Sysinternals
Advanced system utilities to manage, troubleshoot, and diagnose Windows and Linux systems and applications.
1,198 questions
![](data:image/svg+xml, %3Csvg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' height='64' class='font-weight-bold' style='font: 600 30.11764705882353px "SegoeUI", Arial' width='64'%3E%3Ccircle fill='hsl(307.2, 24%, 39%)' cx='32' cy='32' r='32' /%3E%3Ctext x='50%25' y='55%25' dominant-baseline='middle' text-anchor='middle' fill='%23FFF' %3EM%3C/text%3E%3C/svg%3E)
Same
what gives?
Process Monitor is showing impossibly old Timestamps for modules under \Windows\SysWOW64
![](data:image/svg+xml, %3Csvg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' height='64' class='font-weight-bold' style='font: 600 30.11764705882353px "SegoeUI", Arial' width='64'%3E%3Ccircle fill='hsl(198.4, 74%, 29%)' cx='32' cy='32' r='32' /%3E%3Ctext x='50%25' y='55%25' dominant-baseline='middle' text-anchor='middle' fill='%23FFF' %3EWU%3C/text%3E%3C/svg%3E)
Windows User
11
Reputation points
When viewing process modules, I have noticed that many modules under C:\Window\SysWOW64 have impossibly old Timestamps, yet if you view the properties of a modules, they appear normal. I observed this on my test VM and also a customer's computer who sent me a PML to examine. ![81793-2021-03-25-230110.jpg][1] [1]: /api/attachments/81793-2021-03-25-230110.jpg?platform=QnA
Sysinternals
{count} votes
-
![](data:image/svg+xml, %3Csvg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' height='64' class='font-weight-bold' style='font: 600 30.11764705882353px "SegoeUI", Arial' width='64'%3E%3Ccircle fill='hsl(137.6, 40%, 23%)' cx='32' cy='32' r='32' /%3E%3Ctext x='50%25' y='55%25' dominant-baseline='middle' text-anchor='middle' fill='%23FFF' %3ER%3C/text%3E%3C/svg%3E)
Roli 1 Reputation point2021-12-20T09:30:18+00:00 Same for me, any idea anybody?
Sign in to comment
2 answers
Sort by: Most helpful
-
-
RLWA32 47,031 Reputation points2025-02-06T20:12:43.1633333+00:00 A good discussion of bizarre timestamps can be found at Why are the module timestamps in Windows 10 so nonsensical?.