MAS 1.0.614 downleveled itself from 5729 to 5725

[Leo Feret]

I've had MAS 1.0.614 successfully installed for a day at the 5729
signature level and a deep scan worked without error. Now (18:20 EDT) it
notified me of an update, and when I accepted, the signature level is
down to 5725. If not intentional on Microsoft's part, this is not good,
beta or not.

--
--
Leo Feret - "I'm not always at the keyboard;
·|Ô¿Ô¬|· sometimes I use the trackball."
____________________________________________
"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in
practice, there is."
- Jan L.A. van de Snepscheut

 

[plun]

Leo Feret has brought this to us :

I've had MAS 1.0.614 successfully installed for a day at the 5729 signature
level and a deep scan worked without error. Now (18:20 EDT) it notified me of
an update, and when I accepted, the signature level is down to 5725. If not
intentional on Microsoft's part, this is not good, beta or not.

Something is totally wrong with build 614 and updates.

If you check within Program files / Microsoft Antispyware
and look for these two files.

gcThreatAuditScanData.gcd and
gcThreatAuditThreatData.gcd

They are probably dated June 9, and it is ver 5725.

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;892519

 

[Leo Feret]

I confirm what you thought is true. I then manually updated MAS and it
said I was now at 5729. This is not true, I still have only the 5725
levels on my PC.

Leo Feret has brought this to us :

Something is totally wrong with build 614 and updates.

If you check within Program files / Microsoft Antispyware
and look for these two files.

gcThreatAuditScanData.gcd and
gcThreatAuditThreatData.gcd

They are probably dated June 9, and it is ver 5725.

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;892519

--
--
Leo Feret - "I'm not always at the keyboard;
·|Ô¿Ô¬|· sometimes I use the trackball."
____________________________________________
"The only certainty is that nothing is certain."
- Pliny The Elder, Historia Naturalis, bk. 2, ch. 7.

 

[plun]

Leo Feret brought next idea :

I confirm what you thought is true. I then manually updated MAS and it said I
was now at 5729. This is not true, I still have only the 5725 levels on my
PC.

Hi

Yes and I just performed an old "jungle trick" for this beta
and renamed these to files to *.old and restarted MSAS.

In earlier versions this has worked but now it only says updated to
ver 5729
without updataing these to files. Maybe these files are missing within
MS download
servers ? A lot of files do not exist within log below.

--
plun


And errors.log shows this:

438::ln 0:Object doesn't support this property or
method::gcasDtServ:modMain:ShutDown::2005-06-27 01:33:03:XP:1.0.614
91::ln 0:Object variable or With block variable not
set::FilePath=C:\Program\Microsoft
AntiSpyware\gcasServ.exe::gcasDtServ:modThreatData:IsFileThreat::2005-06-27
01:33:34:XP:1.0.614
0::Requiring definition updates, files do not
exist.::Updates:UserVersionID::0::2005-06-27 01:33:34
0::Requiring definition updates, files do not exist. UpdateDefinitions
Sucessful.::Updates:UserVersionID::0::2005-06-27 01:33:45
0::Requiring definition updates, files do not exist. UpdateDefinitions
Sucessful. Files MISSING!::Updates:UserVersionID::0::2005-06-27
01:33:45
5::Invalid procedure call or
argument::Updates:UserVersionID::30::2005-06-27 01:33:45
0::Requiring definition updates, files do not
exist.::Updates:UserVersionID::0::2005-06-27 01:34:05
0::Requiring definition updates, files do not exist. UpdateDefinitions
Sucessful.::Updates:UserVersionID::0::2005-06-27 01:34:05
0::Requiring definition updates, files do not exist. UpdateDefinitions
Sucessful. Files MISSING!::Updates:UserVersionID::0::2005-06-27
01:34:05
5::Invalid procedure call or
argument::Updates:UserVersionID::30::2005-06-27 01:34:05
0::Requiring definition updates, files do not
exist.::Updates:UserVersionID::0::2005-06-27 01:34:06
0::Requiring definition updates, files do not exist. UpdateDefinitions
Sucessful.::Updates:UserVersionID::0::2005-06-27 01:34:06
0::Requiring definition updates, files do not exist. UpdateDefinitions
Sucessful. Files MISSING!::Updates:UserVersionID::0::2005-06-27
01:34:06
5::Invalid procedure call or
argument::Updates:UserVersionID::30::2005-06-27 01:34:06
0::Requiring definition updates, files do not
exist.::Updates:UserVersionID::0::2005-06-27 01:34:59
0::Requiring definition updates, files do not exist. UpdateDefinitions
Sucessful.::Updates:UserVersionID::0::2005-06-27 01:34:59
0::Requiring definition updates, files do not exist. UpdateDefinitions
Sucessful. Files MISSING!::Updates:UserVersionID::0::2005-06-27
01:34:59
5::Invalid procedure call or
argument::Updates:UserVersionID::30::2005-06-27 01:34:59
0::Requiring definition updates, files do not
exist.::Updates:UserVersionID::0::2005-06-27 01:35:00
0::Requiring definition updates, files do not exist. UpdateDefinitions
Sucessful.::Updates:UserVersionID::0::2005-06-27 01:35:00
0::Requiring definition updates, files do not exist. UpdateDefinitions
Sucessful. Files MISSING!::Updates:UserVersionID::0::2005-06-27
01:35:00
5::Invalid procedure call or
argument::Updates:UserVersionID::30::2005-06-27 01:35:00

 

[Bill Sanderson]

As is often the case, this article is out of date:

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;892519

The issue of Help, About, sometimes showing an out of date version number is
still with us in build 613, at least--I saw it twice today. However, I've
never seen it be off by two versions.

