- May 31, 2017
- 1,742
You have used 5+ accounts.
As you have noted, your "evidence" is not from Microsoft, even though you have insisted on multiple occasions that permanently disabling vulnerable processes is included in Microsoft's recommended best practices. Find evidence where Microsoft recommends disabling vital parts of their OS, and please post links instead of screenshots so I do not have to spend 5 minutes looking them up.
First of all, it is a very bad idea simply because Tickle was experiencing a block over and over and over again, so he probably believed his system was infected, as would any user. Blocking macros is certainly a great idea because it is not going to break anything, but permanently blocking ANY part of a driver update is not because there is not a chance that the driver will work 100% as the vendor intended... if you do, something is not going to function correctly as the vendor intended. In this case, even Intel probably cannot determine what all this block might break without a close examination.
AG and other similar products can be tailored to block or allow whatever you want, so really it is a non-issue. If you want to lock everything down to potentially make your system more secure, but take a risk of blocking items that should not be blocked, then by all means please do.
I did not send him on a wild goose chase... my first response was correct.
The Norton and Emsisoft blocks were false positives, not intentional blocks. It happens.
As you have noted, your "evidence" is not from Microsoft, even though you have insisted on multiple occasions that permanently disabling vulnerable processes is included in Microsoft's recommended best practices. Find evidence where Microsoft recommends disabling vital parts of their OS, and please post links instead of screenshots so I do not have to spend 5 minutes looking them up.
First of all, it is a very bad idea simply because Tickle was experiencing a block over and over and over again, so he probably believed his system was infected, as would any user. Blocking macros is certainly a great idea because it is not going to break anything, but permanently blocking ANY part of a driver update is not because there is not a chance that the driver will work 100% as the vendor intended... if you do, something is not going to function correctly as the vendor intended. In this case, even Intel probably cannot determine what all this block might break without a close examination.
AG and other similar products can be tailored to block or allow whatever you want, so really it is a non-issue. If you want to lock everything down to potentially make your system more secure, but take a risk of blocking items that should not be blocked, then by all means please do.
I did not send him on a wild goose chase... my first response was correct.
The Norton and Emsisoft blocks were false positives, not intentional blocks. It happens.
Last edited:
