McAfee update causing issues

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by stapp, Apr 21, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. stapp

    stapp Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    Posts:
    7,270
    Location:
    England
  2. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,818
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
  3. stapp

    stapp Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    Posts:
    7,270
    Location:
    England
    That page never seems to load IBK.

    Does it for you?
     
  4. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,818
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    Yes, but its slow (I copied it, see below). Probably too many users loading it right now (on another mcafee subsite I get the message:

    Site Undergoing Maintenance

    This site is currently down, but will be back shortly.

    (Apr 21)
    Note:

    Please wait a few minutes, and try doing whatever it was that you were doing again.


     
  5. stapp

    stapp Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    Posts:
    7,270
    Location:
    England
    Thank you for taking the trouble to copy and paste the details, it may help a McAfee user here who reads it here.
     
  6. Fly

    Fly Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Posts:
    2,069
    Being a former McAfee user, this doesn't surprise me.

    Just one of those broken DATs. This time with more impact than usual.
     
  7. CloneRanger

    CloneRanger Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Posts:
    4,833
    If memory serves me correctly, this isn't the first time something major like this has happened with a McAfee update.

    How is the average person expected to cope with this, and command prompts etc ? Or is this just a corporate AV fiasco ?

    If it's not just corporate, then a heck of a lot of people will be screwed, with no easy way out. Glad i don't know anyone with McAfee, otherwise my phone would be red hot.
     
  8. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,818
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    McAfee response: http://siblog.mcafee.com/support/mcafee-response-on-current-false-positive-issue/

     
  9. Triple Helix

    Triple Helix Webroot Product Advisor

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2004
    Posts:
    12,011
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    It's in the TV news here in Ontario, Canada :D Constant reboots they say!

    TH
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2010
  10. Cudni

    Cudni Global Moderator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Posts:
    6,956
    Location:
    Somethingshire
  11. Macstorm

    Macstorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,531
    Location:
    Sneffels volcano
    I was to post about the same theme:

    AssociatedPress/Yahoo!News http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100421/ap_on_hi_te/us_tec_mcafee_antivirus_flaw
     
  12. syk69

    syk69 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Posts:
    183
    My corporation was affected by this. Lets just say its been a long day fixing the thousand users affected in our company. No way to auto deploy fix as svchost.exe corruption prevents network access. The fix isn't so bad as you can boot up into PE usb drive and copy over a healthy svchost.exe and extra.dat in appropriate location, restart machine and its good to go. Problem is when it affects thousands of users in big corporations or not as computer knowledgeable users. That being said...I was never a big fan of McAfee and now even more so.

    Safe mode doesn't always work to copy over the needed files. That's why I recommend booting up with a BartPE/WinXPPE/ubcd4win cd or usb drive.
     
  13. STRYDER

    STRYDER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2008
    Posts:
    99
    HA!
    Where are the posters who said programs with less FP's are less effective?

    owned in the face.
     
  14. Triple Helix

    Triple Helix Webroot Product Advisor

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2004
    Posts:
    12,011
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
  15. JimIT

    JimIT Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,035
    Location:
    Denton, Texas
    Exactly. FP's are a VERY big deal.
     
  16. Zombini

    Zombini Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Posts:
    469
    Agree completely. There are a lot of so call "security consultants" or "security experts" here that claim that they rather have an FP than have a missed detection. Frankly I dont know what they are smoking, because in the real-world FPs do matter. They affect business much more than your average missed rogueAV.
     
  17. siljaline

    siljaline Former Poster

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Posts:
    6,619
    McAfee false positives bricks enterprise PCs worldwide :ouch:

    More at above Link

    Things go from bad to worse as McAfee probes why
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2010
  18. apm

    apm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2006
    Posts:
    162
    "The remediation passed our quality testing ..." :shifty:

    Trojan/Rouge try to keep your machine running to steal, FPs try to kill it ASAP.
     
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2010
  19. vijayind

    vijayind Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Posts:
    1,413
    This would be a good time for competitors to provide "switch offers". Eset looks attractive esp. with their buyout clause.
     
  20. AvinashR

    AvinashR Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2009
    Posts:
    2,060
    Location:
    New Delhi Metallo β-Lactamase 1
    Microsoft Alert:-



    What is the purpose of this alert?

    Microsoft has been made aware of an issue with a McAfee DAT file update - released Wednesday, April 21, 2010 - that has been causing stability issues on Windows XP client systems. The symptom is caused by a false-positive detection on a core Windows file (svchost.exe). Once the file is quarantined by McAfee, the system may encounter one of the following symptoms:

    · The computer shuts down when a DCOM error or a RPC error occurs

    · The computer continues to run without network connectivity.

    · The computer triggers a Bugcheck (Blue Screen).


    The DAT file version that that caused the problem is McAfee DAT 5958. This file was propagated to client machines that conduct automatic updates of definition files. McAfee updated the DAT file soon after the problem was identified with a new version that does not cause the problem.
     
  21. tgell

    tgell Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2004
    Posts:
    1,073
    Article


     
  22. tgell

    tgell Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2004
    Posts:
    1,073
    Latest updated article

     
  23. lubieplacki

    lubieplacki Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Posts:
    151
    Location:
    Poland
    McAfee can by this situation lose a lot of their previous clients. But problems like that happend before and will happen in the future. Everyone big company is exposed for trouble like that.
     
  24. Fly

    Fly Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Posts:
    2,069
    It all depends on the kind of false positives (Windows system files ?) and how the AV handles it.

    In my case, Avira will prompt me before doing anything.
     
  25. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    8,028
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    I always worry about this happening. I have McAfee but I'm using Vista. Knowing my luck, if I switch to another AV it will do something like this!
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.