Diagnostic Tracking Service

Topic

New Reply

This is primarily intended for those that run stable systems that DON’T want diagnostic information sent back to Microsoft for analysis.
Or just some more fat to cut away for the sake of cutting away at some OS fat.

How to disable the Diagnostics Tracking Service in Windows

By Martin Brinkmann on May 12, 2015 in Windows – Last Update: May 18, 2015 35
Windows 7 and 8.1, Server 2008 R2 and Server 2012 R2 users and admins who have already installed the patches
Microsoft released today for those operating system may have noticed that the updates included a patch that added a Diagnostics Tracking Service service to the operating system.

Windows 10 beta builds excluded for obvious reasons.

I go through my services once in a while to see what’s new, changed, or turned back on [??]
This particular service I hadn’t seen before.

Reply | Quote

Replies

You might have found it sooner had you run sfc/SCANNOW.

Reply | Quote

Thankfully I hadn’t had a need to run sfc/SCANNOW.
Sometimes scannow fixes things I need to stay broken.

But I do like to eyeball through every single running process now and again.
It’s good practice to ensure that nothing gets by in terms of sneak program add-ons and such.

Reply | Quote

It never made it onto my machine, I dredge through the MS speak before deciding what’s needed on my PC.

Reply | Quote

May’s KB3022345 was responsible for this service, but was found to be causing sfc /scannow to wrongly report irreparable files.

That was superseded by KB3068708 in June’s updates but was found to be causing the same problem for some and they were listed as Telemetry errors in the CBS log.

You can uninstall May’s update as it was withdrawn – at least it doesn’t get reoffered if you uninstall it.

I dumped it because as well as getting the sfc errors, I was getting a number of errors in Event Viewer as well as Reliability history to say that the Diagnostic Tracking Service had stopped.

It fleetingly crossed my mind that Norton 360 could have been responsible for that if it saw it as spyware 😀 – of course of which it was of a sort.

Reply | Quote