MS Security Essentials Stops Scanning After 29 Files

Topic

New Reply

I’m running Win 7 Pro, SP1, x64. I just updated (actually about an hour ago by now) the definitions in MS Security Essentials to 1.301.1608.0. I tried a Full Scan and it quit scanning after 29 files. Tried a Quick Scan and it also stopped after 29 files. It’s not throwing any error codes and says that no threats were found after scanning 29 files. Gives me the big green checkmark. So, it looks just like a normal Full Scan except it only scans 29 files.

I shut down the computer, restarted and attempted another definition update but was told I was already up to date. Tried another Full Scan with the same results as above.

Anyone else seeing this sort of behavior? Just a glitch – temporary or otherwise – or did I get hit with some sort of malware?

Thanks.

3 users thanked author for this post.

woody, geekdom, Microfix

Reply | Quote

Replies

If programs don’t run the way they are supposed to,

un-install the program, then install it again

I hope this helps   🙂

 

have a good 1 🙂 cheers

1 user thanked author for this post.

DrBonzo

Reply | Quote

I ran first with the defintions shown below and got the normal number of files scanned in in quick scan:

Updating definition:

When I scanned both quick and full, scan yielded only 24 files.

The definition appears to have been corrupted on the Microsoft side.

There’s a method of backing out the definition and the information is in this forum. I will see if II can locate the information.

Carpe Diem {with backup and coffee}
offline▸ Win10Pro 2004.19041.572 x64 i3-3220 RAM8GB HDD Firefox83.0b3 WindowsDefender
offline▸ Acer TravelMate P215-52 RAM8GB Win11Pro 22H2.22621.1265 x64 i5-10210U SSD Firefox106.0 MicrosoftDefender
online▸ Win11Pro 22H2.22621.1413 x64 i5-9400 RAM16GB HDD Firefox112.0b3 MicrosoftDefender

2 users thanked author for this post.

Microfix, DrBonzo

Reply | Quote

[geekdom]

Here is further information on a similar situation in March of this year:
https://www.askwoody.com/forums/topic/windows-defender-security-definition-problems/#post-343273

Carpe Diem {with backup and coffee}
offline▸ Win10Pro 2004.19041.572 x64 i3-3220 RAM8GB HDD Firefox83.0b3 WindowsDefender
offline▸ Acer TravelMate P215-52 RAM8GB Win11Pro 22H2.22621.1265 x64 i5-10210U SSD Firefox106.0 MicrosoftDefender
online▸ Win11Pro 22H2.22621.1413 x64 i5-9400 RAM16GB HDD Firefox112.0b3 MicrosoftDefender

• This reply was modified 3 years, 6 months ago by geekdom.

1 user thanked author for this post.

DrBonzo

Reply | Quote

I’m seeing similar behavior on my Win 7 Starter x86 guinea pig machine, except it scans 19 files instead of 29. Definitions are 1615, same as yours @geekdom, so I agree that the issue is on MS’s end, not ours. I’m OK as long as they fix it in short order.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Microfix, geekdom

Reply | Quote

Not only is it affecting MSE, Windows 8.1 Defender exhibits the same behaviour. SNAFU

Wonder if W10 MS Defender is affected also..anyone confirm?

Keep IT Lean, Clean and Mean!

2 users thanked author for this post.

DrBonzo, geekdom

Reply | Quote

I downloaded the Safety Scanner Tool from here:

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/threat-protection/intelligence/safety-scanner-download

Same issue when I ran it on the Win 7 Pro x64 machine; didn’t bother with the Win 7 Starter machine.

Looks like most of the MS antivirus stuff is BORKED. I hope we’re not going to have to beta test these updates, too!

1 user thanked author for this post.

geekdom

Reply | Quote

Microsoft Community is also reporting same behavior:
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/protect/forum/all/quick-scan-through-windows-security/a5cdf599-5a4c-49f9-96d3-4900033f6147

Carpe Diem {with backup and coffee}
offline▸ Win10Pro 2004.19041.572 x64 i3-3220 RAM8GB HDD Firefox83.0b3 WindowsDefender
offline▸ Acer TravelMate P215-52 RAM8GB Win11Pro 22H2.22621.1265 x64 i5-10210U SSD Firefox106.0 MicrosoftDefender
online▸ Win11Pro 22H2.22621.1413 x64 i5-9400 RAM16GB HDD Firefox112.0b3 MicrosoftDefender

2 users thanked author for this post.

