Windows Update / SvcHost.exe 100% Cpu in task manager

Hello,

I find the incredible amount of understanding about 'how computers work or don't work amazing.

I remember the time when I had WindowsXP working with IE7 - the reason stated to upgrade to IE8 was that it was simply more secure as there were so many 'kids' deciding they were invulnerable to prosecution for messing around - attempting (and succeeding) to access other peoples computer lives.

Presently I am sending a recommendation to Washington to have Internet crimes be a FEDERAL offence as this activity crosses State lines. The Inspection Service is very good at apprehending Folks messing with the sanctity of the mail. All they need to do is ADD an Internet crimes passage in the existing LAW. A pause here - think about what WE have available to us now - BUYING PROTECTION just like in a MOB MOVIE - how in the world did that become legal?! Or even RIGHT!!!!

I sat here asking myself IF I had issues with IE8 - the only memory is IF you use toolbars - this a major contributing factor for problems. I recall removing these toolbar(s) and always DENIED any Software install their toolbar. Some software - umm sounds like giggle seems to IMO take over a computer.

At that time I became very sensitive for so many pieces of Software to have to 'call home' (with who knows what data) - I chose to ACTIVELY travel deep into 'tools' or 'options' preferences' and TURN OFF any and all 'connect automatically to the Internet. IN MY HOME YOU MUST [still} ASK TO USE THE PHONE!!!!!

This choice required making note or 'shortcuts' in a START menu folder with these programs so that I may update  - if I feel it is necessary. Most of the time updates are NOT necessary.

The exception would be updates to security programs.

Computer users need to develop a discipline.

But - I must add that my ASSUMPTION and personal opinion to many computers users plight towards Internet performance degradation is: the excessive adding of multimedia files/windows/multimedia advertisements; what ever you want to refer to them as to WEB PAGES/SITES - uses too much of a COMPUTER OWNERS COMPUTER RESOURCES or taxes them greatly. Further I might add that these WEB PAGE/SITE developers are using GAMING LEVEL computers for WEB SITE creation. Of course THEY will NOT have any problems with their computer whilst surfing the INTERNET! While WE continue to use [healthy] WindowsXP builds limited to whatever the motherboard allowed in CPU and RAM.

This made a difference for Me. And I did NOT install  - not sure how to describe this possibly the Flash that you must download or is asked for when you go to a web page. I always wondered why it is asking for me to install it when I do not see anything wrong with the page and there is nothing indicating my computer is 'hurting' AND my computer reveals there is Flash player already there. I'm not talking about a version update by the way. All I know is - If I do install the latest and greatest Flash player used worldwide - performance takes a nose dive.

Sadly the abundance of Folk out there seeking advice - recall: "I have been going to this WEB SITE for a long time, now my computer hangs or freezes (for a period of time) becoming non-functional or my computer is so slow ONLY when on the Internet! Now flow this thought to the USUAL (the following gives me heartburn) reading over & over again - to check for malware or a virus, your registry or the Folk poised to offer as a remedy their companies program to correct the problem. This, personally annoys me as one can clearly discern some of the Folk offering advice are 'amateurs' wanting to have that 'I helped someone/good feeling today'.  I don't doubt some need to perform these routines - the way Folks use computers or due to their lack of knowledge!

I guess - a simple way to sum it up is:  A software box usually has a 'RECOMMENDED computer environment - processor and RAM' for the software to function properly or if at all. The SAME should hold true with Software updates - your/our XP environment just will not work with Software that is modified or written by/for GAMING LEVEL computers.  But do we get that advice - NO!

My advice - save a copy of what is important to you - the software versions THAT WORKED. Many Folk wait for 'others' to start complaining when there is a big update - not a bad idea just read the computer configuration of the complainant.

Sadly when I went to some of these computer help sites (not Microsoft) clearly I was censored by the so called site administrator. Think about that in a society where freedom of speech exists - a site administrator applies him/herself as a tyrant or dictator!

But it is all about not telling Folk the truth - as it means MONEY. The money of the web site developers; the Software/computer hardware company's - I think you got the picture.

I have also verified the competition that exists for web page developers to compete with hardware/software companies making web pages more exciting and 'pretty'.

Some think MP3 music is great - until you listen to your favorite album on a reference level stereo and hear the music for the first time! I guess we will be stuck in a World made for the Folks that just scratch the surface of life!

By the way - someone who gets a lot of mileage from their computer clearly has an understanding of the machine.

I did not need to replace a hard drive for 8 years.

A big key is : two drives - one for the OS boot drive and the other for data. Cooling - adequate. Important to install a thin fan to the 'C' boot hard drive - it makes a very big difference! And approach what makes heat. Overclocking Graphics cards (I don't ever do that) and having a PSU sufficient to run the components WITHOUT working very hard. The formula program that umm tells you how much PSU you need - well ADD 100 WATTS . 

 My Wife just called for dinner - bye

I don't know what is the inside track on this story.  I know that the spiking I experienced wasn't involving the BITS issue that others were having because BITS is okay for me. So it was actually the same story for me both October and November that the cumulative security update being installed offline was a fix for the CPU spiking which seemed to be a pure Windows Update website scripting problem or permissions problem that was fixed by the "secret handshake" if you preinstalled the cumulative security update before going to Windows Update. 

Hi Keith,

It's all very mysterious and a bit intriguing.

I keep a wary eye on this site to see what pops up, but haven't seen anything special as yet:

http://www.securitytracker.com/archives/summary/9000.html

I don't know what is the inside track on this story.  I know that the spiking I experienced wasn't involving the BITS issue that others were having because BITS is okay for me. So it was actually the same story for me both October and November that the cumulative security update being installed offline was a fix for the CPU spiking which seemed to be a pure Windows Update website scripting problem or permissions problem that was fixed by the "secret handshake" if you preinstalled the cumulative security update before going to Windows Update.

Dittos for me on the Firefox and the backup machines. For me most of my computer usage is not involving any tasking that ever taxes the CPU even though it is a single core P4, I just don't use the computer for anything but for text document handling and sometimes low demand multimedia like a radio stream or a standard definition video stream.  I can do that with 10 browsers and 2 office applications open and the CPU still isn't spiking.  So why in the world would an updates list compiler be molesting the CPU if it was not malicious script?  I just don't see this as accidental but as a matter of design. Clearly something extreme has recently been implemented almost like a footnote to TCP/IP has been implemented for which nobody using an XP associated version of IE will ever get the memo.

 

You can bet money Ubuntu is unaffected.

 

About the October cumulative update, no it behaved the same way as the November update in my observation and I even observed...here we go again.  So it would have been September or earlier

or maybe something between September and October when the deed was done.

Hi Keith,

I didn't have a problem with the October update and everything except the stuff MS wants me to have, but which I don't want, installed properly.

The problem only arose with the November bunch.

Don't the forum mods have any info? Mods would have some means of contact with Redmond I would have thought. Or maybe they have, but aren't disclosing what it is.