft, about 3,000 MSE users were affected by this. If you're one of them, open up MSE, click the Update tab, press Update, and then reinstall Chrome.
0
+ -

"Only 3000 MSE users were affected? That tells you how (Un)popular MSE is. I recommend Avast Free Antivirus. Its free, and I never had any issues with it. Avast has always protected me from everything."

0
+ -

>> That tells you how (Un)popular MSE is.

That's exactly what I was thinking. Chrome has ~20% market share - probably somewhere close to 100 million installs. If their audience is representative of the norm, look for MSE to join MSAV and OneCare sometime soon.

Then again, the number of MSE users running Chrome may be disproportionate. People running Chrome are usually aware of MS's security track-record and avoiding IE because of it, whereas people running MSE are not.

0
+ -

x2 on avast optimus

0
+ -

there just might be a few more Avast converts have noticed some MSE users chest -thumping..and others looking for a change .get Avast, If they want to stick with MSE and Chrome no problem.the patch is in.

been using Avast fro years & no problems

0
+ -

Eh. I've used Avast, it felt not right. I mean sure, it works and get rids of the viruses but it's slow/inefficient and it kind of makes your system go slow really.

Speaking of which. I've used MSE for years and I have barely got a virus on the system, I mean it's done it's job well and it may have detected some false positives but most of the time it does get a virus right, plus I get all of these options to allow the virus if it is a false positive. Besides, My MSE didn't delete Chrome and I'm still going to use MSE because it's free, it's resource efficient and it's a hell of a lot better than AVG.

+1
+ -

""Only 3000 MSE users were affected? That tells you how (Un)popular MSE is. I recommend Avast Free Antivirus. Its free, and I never had any issues with it. Avast has always protected me from everything.""

Not really. The issue wasnt active for that long before MS pushed out an update. It just means that 3000 people did a scan during that small window of time AND didnt look at the scan results page before applying any actions. Any person who has average or above computer skills would look at the scan results page, see that it detected google chrome and would have told it to ignore the issue.

I know quite a few people who use MS's AV solution. It works really good, its very fast and not a resource hog and its free.

+3
+ -

I was a long-time advocate of Avast. It has since become bloated and full of adware just like Norton and McAfee. MSE is lightweight, effective, and although it's embarrassing to MS, *no one* is immune to false positives (including Avast, which once flagged a critical part of my Windows 2000 as "malware").

I am anything but a Microsoft fan, but the fact is that MSE is a good product, and it's free. If only Windows were as good!

0
+ -

I've got a Vista Ultimate x32 bit operating system that I use just to visit eBay & for internet banking. I use that free microsoft virus scan & also I have IE8 on that pc. Nothing has been caught & I do not expect anything to get caught, that is why I use their free scan because it is only used for eBay & Internet banking. On my other computer I have PC Tools Spyware doctor & their anti-virus program. So far it works okay. I've tried the free like Avast, lava, etc. I have noticed that when you get their free versions they only get rid of the smaller kind of infections, but when you pay for them that is when you get rid of the rest. Although I have noticed with lava though that when I used the free version it worked okay, but when I upgraded it to the buy level it seemed not to work no more. So I migrated to PC Tools Spyware doctor & the scan caught quite a few bugs that lava could not. Ever since than I have been with PC Tools.

0
+ -

AVG idnetified the SAME virus in a number of sql .dll files for quickbooks and other programs and completely broke those programs, I installed MSSE on the same machine and had no false positives.

0
+ -

Nice 'accident'

0
+ -

Some might have called this a ploy for browser dominance. Or a joke by some poor Microsoft sap. From what I have seen MSE is pretty decent for a free antivirus and it updates automatically unlike AVG.

+1
+ -

well at least this is minor compared to the blunder AVG had a while back  lol 

except for those that were using AVG

0
+ -

@omegadraco, That's the first thing I thought when I read the title to this article, then immediately Laughed Out Loud!!

It's hard to tell whether this is "genius" or was "stupidity" LOL Either way, at least it's fixed. :)

I have never used MSE before so I cannot comment on it's usability. I have used AVG and Avast many moons ago, until I found NOD32, it's now the only one I will ever use! (alongside Malwarebytes) I'm good to go :D

0
+ -

It's a combination of AVAST and MSE for me, and it works. But I should tell the truth and say that AVAST by itself works too. Smile

0
+ -

MSE works fine for me. It also didnt delete chrome. If it would have done that i would have kicked its ass.

-1
+ -

LLeCompte:
MSE works fine for me. It also didnt delete chrome.

Not here either. Chrome is still here and kicking.

