Microsoft Security Essentials

[Whatacrock]

This is much easier way to maintain rather than having individual scripts for x64 and x86 releases, also keeps items in their respective departments. It also maintains a minimal directory tree size.

For now safest to keep this release as it stands..

[TheAPGuy]

You want him to make it two scripts? ... well if he wants to. I don't think its necessary though. True it would cut the download down by 1/3 but, its not that big.

edit: didn't see wac's response.

[Whatacrock]

If it was split into individual scripts then there would 3, 2 for MS Security Essentials and 1 for EMET. Honestly it's far easier to stay as one package, you never know when may need the other items..

[Whatacrock]

Microsoft Security Essentials release has been updated May 6

changelog: @EMET;

[Whatacrock]

The Microsoft Security release has been updated 30 June 2014

changelog: @EMET -- filesize and MD5 chnaged, version remains the same

[Whatacrock]

MS Security release updated August 1

changelog: @EMET now at version 5.0

[DesertJerry]

Thought I'd mention that I installed this version in XP Pro x64 w/SP2, Win7 w/SP2 x64, and Win8.1 u 1 x64 and it appears to be working in all three even though XP was not mentioned in the list of operating systems.

[Whatacrock]

@DesertJerry -- you may have misread the line.. here it is from the apm. Microsoft Security Essentials no longer supports Windows XP, this maybe was the apm you were reading..

WindowsVersion=XP,2K3,VISTA,2K8,SEVEN,EIGHT,EIGHT_1

[DesertJerry]

I wasn't reading the APM - I was referring to the statement at the Microsoft web site for EMET 5.0 - it did not make any mention of XP being a valid operating system for EMET 5.0's installation. Vista to Win8.1 were shown but not XP - that's why I mentioned I had installed it with no problems here; assuming others might want to do the same.

[Whatacrock]

Thanks DesertJerry...