Using the KB article to confirm what's on the disk is the way to get this
right, and if I'm reading this thread correctly, you've confirmed, via the
June 9th date, at least, that you are really back on 5725.

I'm not sure what's going on here, but I think I'd posit that you were never
beyond 5725 in the first place--that the previous updates didn't "take."
I'm not sure, however, what version is contained in the current downloads
from Microsoft--on most machines, I've already been on 5729 when I've
downloaded the 6.xx version, and that has (apparently--I've not looked at
the files) remained in place. I'll check some more tonight and tomorrow.
--

 

[Robin Walker [MVP]]

I've had MAS 1.0.614 successfully installed for a day at the 5729
signature level and a deep scan worked without error. Now (18:20 EDT)
it notified me of an update, and when I accepted, the signature level
is down to 5725.

People who are having problems with signature-updates having curious
results: please try clearing your Internet Explorer browser cache before
using the MSAS update function.

 

[ofelas]

Hi, Robin,

Still no luck in proper operation of definition updates.

Thanks,

Chip

-----Original Message-----

I've had MAS 1.0.614 successfully installed for a day at the 5729
signature level and a deep scan worked without error. Now (18:20 EDT)
it notified me of an update, and when I accepted, the signature level
is down to 5725.

People who are having problems with signature-updates having curious
results: please try clearing your Internet Explorer browser cache before
using the MSAS update function.

--
Robin Walker [MVP Networking]
(e-mail address removed)


.

 

[plun]

Robin Walker [MVP] submitted this idea :

People who are having problems with signature-updates having curious results:
please try clearing your Internet Explorer browser cache before using the
MSAS update function.

Hi

IE TIF and MSAS update ? joking ?

Well, to be safe I have my settings for this junkbox to
1MB.............. B-)

Also increased it to 10 MB if it was so stupid that MSAS using this
"box".

 

[Bill Sanderson]

It appears to me that the download definition level is 5725. I'd need to
re-read this thread carefully to be clear how that relates to the symptoms,
but I think it is relevant.

I've yet to see a clear instance of definitions being replace with an
earlier set, but I've seen lots of instances of failure to update.

--

 

[Pen]

614 is definitely NOT updating. It says it is
but the 2 definitions files never change. Check the dates
on gcThreatAuditScanData.gcd and gcThreatAuditThreatData.gcd
you will find they don't change. That is why every time you
click update, it tries to update, says it succeeded. In point of fact
it doesn't. Is there any way to go back to 509?

 

[plun]

Pen formulated the question :

614 is definitely NOT updating. It says it is
but the 2 definitions files never change. Check the dates
on gcThreatAuditScanData.gcd and gcThreatAuditThreatData.gcd
you will find they don't change. That is why every time you
click update, it tries to update, says it succeeded. In point of fact
it doesn't. Is there any way to go back to 509?

Hi

Wait for a solution from MS.

 

[Tom Emmelot]

plun schreef:

Pen formulated the question :



Hi

Wait for a solution from MS.

Hello Plun,

i update to 614(xxx) and after update the def's it says 5729 in the
About window!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Regards >*< TOM >*<

PS I allways use Freshdownload mannager to download files this prevent
cash problems!

 

[Anonymous Bob]

plun schreef:
Hello Plun,

i update to 614(xxx) and after update the def's it says 5729 in the
About window!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now manually check for an update...

Bob Vanderveen

 

[Pen]

That's exactly my point. The "about" says 5729, but the files
don't change. Look for yourself in c:\program files\microsoft
AntiSpyware

 

[Bill Sanderson]

I've done that, and the defs have remained at 5729, and I've looked at the
physical def files before and after the 614 upgrade (over 509/5729) and they
haven't changed.

I'm not saying that what you are seeing isn't happening, just that the
product is working correctly for some users--so far I haven't seen this
behavior from this build myself. I have seen similar behavior from the .509
build at some time in the past, though.

--

 

[Anonymous Bob]

I've done that, and the defs have remained at 5729, and I've looked at the
physical def files before and after the 614 upgrade (over 509/5729) and they
haven't changed.

Thanks, Bill.
There was one report in these newsgroups that a *new* build 614
dated June 25 was available. The current download is dated June 24.
Do you have any additional information?

Bob Vanderveen

 

[Pen]

No you've missed the issue. The problem is that
614 won't update either 5725 or 5727 to 5729.
It is NOT that it reverts. 614 says it does,
but in fact it doesn't actually do it. In my case machines that
were at 5725 are still there, while 5727 ones are
still there. but all say they are 5729. Whatever the machine was
at under 509 is where they still are irregardless of what
"about" says.

 

[plun]

Pen brought next idea :

No you've missed the issue. The problem is that
614 won't update either 5725 or 5727 to 5729.
It is NOT that it reverts. 614 says it does,
but in fact it doesn't actually do it. In my case machines that
were at 5725 are still there, while 5727 ones are
still there. but all say they are 5729. Whatever the machine was
at under 509 is where they still are irregardless of what
"about" says.

Hi

This is all correct and we must wait for MS to find
a solution.

This is well documented and MS will fix this.

 

[Bill Sanderson]

I have no information about what differences there are between the
builds--I've had the same successes with 613 on several machines, before I
was offered 614 by the download center. It won't hurt to try 614, but my
recollection from the .signatures group is that 614 is the one cited most
frequently as having problems.



--

 

[Bill Sanderson]

I haven't been able to test that yet. Actually--I have done one machine as
a clean install which came in with 5725--that's what was in the download, I
believe. I was able to successfully update that to 5729. However, I don't
recall if that was 613 or 614, I'm afraid.

I'll look for a machine to test 614 updating over something lower than 5729,
but I'm not sure I'll get time to test that--I'm going to be much reduced in
online time over the next week and a half.

--