0
+ -

I have got a pc that I use for online gaming & I've got three browsers that I use. 1) Aurora by Mozilla, 2) Chrome by Goolge and 3) IE8 by MS, but I use the IE8 only for emergencies ( I have had not one yet ). I have got PC Tools spyware doctor & nothing happens to me when gaming & I don't even have it in gaming mode. I use XP for the OS, so I don't have to worry about their free scan at all. I've been there & done that with vista a long time ago & I will never return to Microsoft's free anti-virus scan ever again with a gaming or a plain surfing pc. It's free scan only works if your pc is so damn old & you're so damn stingy to buy anything that eventually you'll catch a bug alright with their free scan, but their free scan must be at least 4 or more years behing in what others can catch now. Even with the free download scans you can catch some bug well before the free MS scan can.

-1
+ -

I personally don't use any anti-virus programs. They are a huge resource hog and I honestly haven't had any issues with viruses either.

+1
+ -

lifeasjosh:

I personally don't use any anti-virus programs. They are a huge resource hog and I honestly haven't had any issues with viruses either.

NOT THAT YOU KNOW OF!!! lol

 

0
+ -

lifeasjosh:
I personally don't use any anti-virus programs. ~They are a huge resource hog~

Maybe you should get a PC with a reasonable amount of resources to work with. My two AV programs use Jack Shite for resources.

I can remember worrying about my computer's resources many years ago and I'm glad those days are over.

0
+ -

We all know it was on purpose :P

0
+ -

I am running a Tobshiba with an 2.3ghz core i3 with 4gigs of ddr3 SDRAM on windows xp. However, I enjoy seeing 26 processes running in taskmgr.exe instead of 75. Even though I am running a very low number of applications, it is always best to streamline the computer as much as possible. If I can save 12megs of ram, then hey, thats still ram that I am saving and processing power for something else, more useful. I also don't use any background and use the old style GUI instead of the luna theme, to save on ram.its all about performance for me, i enjoy turning my computer on and waiting about 10.5 seconds for the computer to load, i've timed it with my cellphone. I also defrag it about 30+ times a day. It doesn't take long at all, maybe about...1:35 minutes. If you sit there and keep defraging your computer, you will notice the defrag keeps taking less and less time to finish. The more you defrag the better organized the platters are, the faster the computer can load application and boot and shutdown.

This is also why I don't use windows 7. I hate it. Runs at like 800+ megs just on idle. Windows XP can run on as little as 128megs! i still don't understand why microsoft made such a resource hog of an OS?! Why not make an OS that is widely supported and only uses like 50 megs on idle! that would be awesome!!!

I would be the guy to build (if money allowed) an SR-2 EVGA based computer with 48 gigs of DDR3, two core i7-990x, an OCZ Z-Drive R4 PCIe SSD, Two GIGABYTE GV-R699D5-4GD-B Radeon HD 6990 4GB 256-bit GDDR5, Two CORSAIR Professional Series Gold AX1200W PSU's, and pack it all into a mountain mods case...then install windows xp. Talk about available ram usage and loading times! Ah yes, totally awesome. (And yes, i do understand that windows xp doesn't support Directx11/latest software available or even would be able to use all the processing power.)

+1
+ -

lifeasjosh:
This is also why I don't use windows 7. I hate it. Runs at like 800+ megs just on idle. Windows XP can run on as little as 128megs! i still don't understand why microsoft made such a resource hog of an OS?! Why not make an OS that is widely supported and only uses like 50 megs on idle! that would be awesome!!!

Note, in order to get Windows XP to use that less memory you have to disable a whole lot of services and startup programs. Windows 7 in safe mode also runs the same amount as your XP install so I'm guessing it's a combination of knowing which services/things to disable to get the RAM amount lower.

Also I think your performance dream PC is kind of a pipe dream. For one, Windows 7 is built for SSD's so it would load up as quickly (if not quicker) than Windows XP and it would know how to use the TRIM function to extend the life of a hard drive, and it's obvious that 48GBs of RAM is going to amount to some crazy RAM usage but really, you only lose like 1.5 GB so it's inconsequential.

Also two power supplies; that's crazy overkill, even for that setup. I mean in all honesty you have like 2400W of power and that computer is only going to use up 1000W or so. Again, crazy overkill.

0
+ -

I agree with you about the defraging. I run Auslogics Disk Defrag all of the time, on all of my boxes. As for running XP on new hardware, no, not me. I enjoy the functionality of Win-7. I enjoy not having to ska-rew with the system all of the time.

0
+ -

I dont think defragging 30 times a day is a good thing lifeasjosh, that's gonna wear down the life of your hard drive by a lot if it has to erase and rewrite information onto new sectors so often, if your not adding and removing MASSIVE amounts of data every day, I think defragging your Hard Drives once a week or maybe even month would work just fine for keeping things loading a little quicker and not cause your hard drive to fail,

MSE is great, that in combination with Avast or Avg and Ad-Aware is a free, relatively lightweight way to protect your computer, even if once in a while an update is flawed and effects less than 10% of its users in a mildly negative manner (talking about the 3000 effected MSE users of course)

Login or Register to Comment
Post a Comment
Username:   Password: