What's the deal with MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) and Windows 98?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

stan

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
238
0
18,680
0
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

Me too. Not a single problem. I'm on dial-up with a 9year old Gateway.

"SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
news:e57ATN5JFHA.2784@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Well, we live in an era of 'instant PC Experts'
>
> the typical'my brother in law-sez, ......., and the secretary at work.....
>
> roof is needed not rumors.
>
> I've had the update for 4 days and nothing has raised an ugly head yet.
>
> "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
> news:eqDybF5JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > It is just what people are saying. I don't have any proof.
> >
> > "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
> > news:%23cwdfB5JFHA.1528@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > : Any particular boards?
> > :
> > : Is this well founded and some one has absolute proof, or just some one
> > : saying it must be ...?
> > :
> > : "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
> > : news:eNc9wh4JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > : > Read the discussion boards and you will see that it is causing havoc
> with
> > : > some user's machines and associated software and/or hardware. For
> some
> > of
> > : > the users baddies are definately involved but definately not with
all
> the
> > : > users.
> > : >
> > : > "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
> > : > news:ObT$hW4JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > : > : Whata's the downside of this update?
> > : > :
> > : > : "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
> > : > : news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > : > : > Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I want to
> > : install
> > : > : it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install these
> > updates
> > : in
> > : > : general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But on
> the
> > : other
> > : > : hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711,
the
> > : > : inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this
patch
> is
> > : far
> > : > : greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine. Keep in
> mind
> > : > that
> > : > : there have been several updates this year considered "important"
for
> > : > Windows
> > : > : 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune pointed
> out,
> > : the
> > : > : difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so
> > : > significant
> > : > : in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine probably
*is*
> > : > : vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be 100% secure
> all
> > : the
> > : > : time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about not
> having
> > : this
> > : > : one patch installed.
> > : > : >
> > : > : > And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running
> WITHOUT
> > : > : anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I decided I
> > would
> > : > run
> > : > : a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what - nothing
> found
> > : > other
> > : > : than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is
> > being
> > : > : aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the Internet.
> > : > : >
> > : > : > Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was, but
what
> I
> > : do
> > : > : know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this
> manner,
> > : > : without informing the users of the potential caveats, and
apparently
> > : > without
> > : > : testing in dial-up systems, etc.
> > : > : >
> > : > : >
> > : > : >
> > : > : > "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
> > : > : news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > : > : > > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update
that
> has
> > : as
> > : > : of now
> > : > : > > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need this
> > critical
> > : > : update
> > : > : > > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way
to
> > : > : compromise
> > : > : > > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch and
have
> > not
> > : > : been
> > : > : > > updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers will
be
> a
> > : > : maximum of
> > : > : > > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is
> connected
> > to
> > : > the
> > : > : > > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE" running
> > because
> > : I
> > : > : am
> > : > : > > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better fix
but
> > : this
> > : > is
> > : > : a
> > : > : > > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe while
> > : on-line.
> > : > : If
> > : > : > > programs are not responding then discover why. People you
need
> > this
> > : > : CRITICAL
> > : > : > > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run with
the
> > : patch
> > : > : because
> > : > : > > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove Ethernet
> cable,
> > : USB
> > : > : cable
> > : > : > > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if you do
> not
> > : do
> > : > : this
> > : > : > > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just asking
for
> > : your
> > : > : system
> > : > : > > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends
although
> I
> > : know
> > : > a
> > : > : lot
> > : > : > > about security on computers and weak access points and could
> > : probably
> > : > do
> > : > : it
> > : > : > > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is with
> > keeping
> > : > the
> > : > : > > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers to
try
> > and
> > : > get
> > : > : one
> > : > : > > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the
> > : > : terriorists and
> > : > : > > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others can
> help
> > : you
> > : > : with
> > : > : > > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
> > : > : > >
> > : > : > > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message
> > : > news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
> > : > : > > :
> > : > : > > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
> > : > : > > :
> > : > : > > :
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
> > : > : > > :
> > : > : > > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past
> > week)
> > : > : > > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you
almost
> > : > : > > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the
> > : background.
> > : > : > > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any
> such
> > : > update
> > : > : > > : or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of
> > : simply
> > : > : > > : replacing an existing file).
> > : > : > > :
> > : > : > > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is
> > : critical
> > : > : > > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply
> > : > deactivating
> > : > : > > : it (via msconfig).
> > : > : > > :
> > : > : > > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and
> > : KB891711.EXE?
> > : > : > > :
> > : > : > > : Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe
> mode
> > : to
> > : > : > > : properly install it) ?
> > : > : > > :
> > : > : > > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
> > : > : > > :
> > : > : > > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
> > : > : > >
> > : > : > >
> > : > :
> > : >
> > : >
> > :
> >
> >
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

Indeed it is.

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> You think that's a simple one, eh?
>
> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS MVP Shell/User
> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>
> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:uLrjKMMMFHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> The solution is simple: don't take in all the (supposed) "updates".
>>
>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>> Just read the Win98.Gen_Discussion group, or the WindowsME.General
>>> group, and you'll see several examples of KB891711 causing BSODs.
>>> Believe me, there *is* a problem, and MS *is* working on a solution. The
>>> biggest problem we have, now, is most people who are having trouble with
>>> KB891711 don't seem to be willing to perform some rather simple tests
>>> and return the results.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>> MS MVP Shell/User
>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>>>
>>> "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
>>> news:e57ATN5JFHA.2784@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>> Well, we live in an era of 'instant PC Experts'
>>>>
>>>> the typical'my brother in law-sez, ......., and the secretary at
work.....
>>>>
>>>> roof is needed not rumors.
>>>>
>>>> I've had the update for 4 days and nothing has raised an ugly head yet.
>>>>
>>>> "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
>>>> news:eqDybF5JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>>> It is just what people are saying. I don't have any proof.
>>>>>
>>>>> "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:%23cwdfB5JFHA.1528@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> Any particular boards?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this well founded and some one has absolute proof, or just some
one
>>>>>> saying it must be ...?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:eNc9wh4JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>> Read the discussion boards and you will see that it is causing havoc
>>>>>>> with some user's machines and associated software and/or hardware.
>>> For
>>>> some
>>>>> of
>>>>>>> the users baddies are definately involved but definately not with
all
>>>>>>> the users.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:ObT$hW4JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>> Whata's the downside of this update?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>> Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I
>>> want to
>>>>>> install
>>>>>>>> it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install
>>> these
>>>>> updates
>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But
>>> on
>>>> the
>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>> hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the
>>>>>>>> inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this
>>> patch
>>>> is
>>>>>> far
>>>>>>>> greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine.
>>> Keep in
>>>> mind
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> there have been several updates this year considered "important"
for
>>>>>>>> Windows 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary
> Terhune
>>> pointed
>>>> out,
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so
>>>>>>>> significant in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine
>>>>>>>> probably *is* vulnerable to something. But that's life, you
> can't be
>> 100%
>>> secure
>>>> all
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about
>>> not
>>>> having
>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>> one patch installed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running
>>>> WITHOUT
>>>>>>>> anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I
>>> decided I
>>>>> would
>>>>>>> run
>>>>>>>> a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what -
>>> nothing
>>>> found
>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>> than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is
>>>>>>>> being aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the
>>>>>>>> Internet.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was,
>>> but what
>>>> I
>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>> know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this
manner,
>>>>>>>> without informing the users of the potential caveats, and
apparently
>>>>>>>> without testing in dial-up systems, etc.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>>> According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update
>>> that
>>>> has
>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>> of now
>>>>>>>>>> not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need
>>> this
>>>>> critical
>>>>>>>> update
>>>>>>>>>> because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to
>>>>>>>>>> compromise all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the
> patch
>>> and have
>>>>> not
>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>> updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers
>>> will be
>>>> a
>>>>>>>> maximum of
>>>>>>>>>> 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is
>>>> connected
>>>>> to
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE"
>>> running
>>>>> because
>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>> am
>>>>>>>>>> sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better
>>> fix but
>>>>>> this
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe
>>> while
>>>>>> on-line.
>>>>>>>> If
>>>>>>>>>> programs are not responding then discover why. People you
>>> need
>>>>> this
>>>>>>>> CRITICAL
>>>>>>>>>> PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run
>>> with the
>>>>>> patch
>>>>>>>> because
>>>>>>>>>> of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove
>>> Ethernet
>>>> cable,
>>>>>> USB
>>>>>>>> cable
>>>>>>>>>> or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if
>>> you do
>>>> not
>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>> and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just
>>> asking for
>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>> system
>>>>>>>>>> to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends
>>> although
>>>> I
>>>>>> know
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> lot
>>>>>>>>>> about security on computers and weak access points and
>>> could
>>>>>> probably
>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>> without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is
>>> with
>>>>> keeping
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers
>>> to try
>>>>> and
>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>>>> small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the
>>>>>>>>>> terriorists and finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I
and
>>>>>>>>>> others
>>> can
>>>> help
>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>> your computer problems. Have a nice day!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past
week)
>>>>>>>>>>> gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
>>>>>>>>>>> certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the
>>>>>>>>>>> background. It is set to run automatically at startup. First
time
>>> any
>>>> such
>>>>>>> update
>>>>>>>>>>> or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of
simply
>>>>>>>>>>> replacing an existing file).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is
critical
>>>>>>>>>>> for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply
>>>>>>>>>>> deactivating it (via msconfig).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and
KB891711.EXE?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything special about it (like running it in
>>> safe
>>>> mode
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> properly install it) ?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

OK, maybe you can share your philosophy on how one decides *which*
updates to install and which not to install.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP Shell/User
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm

"Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:%23vx0LINMFHA.732@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Indeed it is.
>
> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> > You think that's a simple one, eh?
> >
> > --
> > Gary S. Terhune
> > MS MVP Shell/User
> > http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
> > http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
> >
> > "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:uLrjKMMMFHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> >> The solution is simple: don't take in all the (supposed)
"updates".
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

Simple. None. (And I'm still here to prove it).

Next?

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> OK, maybe you can share your philosophy on how one decides *which*
> updates to install and which not to install.
>
> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS MVP Shell/User
> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>
> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:%23vx0LINMFHA.732@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> Indeed it is.
>>
>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>> You think that's a simple one, eh?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>> MS MVP Shell/User
>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>>>
>>> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>> news:uLrjKMMMFHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>> The solution is simple: don't take in all the (supposed) "updates".
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

Unfortunately, the machines I saw the problems on were at work, the update was
removed right away, and I can't put it back on to test, as it is a work computer and
I cannot "test" on those.

I have not been able to repro the problem on another machine yet....maybe this
weekend I can try on some old machines here at home.
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

"Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:ORZGYJMMFHA.2384@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Just read the Win98.Gen_Discussion group, or the WindowsME.General
> group, and you'll see several examples of KB891711 causing BSODs.
> Believe me, there *is* a problem, and MS *is* working on a solution. The
> biggest problem we have, now, is most people who are having trouble with
> KB891711 don't seem to be willing to perform some rather simple tests
> and return the results.
>
> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS MVP Shell/User
> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>
> "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
> news:e57ATN5JFHA.2784@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > Well, we live in an era of 'instant PC Experts'
> >
> > the typical'my brother in law-sez, ......., and the secretary at
> work.....
> >
> > roof is needed not rumors.
> >
> > I've had the update for 4 days and nothing has raised an ugly head
> yet.
> >
> > "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
> > news:eqDybF5JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > > It is just what people are saying. I don't have any proof.
> > >
> > > "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
> > > news:%23cwdfB5JFHA.1528@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > > : Any particular boards?
> > > :
> > > : Is this well founded and some one has absolute proof, or just some
> one
> > > : saying it must be ...?
> > > :
> > > : "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
> > > : news:eNc9wh4JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > > : > Read the discussion boards and you will see that it is causing
> havoc
> > with
> > > : > some user's machines and associated software and/or hardware.
> For
> > some
> > > of
> > > : > the users baddies are definately involved but definately not
> with all
> > the
> > > : > users.
> > > : >
> > > : > "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
> > > : > news:ObT$hW4JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > > : > : Whata's the downside of this update?
> > > : > :
> > > : > : "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
> > > : > : news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > > : > : > Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I
> want to
> > > : install
> > > : > : it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install
> these
> > > updates
> > > : in
> > > : > : general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But
> on
> > the
> > > : other
> > > : > : hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of
> KB891711, the
> > > : > : inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this
> patch
> > is
> > > : far
> > > : > : greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine.
> Keep in
> > mind
> > > : > that
> > > : > : there have been several updates this year considered
> "important" for
> > > : > Windows
> > > : > : 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune
> pointed
> > out,
> > > : the
> > > : > : difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not
> so
> > > : > significant
> > > : > : in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine
> probably *is*
> > > : > : vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be 100%
> secure
> > all
> > > : the
> > > : > : time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about
> not
> > having
> > > : this
> > > : > : one patch installed.
> > > : > : >
> > > : > : > And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running
> > WITHOUT
> > > : > : anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I
> decided I
> > > would
> > > : > run
> > > : > : a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what -
> nothing
> > found
> > > : > other
> > > : > : than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important
> thing is
> > > being
> > > : > : aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the
> Internet.
> > > : > : >
> > > : > : > Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was,
> but what
> > I
> > > : do
> > > : > : know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in
> this
> > manner,
> > > : > : without informing the users of the potential caveats, and
> apparently
> > > : > without
> > > : > : testing in dial-up systems, etc.
> > > : > : >
> > > : > : >
> > > : > : >
> > > : > : > "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
> > > : > : news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > > : > : > > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update
> that
> > has
> > > : as
> > > : > : of now
> > > : > : > > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need
> this
> > > critical
> > > : > : update
> > > : > : > > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a
> way to
> > > : > : compromise
> > > : > : > > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch
> and have
> > > not
> > > : > : been
> > > : > : > > updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers
> will be
> > a
> > > : > : maximum of
> > > : > : > > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is
> > connected
> > > to
> > > : > the
> > > : > : > > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE"
> running
> > > because
> > > : I
> > > : > : am
> > > : > : > > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better
> fix but
> > > : this
> > > : > is
> > > : > : a
> > > : > : > > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe
> while
> > > : on-line.
> > > : > : If
> > > : > : > > programs are not responding then discover why. People you
> need
> > > this
> > > : > : CRITICAL
> > > : > : > > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run
> with the
> > > : patch
> > > : > : because
> > > : > : > > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove
> Ethernet
> > cable,
> > > : USB
> > > : > : cable
> > > : > : > > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if
> you do
> > not
> > > : do
> > > : > : this
> > > : > : > > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just
> asking for
> > > : your
> > > : > : system
> > > : > : > > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends
> although
> > I
> > > : know
> > > : > a
> > > : > : lot
> > > : > : > > about security on computers and weak access points and
> could
> > > : probably
> > > : > do
> > > : > : it
> > > : > : > > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is
> with
> > > keeping
> > > : > the
> > > : > : > > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers
> to try
> > > and
> > > : > get
> > > : > : one
> > > : > : > > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby,
> the
> > > : > : terriorists and
> > > : > : > > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others
> can
> > help
> > > : you
> > > : > : with
> > > : > : > > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
> > > : > : > >
> > > : > : > > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message
> > > : > news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
> > > : > : > > :
> > > : > : > > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
> > > : > : > > :
> > > : > : > > :
> > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
> > > : > : > > :
> > > : > : > > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the
> past
> > > week)
> > > : > : > > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you
> almost
> > > : > : > > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in
> the
> > > : background.
> > > : > : > > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time
> any
> > such
> > > : > update
> > > : > : > > : or security patch has been configured to operate
> (instead of
> > > : simply
> > > : > : > > : replacing an existing file).
> > > : > : > > :
> > > : > : > > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE)
> is
> > > : critical
> > > : > : > > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are
> simply
> > > : > deactivating
> > > : > : > > : it (via msconfig).
> > > : > : > > :
> > > : > : > > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and
> > > : KB891711.EXE?
> > > : > : > > :
> > > : > : > > : Is there anything special about it (like running it in
> safe
> > mode
> > > : to
> > > : > : > > : properly install it) ?
> > > : > : > > :
> > > : > : > > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
> > > : > : > > :
> > > : > : > > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
> > > : > : > >
> > > : > : > >
> > > : > :
> > > : >
> > > : >
> > > :
> > >
> > >
> >
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

I didn't mean that to sound as harsh as it looks. I fully understand why
people can't or don't want to repro the issue and/or waste more time on
the problem, particularly those who aren't familiar with the joys of
deliberately hacking their own systems, <eg>. Only, it would certainly
help if those who have experienced the problem could give more feedback
to the people who are now in charge of fixing it. Particularly those
folks who are especially computer savvy.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP Shell/User
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm

"glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
news:e$tm5IPMFHA.4044@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Unfortunately, the machines I saw the problems on were at work, the
update was
> removed right away, and I can't put it back on to test, as it is a
work computer and
> I cannot "test" on those.
>
> I have not been able to repro the problem on another machine
yet....maybe this
> weekend I can try on some old machines here at home.
> --
> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>
> "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
> news:ORZGYJMMFHA.2384@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > Just read the Win98.Gen_Discussion group, or the WindowsME.General
> > group, and you'll see several examples of KB891711 causing BSODs.
> > Believe me, there *is* a problem, and MS *is* working on a solution.
The
> > biggest problem we have, now, is most people who are having trouble
with
> > KB891711 don't seem to be willing to perform some rather simple
tests
> > and return the results.
> >
> > --
> > Gary S. Terhune
> > MS MVP Shell/User
> > http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
> > http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
> >
> > "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
> > news:e57ATN5JFHA.2784@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > > Well, we live in an era of 'instant PC Experts'
> > >
> > > the typical'my brother in law-sez, ......., and the secretary at
> > work.....
> > >
> > > roof is needed not rumors.
> > >
> > > I've had the update for 4 days and nothing has raised an ugly head
> > yet.
> > >
> > > "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
> > > news:eqDybF5JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > > > It is just what people are saying. I don't have any proof.
> > > >
> > > > "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:%23cwdfB5JFHA.1528@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > > > : Any particular boards?
> > > > :
> > > > : Is this well founded and some one has absolute proof, or just
some
> > one
> > > > : saying it must be ...?
> > > > :
> > > > : "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
> > > > : news:eNc9wh4JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > > > : > Read the discussion boards and you will see that it is
causing
> > havoc
> > > with
> > > > : > some user's machines and associated software and/or
hardware.
> > For
> > > some
> > > > of
> > > > : > the users baddies are definately involved but definately not
> > with all
> > > the
> > > > : > users.
> > > > : >
> > > > : > "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
> > > > : > news:ObT$hW4JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > > > : > : Whata's the downside of this update?
> > > > : > :
> > > > : > : "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
> > > > : > : news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > > > : > : > Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I
> > want to
> > > > : install
> > > > : > : it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install
> > these
> > > > updates
> > > > : in
> > > > : > : general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711.
But
> > on
> > > the
> > > > : other
> > > > : > : hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of
> > KB891711, the
> > > > : > : inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by
this
> > patch
> > > is
> > > > : far
> > > > : > : greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine.
> > Keep in
> > > mind
> > > > : > that
> > > > : > : there have been several updates this year considered
> > "important" for
> > > > : > Windows
> > > > : > : 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune
> > pointed
> > > out,
> > > > : the
> > > > : > : difference between "important" and "critical" is actually
not
> > so
> > > > : > significant
> > > > : > : in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine
> > probably *is*
> > > > : > : vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be
100%
> > secure
> > > all
> > > > : the
> > > > : > : time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss
about
> > not
> > > having
> > > > : this
> > > > : > : one patch installed.
> > > > : > : >
> > > > : > : > And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been
running
> > > WITHOUT
> > > > : > : anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I
> > decided I
> > > > would
> > > > : > run
> > > > : > : a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what -
> > nothing
> > > found
> > > > : > other
> > > > : > : than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important
> > thing is
> > > > being
> > > > : > : aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the
> > Internet.
> > > > : > : >
> > > > : > : > Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates
was,
> > but what
> > > I
> > > > : do
> > > > : > : know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in
> > this
> > > manner,
> > > > : > : without informing the users of the potential caveats, and
> > apparently
> > > > : > without
> > > > : > : testing in dial-up systems, etc.
> > > > : > : >
> > > > : > : >
> > > > : > : >
> > > > : > : > "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
> > > > : > : news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > > > : > : > > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical
update
> > that
> > > has
> > > > : as
> > > > : > : of now
> > > > : > : > > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need
> > this
> > > > critical
> > > > : > : update
> > > > : > : > > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find
a
> > way to
> > > > : > : compromise
> > > > : > : > > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the
patch
> > and have
> > > > not
> > > > : > : been
> > > > : > : > > updated. My best guess is that the time for the
hackers
> > will be
> > > a
> > > > : > : maximum of
> > > > : > : > > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine
is
> > > connected
> > > > to
> > > > : > the
> > > > : > : > > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE"
> > running
> > > > because
> > > > : I
> > > > : > : am
> > > > : > : > > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a
better
> > fix but
> > > > : this
> > > > : > is
> > > > : > : a
> > > > : > : > > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be
safe
> > while
> > > > : on-line.
> > > > : > : If
> > > > : > : > > programs are not responding then discover why. People
you
> > need
> > > > this
> > > > : > : CRITICAL
> > > > : > : > > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run
> > with the
> > > > : patch
> > > > : > : because
> > > > : > : > > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove
> > Ethernet
> > > cable,
> > > > : USB
> > > > : > : cable
> > > > : > : > > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because
if
> > you do
> > > not
> > > > : do
> > > > : > : this
> > > > : > : > > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just
> > asking for
> > > > : your
> > > > : > : system
> > > > : > : > > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends
> > although
> > > I
> > > > : know
> > > > : > a
> > > > : > : lot
> > > > : > : > > about security on computers and weak access points and
> > could
> > > > : probably
> > > > : > do
> > > > : > : it
> > > > : > : > > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart
is
> > with
> > > > keeping
> > > > : > the
> > > > : > : > > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally
consumers
> > to try
> > > > and
> > > > : > get
> > > > : > : one
> > > > : > : > > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a
hobby,
> > the
> > > > : > : terriorists and
> > > > : > : > > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and
others
> > can
> > > help
> > > > : you
> > > > : > : with
> > > > : > : > > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
> > > > : > : > >
> > > > : > : > > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message
> > > > : > news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
> > > > : > : > > :
> > > > : > : > > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
> > > > : > : > > :
> > > > : > : > > :
> > > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
> > > > : > : > > :
> > > > : > : > > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within
the
> > past
> > > > week)
> > > > : > : > > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer,
you
> > almost
> > > > : > : > > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running
in
> > the
> > > > : background.
> > > > : > : > > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First
time
> > any
> > > such
> > > > : > update
> > > > : > : > > : or security patch has been configured to operate
> > (instead of
> > > > : simply
> > > > : > : > > : replacing an existing file).
> > > > : > : > > :
> > > > : > : > > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002
(KB891711.EXE)
> > is
> > > > : critical
> > > > : > : > > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are
> > simply
> > > > : > deactivating
> > > > : > : > > : it (via msconfig).
> > > > : > : > > :
> > > > : > : > > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98
and
> > > > : KB891711.EXE?
> > > > : > : > > :
> > > > : > : > > : Is there anything special about it (like running it
in
> > safe
> > > mode
> > > > : to
> > > > : > : > > : properly install it) ?
> > > > : > : > > :
> > > > : > : > > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
> > > > : > : > > :
> > > > : > : > > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
> > > > : > : > >
> > > > : > : > >
> > > > : > :
> > > > : >
> > > > : >
> > > > :
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

But you are shorter than once you were, Colorado! By 3/4's!

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
"Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:OFBkIJPMFHA.1884@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
| Simple. None. (And I'm still here to prove it).
|
| Next?
|
| Gary S. Terhune wrote:
| > OK, maybe you can share your philosophy on how one decides *which*
| > updates to install and which not to install.
| >
| > --
| > Gary S. Terhune
| > MS MVP Shell/User
| > http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
| > http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
| >
| > "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| > news:%23vx0LINMFHA.732@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| >> Indeed it is.
| >>
| >> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
| >>> You think that's a simple one, eh?
| >>>
| >>> --
| >>> Gary S. Terhune
| >>> MS MVP Shell/User
| >>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
| >>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
| >>>
| >>> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| >>> news:uLrjKMMMFHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| >>>> The solution is simple: don't take in all the (supposed)
"updates".
|
|
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

I can tell you this much, everything is working over here, including the
troubleshooters!

Well, except for that stupid file copy/delete problem in copying a large
number of files in Windows Explorer (with IE 6 and Win98SE) - but that's
been fixed by swapping those two DLL files.

So - hunky dory!

Plus I'm on a dial up, another added security benefit!

PCR wrote:
> But you are shorter than once you were, Colorado! By 3/4's!
>
> --
> Thanks or Good Luck,
> There may be humor in this post, and,
> Naturally, you will not sue,
> should things get worse after this,
> PCR
> pcrrcp@netzero.net
> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:OFBkIJPMFHA.1884@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Simple. None. (And I'm still here to prove it).
>>
>> Next?
>>
>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>> OK, maybe you can share your philosophy on how one decides *which*
>>> updates to install and which not to install.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>> MS MVP Shell/User
>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>>>
>>> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>> news:%23vx0LINMFHA.732@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>> Indeed it is.
>>>>
>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>> You think that's a simple one, eh?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>> MS MVP Shell/User
>>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
>>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>>>>>
>>>>> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:uLrjKMMMFHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> The solution is simple: don't take in all the (supposed) "updates".
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

No BSOD here, but what is/are the simple test(s)?


"Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:uLrjKMMMFHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> The solution is simple: don't take in all the (supposed) "updates".
>
> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> > Just read the Win98.Gen_Discussion group, or the WindowsME.General
> > group, and you'll see several examples of KB891711 causing BSODs.
> > Believe me, there *is* a problem, and MS *is* working on a solution. The
> > biggest problem we have, now, is most people who are having trouble with
> > KB891711 don't seem to be willing to perform some rather simple tests
> > and return the results.
> >
> > --
> > Gary S. Terhune
> > MS MVP Shell/User
> > http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
> > http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
> >
> > "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
> > news:e57ATN5JFHA.2784@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> >> Well, we live in an era of 'instant PC Experts'
> >>
> >> the typical'my brother in law-sez, ......., and the secretary at
> work.....
> >>
> >> roof is needed not rumors.
> >>
> >> I've had the update for 4 days and nothing has raised an ugly head yet.
> >>
> >> "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
> >> news:eqDybF5JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> >>> It is just what people are saying. I don't have any proof.
> >>>
> >>> "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:%23cwdfB5JFHA.1528@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> >>>> Any particular boards?
> >>>>
> >>>> Is this well founded and some one has absolute proof, or just some
one
> >>>> saying it must be ...?
> >>>>
> >>>> "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
> >>>> news:eNc9wh4JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> >>>>> Read the discussion boards and you will see that it is causing havoc
> with
> >>>>> some user's machines and associated software and/or hardware.
> > For
> >> some
> >>> of
> >>>>> the users baddies are definately involved but definately not with
all
> the
> >>>>> users.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:ObT$hW4JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>> Whata's the downside of this update?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
> >>>>>> news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>>> Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I
> > want to
> >>>> install
> >>>>>> it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install
> > these
> >>> updates
> >>>> in
> >>>>>> general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But
> > on
> >> the
> >>>> other
> >>>>>> hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the
> >>>>>> inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this
> > patch
> >> is
> >>>> far
> >>>>>> greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine.
> > Keep in
> >> mind
> >>>>> that
> >>>>>> there have been several updates this year considered "important"
for
> >>>>>> Windows 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune
> > pointed
> >> out,
> >>>> the
> >>>>>> difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so
> >>>>>> significant in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine
> >>>>>> probably *is* vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't
be
> 100%
> > secure
> >> all
> >>>> the
> >>>>>> time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about
> > not
> >> having
> >>>> this
> >>>>>> one patch installed.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running
> >> WITHOUT
> >>>>>> anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I
> > decided I
> >>> would
> >>>>> run
> >>>>>> a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what -
> > nothing
> >> found
> >>>>> other
> >>>>>> than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is
> being
> >>>>>> aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the Internet.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was,
> > but what
> >> I
> >>>> do
> >>>>>> know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this
> manner,
> >>>>>> without informing the users of the potential caveats, and
apparently
> >>>>>> without testing in dial-up systems, etc.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
> >>>>>> news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>>>> According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update
> > that
> >> has
> >>>> as
> >>>>>> of now
> >>>>>>>> not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need
> > this
> >>> critical
> >>>>>> update
> >>>>>>>> because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to
> >>>>>>>> compromise all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the
patch
> > and have
> >>> not
> >>>>>> been
> >>>>>>>> updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers
> > will be
> >> a
> >>>>>> maximum of
> >>>>>>>> 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is
> >> connected
> >>> to
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE"
> > running
> >>> because
> >>>> I
> >>>>>> am
> >>>>>>>> sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better
> > fix but
> >>>> this
> >>>>> is
> >>>>>> a
> >>>>>>>> temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe
> > while
> >>>> on-line.
> >>>>>> If
> >>>>>>>> programs are not responding then discover why. People you
> > need
> >>> this
> >>>>>> CRITICAL
> >>>>>>>> PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run
> > with the
> >>>> patch
> >>>>>> because
> >>>>>>>> of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove
> > Ethernet
> >> cable,
> >>>> USB
> >>>>>> cable
> >>>>>>>> or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if
> > you do
> >> not
> >>>> do
> >>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>> and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just
> > asking for
> >>>> your
> >>>>>> system
> >>>>>>>> to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends
> > although
> >> I
> >>>> know
> >>>>> a
> >>>>>> lot
> >>>>>>>> about security on computers and weak access points and
> > could
> >>>> probably
> >>>>> do
> >>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>> without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is
> > with
> >>> keeping
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers
> > to try
> >>> and
> >>>>> get
> >>>>>> one
> >>>>>>>> small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the
> >>>>>>>> terriorists and finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I
and
> >>>>>>>> others
> > can
> >> help
> >>>> you
> >>>>>> with
> >>>>>>>> your computer problems. Have a nice day!
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past
week)
> >>>>>>>>> gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
> >>>>>>>>> certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the
> background.
> >>>>>>>>> It is set to run automatically at startup. First time
> > any
> >> such
> >>>>> update
> >>>>>>>>> or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of
> simply
> >>>>>>>>> replacing an existing file).
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is
> critical
> >>>>>>>>> for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply
> deactivating
> >>>>>>>>> it (via msconfig).
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and
> KB891711.EXE?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Is there anything special about it (like running it in
> > safe
> >> mode
> >>>> to
> >>>>>>>>> properly install it) ?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

Basic t-shooting to see what, if anything, else on the affected system
might be at least a pre-condition to the problem. I went through the
details in my post to Win98.Gen_Discussion of 3/14 07:27 PST, titled:
"Review of KB891711.exe issue"

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP Shell/User
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm

"SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
news:ejloV0MMFHA.732@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> No BSOD here, but what is/are the simple test(s)?
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

More power to you. Off the record, I've never had a virus, nor has a
usually up-to-date McAfee ever informed me one had attempted. STILL, it
only takes one. Also, I'm sure, some of the security "flaws" MS are
always fixing don't need a virus to cause harm, but just a malicious WEB
site.


--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
"Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:%238BtsYPMFHA.3196@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| I can tell you this much, everything is working over here, including
the
| troubleshooters!
|
| Well, except for that stupid file copy/delete problem in copying a
large
| number of files in Windows Explorer (with IE 6 and Win98SE) - but
that's
| been fixed by swapping those two DLL files.
|
| So - hunky dory!
|
| Plus I'm on a dial up, another added security benefit!
|
| PCR wrote:
| > But you are shorter than once you were, Colorado! By 3/4's!
| >
| > --
| > Thanks or Good Luck,
| > There may be humor in this post, and,
| > Naturally, you will not sue,
| > should things get worse after this,
| > PCR
| > pcrrcp@netzero.net
| > "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| > news:OFBkIJPMFHA.1884@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
| >> Simple. None. (And I'm still here to prove it).
| >>
| >> Next?
| >>
| >> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
| >>> OK, maybe you can share your philosophy on how one decides *which*
| >>> updates to install and which not to install.
| >>>
| >>> --
| >>> Gary S. Terhune
| >>> MS MVP Shell/User
| >>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
| >>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
| >>>
| >>> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| >>> news:%23vx0LINMFHA.732@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| >>>> Indeed it is.
| >>>>
| >>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
| >>>>> You think that's a simple one, eh?
| >>>>>
| >>>>> --
| >>>>> Gary S. Terhune
| >>>>> MS MVP Shell/User
| >>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
| >>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
| >>>>>
| >>>>> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| >>>>> news:uLrjKMMMFHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| >>>>>> The solution is simple: don't take in all the (supposed)
"updates".
|
|
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

I've gotten a virus/trojan horse/malware or two in the past, but I took care
of it. (I think I was off on some wild goose chase in my web searches, as
I recall). And I don't remember if I had my virus program up to date (I
don't think so).

One of them was a a bit of a pain to get rid of, but restoring the registry
saved the day (and actually was necessary, unless you wanted to spend some
pruning time in there). I think that was the MALWARE one (the infamous
"180solutions" one).

PCR wrote:
> More power to you. Off the record, I've never had a virus, nor has a
> usually up-to-date McAfee ever informed me one had attempted. STILL, it
> only takes one. Also, I'm sure, some of the security "flaws" MS are
> always fixing don't need a virus to cause harm, but just a malicious WEB
> site.
>
>
> --
> Thanks or Good Luck,
> There may be humor in this post, and,
> Naturally, you will not sue,
> should things get worse after this,
> PCR
> pcrrcp@netzero.net
> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:%238BtsYPMFHA.3196@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> I can tell you this much, everything is working over here, including the
>> troubleshooters!
>>
>> Well, except for that stupid file copy/delete problem in copying a large
>> number of files in Windows Explorer (with IE 6 and Win98SE) - but that's
>> been fixed by swapping those two DLL files.
>>
>> So - hunky dory!
>>
>> Plus I'm on a dial up, another added security benefit!
>>
>> PCR wrote:
>>> But you are shorter than once you were, Colorado! By 3/4's!
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks or Good Luck,
>>> There may be humor in this post, and,
>>> Naturally, you will not sue,
>>> should things get worse after this,
>>> PCR
>>> pcrrcp@netzero.net
>>> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>> news:OFBkIJPMFHA.1884@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>>> Simple. None. (And I'm still here to prove it).
>>>>
>>>> Next?
>>>>
>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>> OK, maybe you can share your philosophy on how one decides *which*
>>>>> updates to install and which not to install.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>> MS MVP Shell/User
>>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
>>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>>>>>
>>>>> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:%23vx0LINMFHA.732@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> Indeed it is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>>> You think that's a simple one, eh?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>> MS MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
>>>>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:uLrjKMMMFHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>> The solution is simple: don't take in all the (supposed)
"updates".
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

I would go for my full system backup in that circumstance. Although I've
created a ton of partitions now, still I'm not that complex to restore.
Good for you, though, to beat them in hand to hand combat, Colorado.


--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
"Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:uK8cRqPMFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
| I've gotten a virus/trojan horse/malware or two in the past, but I
took care
| of it. (I think I was off on some wild goose chase in my web
searches, as
| I recall). And I don't remember if I had my virus program up to
date (I
| don't think so).
|
| One of them was a a bit of a pain to get rid of, but restoring the
registry
| saved the day (and actually was necessary, unless you wanted to spend
some
| pruning time in there). I think that was the MALWARE one (the
infamous
| "180solutions" one).
|
| PCR wrote:
| > More power to you. Off the record, I've never had a virus, nor has a
| > usually up-to-date McAfee ever informed me one had attempted. STILL,
it
| > only takes one. Also, I'm sure, some of the security "flaws" MS are
| > always fixing don't need a virus to cause harm, but just a malicious
WEB
| > site.
| >
| >
| > --
| > Thanks or Good Luck,
| > There may be humor in this post, and,
| > Naturally, you will not sue,
| > should things get worse after this,
| > PCR
| > pcrrcp@netzero.net
| > "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| > news:%238BtsYPMFHA.3196@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| >> I can tell you this much, everything is working over here,
including the
| >> troubleshooters!
| >>
| >> Well, except for that stupid file copy/delete problem in copying a
large
| >> number of files in Windows Explorer (with IE 6 and Win98SE) - but
that's
| >> been fixed by swapping those two DLL files.
| >>
| >> So - hunky dory!
| >>
| >> Plus I'm on a dial up, another added security benefit!
| >>
| >> PCR wrote:
| >>> But you are shorter than once you were, Colorado! By 3/4's!
| >>>
| >>> --
| >>> Thanks or Good Luck,
| >>> There may be humor in this post, and,
| >>> Naturally, you will not sue,
| >>> should things get worse after this,
| >>> PCR
| >>> pcrrcp@netzero.net
| >>> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| >>> news:OFBkIJPMFHA.1884@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
| >>>> Simple. None. (And I'm still here to prove it).
| >>>>
| >>>> Next?
| >>>>
| >>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
| >>>>> OK, maybe you can share your philosophy on how one decides
*which*
| >>>>> updates to install and which not to install.
| >>>>>
| >>>>> --
| >>>>> Gary S. Terhune
| >>>>> MS MVP Shell/User
| >>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
| >>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
| >>>>>
| >>>>> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| >>>>> news:%23vx0LINMFHA.732@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| >>>>>> Indeed it is.
| >>>>>>
| >>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
| >>>>>>> You think that's a simple one, eh?
| >>>>>>>
| >>>>>>> --
| >>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
| >>>>>>> MS MVP Shell/User
| >>>>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
| >>>>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
| >>>>>>>
| >>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| >>>>>>> news:uLrjKMMMFHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| >>>>>>>> The solution is simple: don't take in all the (supposed)
| "updates".
|
|
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

I'm computer savvy enough to know I'm done with those updates. (YMMV).
I've learned my lessons the hard way. That's my story, and I'm stickin to
it - well, at least for the most part, anyway!

