Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Removes Antivirus Registry Key Check for All Windows Versions (bleepingcomputer.com)

Posted by msmash on from the some-relaxation dept.

Microsoft has decided to remove a mandatory "registry key requirement" it introduced in the aftermath of the Meltdown and Spectre vulnerability disclosure. BleepingComputer: Microsoft used this registry key to prevent Windows updates from being installed on computers running antivirus software incompatible with the Meltdown and Spectre patches. Antivirus vendors were supposed to create this registry key on users' computers to signal that they've updated their product and will not interfere with Microsoft's patches. This was a big issue because incompatible antivirus products would crash and BSOD Windows systems. [...] The OS maker removed the registry key check for Windows 10 computers last month, in March, and has announced yesterday that the key is no longer necessary for other Windows operating system versions -- 7, 8, 8.1, Server 2008, and Windows Server 2012.

49 comments

  1. Great! by thegreatbob · · Score: 1

    Now can they remove the horseshit, seemingly purely consumer-hostile, blockade on updates to older versions of Windows running on newer CPUs?

    --
    There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
    1. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you want to run old, insecure versions of Windows?

    2. Re:Great! by DarkRookie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because 7 was the last decent version of Windows
      10 is a bloated messy spyware program and not an OS.

      --
      The millennial that doesn't like most of the stuff designed for millennials.
    3. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When was Windows 7 old and insecure? Both CPU companies said their Intel 7th-gen and AMD Ryzen processors are not supported on this still-current, active operating system.

    4. Re:Great! by DarkRookie · · Score: 1

      You can get around this. I have seen people demonstrating it.
      Also, IIRC, its M$ that blocks those and not the CPU manufactures.

      --
      The millennial that doesn't like most of the stuff designed for millennials.
    5. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some people still run the better version of Windows AKA Windows 7 or maybe even Windows 8.1 on newer hardware. Kinda ridicules you have to use Zeffy's wufuc patch to make 7 and 8.1 get updates again.

    6. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because 2000 was the last decent version of Windows

      Fixed that for you.

    7. Re:Great! by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Win 7? the version of windows along with 8.x that have vram limits only allowing the total space to 4064MB to be allocated? Because both OS's blew their shit all over the place and all that. Which is really, like really, really good if you have a single, pair, or more video cards with 8GB of onboard memory that can't be fully used. Maybe you can get developers to use vulkan more and that won't be a problem for gaming, or well development, or even cad programs.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    8. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are an idiot if you think newer = more secure.

      For fuck's sake, Windows 10 is insecure by design and every "update" introduces worse bugs than they fix.

    9. Re:Great! by thegreatbob · · Score: 1

      It's not always a matter of want. I'll leave the other possible reasons as an exercise to the reader, as they've been played out in the comments a million times over.

      --
      There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
    10. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That only affects DirectX 9, which games haven't used in many years and the old games that are DirectX 9 based don't need access to that much VRAM. It's a complete non-issue.

      In the mean time, my Windows 7 doesn't spy on me, serve up advertising, force updates or force reboots. It's a proper OS, unlike that marketing platform that they call "Windows 10".

    11. Re:Great! by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      Why do you want the run the latest spyware from Microsoft?

      1. Are you offering to verify and test all our drivers and apps will be still be functional after upgrading to Windows 10 ?

      2. "Old" is a red herring fallacy. The wheel is thousands of years old -- you don't see people bitching about that.

      3. "Don't fix what ain't broken"

      Stop drinking Microshit's Kool-Aid (TM)

    12. Re:Great! by FilmedInNoir · · Score: 1

      Yes, or just use DX10/11.

      --
      Sig. Sig. Sputnik
    13. Re:Great! by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      So use vista, win 8 or win 10 is what you're saying.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    14. Re:Great! by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      That only affects DirectX 9, which games haven't used in many years and the old games that are DirectX 9 based don't need access to that much VRAM. It's a complete non-issue.

      "Old" You mean like Skyrim? How about GTA V? GTA IV? Witcher 2? Anno2070? Various Batman games? Civ V? Deux Ex:HR? Dishonored? Mechwarrior Online? Metro games? Red Faction? World of Warcraft? New Xcom games? How about ENB's that use custom shaders and effects but a dx9 core? No?

