The problem is a false positive which identifies a regular Windows binary, "svchost.exe", as "W32/Wecorl.a", a virus. If you are affected, you will see a message like:
The file C:WINDOWS\system32\svchost.exe contains the W32/Wecorl.a Virus. Undetermined clean error, OAS denied access and continued. Detected using Scan engine version 5400.1158 DAT version 5958.0000.
We replaced McAfee last year so we were not effected. But I know there have been issues at one of our partners business.
------------------ Our legacy will be the dirt that is swept out of abandoned factories as the industrious youths of the future go back to work. Bravery is being the only one who knows you're afraid. click me
I haven't used it for years. They screwed up their last update. http://www.pcmag.com/articl...,2817,2362993,00.asp McAfee Apologizes for Update Fiasco. McAfee on Thursday issued an apology for the faulty update that shut down users' computers and prompted a continuous reboot cycle. Here is a link that might help. https://kc.mcafee.com/corporate/index?page=content&id=KB68787
[This message has been edited by avengador1 (edited 04-23-2010).]
We do, but we hadn't pushed out the update yet via EPO.
It took 9 workstations off line at one of our partners. They had to reload the OS.
EPO is great, I wish our current solution was a good. But McAfee AV stinks. When we did have it I would always down load new dats to a test repository and then update a few test workstations and non mission critical servers and let them run for a week. If they didn't have any issues then it would go to the prod repository.
It took 9 workstations off line at one of our partners. They had to reload the OS.
EPO is great, I wish our current solution was a good. But McAfee AV stinks. When we did have it I would always down load new dats to a test repository and then update a few test workstations and non mission critical servers and let them run for a week. If they didn't have any issues then it would go to the prod repository.
Shouldn't have taken a reload.. disabling it and reinstalling the file should have been enough.
Shouldn't have taken a reload.. disabling it and reinstalling the file should have been enough.
I don't have the entire story but apparently it took out more than just the svhost file and it was taking longer to trouble shoot than reload the workstation. Thats why we have so many thin clients, they are not prone to these kinds of issues.
I don't have the entire story but apparently it took out more than just the svhost file and it was taking longer to trouble shoot than reload the workstation. Thats why we have so many thin clients, they are not prone to these kinds of issues.
What are your thinclients hooked to, TS, Citrix, VDI?
We tried a pilot a few years ago for using them as TS clients, but middle management didn't like them, so they wanted to 'prove' the wouldn't work to upper by setting things up to fail.. but now we are revisiting with middle management buy-in to hook to VDI. Typical cycles
What are your thinclients hooked to, TS, Citrix, VDI?
We tried a pilot a few years ago for using them as TS clients, but middle management didn't like them, so they wanted to 'prove' the wouldn't work to upper by setting things up to fail.. but now we are revisiting with middle management buy-in to hook to VDI. Typical cycles
Citrix We just expanded our farm to 110 servers. We avarage 7 - 12 user per server. We use published desktops and run 3 core programs and office.
Citrix We just expanded our farm to 110 servers. We avarage 7 - 12 user per server. We use published desktops and run 3 core programs and office.
We virtualized our farm, and run it MUCH hotter then that.. id say 50 or more clients. ( im on the vmware team, but not the citrix one ) but we don't do full desktops, just applications.
on the ESX side, we run upwards of 50 VMs per host.
We virtualized our farm, and run it MUCH hotter then that.. id say 50 or more clients. ( im on the vmware team, but not the citrix one ) but we don't do full desktops, just applications.
on the ESX side, we run upwards of 50 VMs per host.
We are running Xen server on blades, each blade runs 4 virtual Citrix servers. One of the applications we are using needs the extra horse power. Before that we could comfortably run 30 users per server.
IP: Logged
06:54 PM
PFF
System Bot
rogergarrison Member
Posts: 49601 From: A Western Caribbean Island/ Columbus, Ohio Registered: Apr 99
I have Mac on my new computer and it gets its updates automaticly. I havent seen any problems. From what I heard it only affects Professional versions of windows.