Microfix, DrBonzo

Reply | Quote

? says:

i quick scan 4 win7 machines on Sunday’s and one of the 4 shut down and rebooted itself shortly after automatically updating and starting to scan (09/15/2018.) since the other 3 ran the auto update and quick scan normally i figured it was just another microsoft/MSE anomaly. i cleaned the machine rebooted and sucessfully ran the re-scan. i did not bother to search for a reason because MSE (trouble) documentalion has always been lacking. i figured it had trouble because i don’t have the July and September Security Only additional winx telemetry plumbing onboard. the last month or so it has taken 8-10 minutes to quick scan when it used to take 2 to 4  and it dwells in system 32 for an inordanate amount of time, now so ghosts in the machine?

Reply | Quote

i figured it had trouble because i don’t have the July and September Security Only additional winx telemetry plumbing onboard.

Lack of July and/or September Security Only updates should not be the reason of that strange behavior. I also skipped these updates and I have not  noticed any troubles or anomalies with MSE. Except the current issue described by DrBonzo in this topic.

I have found one interesting thing: MSE definition updates must be  still SHA-1 signed, as I use MSE on a Windows 7 without SHA-2 support (KB447419) installed and get no errors – it updates itself successfully.

Reply | Quote

Microfix wrote:

Wonder if W10 MS Defender is affected also..anyone confirm?

Same for me on Windows 10 version 1903 with Antimalware Client 4.18.1908.7: only 8 files scanned with Quick scan.

Some user comments in Germany say it’s only the displayed total which is incorrect, but I’m not clear how they they reached that conclusion:

Windows Defender currently facing a scanning problem with antimalware version 4.18.1908.7

Custom scan apparently works correctly:

Scanning issues with Defender Antimalware version 4.18.1908.7

Windows 11 Pro version 22H2 build 22621.1483 + Microsoft 365 + Edge

4 users thanked author for this post.

Microfix, DrBonzo, TonyS, woody

Reply | Quote

Good catch, everybody!

See https://www.askwoody.com/2019/microsoft-tries-to-fix-the-sfc-scannow-bug-introduced-by-a-patch-in-july-ends-up-clobbering-defender-malware/

Reply | Quote

? says:

another big thank you to Woody et.al, Martin B and Gunter “burn the hut w/chocolate sprinkles,”

i would have never made it this far using windows w\o all the expert help in your pages. lots of mystery behind the Redmond curtain usually exposed here first and quickly too…

Reply | Quote

All issues have been repaired by Microsoft.

Reply | Quote

“The good news is that Microsoft said it fixed this issue with the Security Intelligence Update for Windows Defender Antivirus – KB2267602 (Version 1.301.1684.0) release from this morning. But to be honest, by now we’re just waiting for someone else to find out that something worse has happened as a result of this update. Things like this can only happen so many times before Windows users start to seriously doubt any software updates…”

Reply | Quote

I have Windows 7 Pro and Windows Security Essentials. I just read about this problem. When I opened Security Essentials to see if it was working, it was scanning already. It was doing a full scan. It was up to 102,000 items and 7 hrs and 45 minutes and still going, so I guess it’s okay. The antivirus definition is at version 1.301.2049.0.

Reply | Quote

[geekdom]

This problem was resolved. Read here for further information:
https://www.askwoody.com/2019/microsoft-tries-to-fix-the-sfc-scannow-bug-introduced-by-a-patch-in-july-ends-up-clobbering-defender-malware/

Carpe Diem {with backup and coffee}
offline▸ Win10Pro 2004.19041.572 x64 i3-3220 RAM8GB HDD Firefox83.0b3 WindowsDefender
offline▸ Acer TravelMate P215-52 RAM8GB Win11Pro 22H2.22621.1265 x64 i5-10210U SSD Firefox106.0 MicrosoftDefender
online▸ Win11Pro 22H2.22621.1413 x64 i5-9400 RAM16GB HDD Firefox112.0b3 MicrosoftDefender

• This reply was modified 3 years, 6 months ago by geekdom.

1 user thanked author for this post.

b

Reply | Quote