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> I didn't mean that to sound as harsh as it looks. I fully understand why
> people can't or don't want to repro the issue and/or waste more time on
> the problem, particularly those who aren't familiar with the joys of
> deliberately hacking their own systems, <eg>. Only, it would certainly
> help if those who have experienced the problem could give more feedback
> to the people who are now in charge of fixing it. Particularly those
> folks who are especially computer savvy.
>
> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS MVP Shell/User
> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>
> "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:e$tm5IPMFHA.4044@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> Unfortunately, the machines I saw the problems on were at work, the
update
>> was removed right away, and I can't put it back on to test, as it is a
work
>> computer and I cannot "test" on those.
>>
>> I have not been able to repro the problem on another machine yet....maybe
>> this weekend I can try on some old machines here at home.
>> --
>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>>
>> "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
>> news:ORZGYJMMFHA.2384@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>>> Just read the Win98.Gen_Discussion group, or the WindowsME.General
>>> group, and you'll see several examples of KB891711 causing BSODs.
>>> Believe me, there *is* a problem, and MS *is* working on a solution. The
>>> biggest problem we have, now, is most people who are having trouble with
>>> KB891711 don't seem to be willing to perform some rather simple tests
>>> and return the results.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>> MS MVP Shell/User
>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>>>
>>> "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
>>> news:e57ATN5JFHA.2784@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>> Well, we live in an era of 'instant PC Experts'
>>>>
>>>> the typical'my brother in law-sez, ......., and the secretary at
work.....
>>>>
>>>> roof is needed not rumors.
>>>>
>>>> I've had the update for 4 days and nothing has raised an ugly head yet.
>>>>
>>>> "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
>>>> news:eqDybF5JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>>> It is just what people are saying. I don't have any proof.
>>>>>
>>>>> "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:%23cwdfB5JFHA.1528@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> Any particular boards?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this well founded and some one has absolute proof, or just some
one
>>>>>> saying it must be ...?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:eNc9wh4JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>> Read the discussion boards and you will see that it is
> causing
>>> havoc
>>>> with
>>>>>>> some user's machines and associated software and/or
> hardware.
>>> For
>>>> some
>>>>> of
>>>>>>> the users baddies are definately involved but definately not with
all
>>>>>>> the users.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:ObT$hW4JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>> Whata's the downside of this update?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>> Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I
>>> want to
>>>>>> install
>>>>>>>> it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install
>>> these
>>>>> updates
>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711.
> But
>>> on
>>>> the
>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>> hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the
>>>>>>>> inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by
> this
>>> patch
>>>> is
>>>>>> far
>>>>>>>> greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine.
>>> Keep in
>>>> mind
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> there have been several updates this year considered "important"
for
>>>>>>>> Windows 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune
>>> pointed
>>>> out,
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> difference between "important" and "critical" is actually
> not
>>> so
>>>>>>> significant
>>>>>>>> in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine probably
*is*
>>>>>>>> vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be
> 100%
>>> secure
>>>> all
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss
> about
>>> not
>>>> having
>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>> one patch installed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been
> running
>>>> WITHOUT
>>>>>>>> anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I
>>> decided I
>>>>> would
>>>>>>> run
>>>>>>>> a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what -
>>> nothing
>>>> found
>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>> than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is
>>>>>>>> being aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the
>>>>>>>> Internet.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates
> was,
>>> but what
>>>> I
>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>> know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this
manner,
>>>>>>>> without informing the users of the potential caveats, and
apparently
>>>>>>>> without testing in dial-up systems, etc.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>>> According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical
> update
>>> that
>>>> has
>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>> of now
>>>>>>>>>> not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need
>>> this
>>>>> critical
>>>>>>>> update
>>>>>>>>>> because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find
> a
>>> way to
>>>>>>>> compromise
>>>>>>>>>> all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the
> patch
>>> and have
>>>>> not
>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>> updated. My best guess is that the time for the
> hackers
>>> will be
>>>> a
>>>>>>>> maximum of
>>>>>>>>>> 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine
> is
>>>> connected
>>>>> to
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE"
>>> running
>>>>> because
>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>> am
>>>>>>>>>> sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a
> better
>>> fix but
>>>>>> this
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be
> safe
>>> while
>>>>>> on-line.
>>>>>>>> If
>>>>>>>>>> programs are not responding then discover why. People
> you
>>> need
>>>>> this
>>>>>>>> CRITICAL
>>>>>>>>>> PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run
>>> with the
>>>>>> patch
>>>>>>>> because
>>>>>>>>>> of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove
>>> Ethernet
>>>> cable,
>>>>>> USB
>>>>>>>> cable
>>>>>>>>>> or phone cable until the problem is resolved because
> if
>>> you do
>>>> not
>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>> and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just
>>> asking for
>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>> system
>>>>>>>>>> to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends
>>> although
>>>> I
>>>>>> know
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> lot
>>>>>>>>>> about security on computers and weak access points and
>>> could
>>>>>> probably
>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>> without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart
> is
>>> with
>>>>> keeping
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally
> consumers
>>> to try
>>>>> and
>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>>>> small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a
> hobby,
>>> the
>>>>>>>> terriorists and
>>>>>>>>>> finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and
> others
>>> can
>>>> help
>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>> your computer problems. Have a nice day!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within
> the
>>> past
>>>>> week)
>>>>>>>>>>> gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
>>>>>>>>>>> certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running
> in
>>> the
>>>>>> background.
>>>>>>>>>>> It is set to run automatically at startup. First
> time
>>> any
>>>> such
>>>>>>> update
>>>>>>>>>>> or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of
simply
>>>>>>>>>>> replacing an existing file).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002
> (KB891711.EXE)
>>> is
>>>>>> critical
>>>>>>>>>>> for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply
>>>>>>>>>>> deactivating it (via msconfig).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and
KB891711.EXE?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything special about it (like running it
> in
>>> safe
>>>> mode
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> properly install it) ?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

So, your purpose in participating in this thread is......?