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    15. Re:Great! by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      Other than gamers, who is going to be running over 4Gb of video ram under normal circumstances? Nobody.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    16. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Skyrim is 7 fucking years old and supports DX11, dumbass.
      GTA V is 3 years old and ONLY supports DX10 and DX11, dumbass.
      GTA IV is a decade old and maxes at 512MB VRAM, dumbass.
      The Witcher II is 7 years old and maxes at 512MB VRAM, dumbass.
      Anno 2070 is 7 years old and supports DX11, dumbass.
      Batman: Arkham Asylum is 9 years old and maxes at 256MB VRAM, dumbass.
      Batman: Arkham City is 7 years old and supports DX11, dumbass.
      Batman: Arkham Origins is 5 years old and supports DX11, dumbass.
      Batman: Arkham Knight is 3 years old and supports DX11, dumbass.
      Deus Ex: Human Revolution is 7 years old and supports DX11, dumbass.
      Dishonored is 6 years old and ONLY supports DX10 and DX11, dumbass.
      MechWarrior Online is 5 years old and supports DX11, dumbass.
      Metro 2033 is 8 years old and supports DX11, duimbass.
      Metro: Last Light is 5 years old and supports DX11, dumbass.
      Red Faction is 17 years old, ONLY supports *DX8* and needs *64MB* VRAM, dumbass.
      World of Warcraft is is 14 years old and only needs *64MB* VRAM, dumbass.
      XCOM: Enemy Within is 5 years old and supports DX11, dumbass.
      XCOM 2 is 2 years old and supports DX11, dumbass.

      Who gives a fuck about ENB? It's not a part of the games and the most any of the DX9 only games in this list use is 512MB VRAM, so there's still a lot left over, dumbass.

      You really are out of touch, dumbass.

    17. Re:Great! by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      Say what now? I'm typing this on a Windows 7 machine with DX11.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    18. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no such blockade

    19. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or Monogame

    20. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *Can* gamers map the entire VRAM directly? Thought Windows accessed VRAM through, well, a window no matter how much is there.

    21. Re:Great! by thegreatbob · · Score: 1

      Indeed, it's more like a paper tape saying 'do not enter', as it's pretty easy to bypass (though it does require bypassing windows file protection to patch and/or shim some DLL(s) which were modified by MS to basically say 'nope'). Otherwise, I'm not entirely sure what you're talking about.

      --
      There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
    22. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WOW, skyrim, Anno2070 , MechWarrior online , civ 5 all support DX 11, GTA 5 has DX 10 support. No idea on others but as you had no clue on the ones I actually know about I suspect you are probably wrong on a lot of the too.

    23. Re:Great! by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      or use Windows 7 with DX 11.1. seriously did you bother checking anything before posting this.

    24. Re:Great! by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Just use Win 10 for games.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    25. Re:Great! by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      You really are out of touch, dumbass.

      So who's the dumbass again? Oh right, that'd be you. Just to point out exactly how out of touch you are. Skyrim is DX9 only. Skyrim:SE is DX11. Guess which one is still modded the most? Yeah...so out-of-touch. Guess that's why it also top(ed) out on steams concurrent players well...nearly every week. That's the DX9 version.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    26. Re:Great! by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      You mean partially supported right? And because the functions are limited, and non-supported in the drivers it still doesn't work properly.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    27. Re:Great! by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      or use Windows 7 with DX 11.1. seriously did you bother checking anything before posting this.

      You're saying that a partially supported api, without proper driver feedback is working properly? Win8 is the first version with proper api support in the OS itself that allows full calls. Did you even understand what you're talking about? Probably not, though a decade ago I would have expected someone on /. to understand this natively.

      Let me make this clear. Win7 only got partial DX11 support, around half the functions *revert* to DX9 via compatibility. In other words, if you're still using Win7 and think you're getting full support you're either an idiot or badly misinformed. OGL has better and fuller support under Win7 then DX11.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    28. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The original version of Skyrim maxes at less than 1GB of VRAM so it still wouldn't be a problem if you didn't update, dumbass. It's funny how you had to go back to fish for a very specific version of the game instead of the most current, which is what everybody uses, dumbass.

    29. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is fully supported. DirectX 11 was created FOR Windows 7.

