MaHaBone <> wrote:
> "Robin Walker [MVP]" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>
>> Please ensure that all third-party anti-malware applications are
>> disabled before attempting to update Windows Defender definitions.
>
> Does this advisory apply for all future W/D definitions as well?
It applies pretty much to all updates coming out of Microsoft.
There is a generic problem with third-party anti-malware products: they are
designed to prevent unwanted modifications to your system. But Windows
Updates, Office updates, and Windows Defender updates are intended to modify
your system: that is their sole purpose. How can an anti-malware product
tell the difference between an authorised Microsoft update and an unwanted
update? Or a malicious product pretending to be a Microsoft Update? In
reality, some anti-malware products do not get this distinction quite right,
and running a Microsoft system update leaves a system in a half-cocked
inconsistent state, thanks to the incorrect intervention of an anti-malware
product (like blocking updates to the registry).
If you doubt this, then see the thread "updates won't install" started by
"catlion" on 10 May 2007. "Cath" replied on 11 May 2007, naming a specific
anti-malware product which, when disabled, cured the reported problem for
her. Since then, three other "me too" follow-ups have been posted
confirming that disabling the same product cured their problems too.
There are enough real problems in the world to keep this newsgroup busy
without having to deal with damage inflicted by optional third-party
products. In fact, I sometimes wonder whether the majority of the traffic
in this newsgroup originates with an inconsistency caused by an anti-malware
application.
--
Robin Walker [MVP Networking]
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