    30. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DirectX 11 was released as part of Windows 7, three years before Windows 8 was released.

    31. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, no thanks. I don't want an insecure by design marketing platform masquerading as an OS.

    32. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DX11 has been fully supported on Win 7 now for the better part of a decade.

    33. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any game that works on DX 9 will work on DX 11 on win 7. The ONLY time you will have an issue is if you need a new feature that doesn't exist in windows 7. It DOESN'T revert to DX9, it is simply limited to the same feature support, it is still DX 11 not something happening via compatibility.

    34. Re:Great! by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      The original version of Skyrim maxes at less than 1GB of VRAM

      Wrong dumbass. Skyrim maxed out at 2.84GB of vram, stop showing your ignorance you've already lost.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  2. lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    more like older versions like 7 that dont have the telemetry spying ingrained like a fork up your asshole turning round and round

    1. Re:lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Windows 7 had (has) telemetry. When you set Windows 10 to 'Basic' it is very similar to the checks Windows 7 already did when it went to update your system every time it ran Windows Update. Although the list published recently seems long, most of the so-called "spying" just returns NULL to Microsoft that the particular device and/or configuration is not present on the system - and there are a lot of them because the Windows eco-system is vast. If it is present, Windows Update will check to see if the driver is up-to-date. No biggie.

      Otherwise, if you want to avoid the actually "spying" just delete the Windows-store style apps that come pre-installed, etc. They're the ones phoning home on you. There's also a privacy panel in Settings you can go through to turn off anything else. And, of course, use a local account.

    2. Re:lol by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      Any of which can be changed in Windows 10 by the next update, which you can't stop from installing without jumping through extensive hoops at best.

      Compare this with Windows 7, where I have no telemetry at all running by default (because I could choose never to install those updates) and I can install the monthly security-only roll-ups so I don't get all the other unwanted junk destabilising my system.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  3. Wait, what if I have no antivirus? by Zorpheus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The article does not mention if Windows checked first for an incompatible antivirus software. Sounds as if it just waits for this key to appear.
    So without antivirus it will never update? And if there are two antivirus softwares it will update as soon as one is compatible, making the system crash due to the other?

    1. Re:Wait, what if I have no antivirus? by ElizabethGreene · · Score: 1

      It does still check for known-incompatible AV software, just not the opt-in key. It has minimum version requirements for Avast, AVG, and others.

      You can see it in the Wsus metadata.

    2. Re: Wait, what if I have no antivirus? by Zorpheus · · Score: 1

      Ok the new way seems fine, I just wonder if they old way was really this stupid.

    3. Re:Wait, what if I have no antivirus? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Windows Defender (which runs in the absence of 3rd party AV) sets the key

      And if you're running 2 3rd party AVs, well, best of luck to you on any given day

    4. Re:Wait, what if I have no antivirus? by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      There was a lot of concern about the "no antivirus" case when this first rolled out, exactly because it would apparently have prevented updates from installing.

      This is supposed to have been fixed by a more recent update, but for those who install the monthly security-only roll-ups it still doesn't seem to be clear exactly what should be done and in what order even now.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    5. Re:Wait, what if I have no antivirus? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I did a manual update in January, Windows set the key for me. Avast was OK at the time, but had not set the key.

    6. Re:Wait, what if I have no antivirus? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So without antivirus it will never update?

      Exactly. At least until now. You had to set the registry key manually if you wanted to get updates.
      A couple of websites posted about this in January, but MS didn't think it was a big enough deal to inform users properly (although they do have a page with instructions, if you go looking for it).

  4. Lots of folks used this key by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    to prevent the patches from loading so they wouldn't take the performance hit.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Lots of folks used this key by ElizabethGreene · · Score: 2

      A better* way to prevent the performance hit is to use the "To Disable the Fix" registry keys in KB 4073119

      https://support.microsoft.com/...

      This lets you install updates to protect against the other security vulnerabilities besides S&M.

    2. Re:Lots of folks used this key by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      If they did then they are idiots. There was a documented and official way to achieve the same thing.

  5. Awesome. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now I can just keep using Linux and FreeBSD and it doesn't mean fucking shit to me again.

    Great job at making a piece of shit os that gets virus and selling cures for the disease you created.