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP Shell/User
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm

"Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:OBIUs6QMFHA.2136@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> I'm computer savvy enough to know I'm done with those updates.
(YMMV).
> I've learned my lessons the hard way. That's my story, and I'm
stickin to
> it - well, at least for the most part, anyway!
>
> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> > I didn't mean that to sound as harsh as it looks. I fully understand
why
> > people can't or don't want to repro the issue and/or waste more time
on
> > the problem, particularly those who aren't familiar with the joys of
> > deliberately hacking their own systems, <eg>. Only, it would
certainly
> > help if those who have experienced the problem could give more
feedback
> > to the people who are now in charge of fixing it. Particularly those
> > folks who are especially computer savvy.
> >
> > --
> > Gary S. Terhune
> > MS MVP Shell/User
> > http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
> > http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
> >
> > "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
> > news:e$tm5IPMFHA.4044@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> >> Unfortunately, the machines I saw the problems on were at work, the
> update
> >> was removed right away, and I can't put it back on to test, as it
is a
> work
> >> computer and I cannot "test" on those.
> >>
> >> I have not been able to repro the problem on another machine
yet....maybe
> >> this weekend I can try on some old machines here at home.
> >> --
> >> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> >> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> >>
> >> "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
> >> news:ORZGYJMMFHA.2384@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> >>> Just read the Win98.Gen_Discussion group, or the WindowsME.General
> >>> group, and you'll see several examples of KB891711 causing BSODs.
> >>> Believe me, there *is* a problem, and MS *is* working on a
solution. The
> >>> biggest problem we have, now, is most people who are having
trouble with
> >>> KB891711 don't seem to be willing to perform some rather simple
tests
> >>> and return the results.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Gary S. Terhune
> >>> MS MVP Shell/User
> >>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
> >>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
> >>>
> >>> "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:e57ATN5JFHA.2784@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> >>>> Well, we live in an era of 'instant PC Experts'
> >>>>
> >>>> the typical'my brother in law-sez, ......., and the secretary at
> work.....
> >>>>
> >>>> roof is needed not rumors.
> >>>>
> >>>> I've had the update for 4 days and nothing has raised an ugly
head yet.
> >>>>
> >>>> "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
> >>>> news:eqDybF5JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> >>>>> It is just what people are saying. I don't have any proof.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:%23cwdfB5JFHA.1528@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>> Any particular boards?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Is this well founded and some one has absolute proof, or just
some
> one
> >>>>>> saying it must be ...?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
> >>>>>> news:eNc9wh4JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>>> Read the discussion boards and you will see that it is
> > causing
> >>> havoc
> >>>> with
> >>>>>>> some user's machines and associated software and/or
> > hardware.
> >>> For
> >>>> some
> >>>>> of
> >>>>>>> the users baddies are definately involved but definately not
with
> all
> >>>>>>> the users.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>>> news:ObT$hW4JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>>>> Whata's the downside of this update?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>> news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>>>>> Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I
> >>> want to
> >>>>>> install
> >>>>>>>> it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install
> >>> these
> >>>>> updates
> >>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>> general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711.
> > But
> >>> on
> >>>> the
> >>>>>> other
> >>>>>>>> hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of
KB891711, the
> >>>>>>>> inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by
> > this
> >>> patch
> >>>> is
> >>>>>> far
> >>>>>>>> greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine.
> >>> Keep in
> >>>> mind
> >>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>> there have been several updates this year considered
"important"
> for
> >>>>>>>> Windows 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary
Terhune
> >>> pointed
> >>>> out,
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> difference between "important" and "critical" is actually
> > not
> >>> so
> >>>>>>> significant
> >>>>>>>> in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine
probably
> *is*
> >>>>>>>> vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be
> > 100%
> >>> secure
> >>>> all
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss
> > about
> >>> not
> >>>> having
> >>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>> one patch installed.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been
> > running
> >>>> WITHOUT
> >>>>>>>> anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I
> >>> decided I
> >>>>> would
> >>>>>>> run
> >>>>>>>> a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what -
> >>> nothing
> >>>> found
> >>>>>>> other
> >>>>>>>> than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important
thing is
> >>>>>>>> being aware of what you're doing with your computer and on
the
> >>>>>>>> Internet.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates
> > was,
> >>> but what
> >>>> I
> >>>>>> do
> >>>>>>>> know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in
this
> manner,
> >>>>>>>> without informing the users of the potential caveats, and
> apparently
> >>>>>>>> without testing in dial-up systems, etc.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>> news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>>>>>> According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical
> > update
> >>> that
> >>>> has
> >>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>> of now
> >>>>>>>>>> not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need
> >>> this
> >>>>> critical
> >>>>>>>> update
> >>>>>>>>>> because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find
> > a
> >>> way to
> >>>>>>>> compromise
> >>>>>>>>>> all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the
> > patch
> >>> and have
> >>>>> not
> >>>>>>>> been
> >>>>>>>>>> updated. My best guess is that the time for the
> > hackers
> >>> will be
> >>>> a
> >>>>>>>> maximum of
> >>>>>>>>>> 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine
> > is
> >>>> connected
> >>>>> to
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>> Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE"
> >>> running
> >>>>> because
> >>>>>> I
> >>>>>>>> am
> >>>>>>>>>> sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a
> > better
> >>> fix but
> >>>>>> this
> >>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>> a
> >>>>>>>>>> temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be
> > safe
> >>> while
> >>>>>> on-line.
> >>>>>>>> If
> >>>>>>>>>> programs are not responding then discover why. People
> > you
> >>> need
> >>>>> this
> >>>>>>>> CRITICAL
> >>>>>>>>>> PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run
> >>> with the
> >>>>>> patch
> >>>>>>>> because
> >>>>>>>>>> of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove
> >>> Ethernet
> >>>> cable,
> >>>>>> USB
> >>>>>>>> cable
> >>>>>>>>>> or phone cable until the problem is resolved because
> > if
> >>> you do
> >>>> not
> >>>>>> do
> >>>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>> and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just
> >>> asking for
> >>>>>> your
> >>>>>>>> system
> >>>>>>>>>> to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends
> >>> although
> >>>> I
> >>>>>> know
> >>>>>>> a
> >>>>>>>> lot
> >>>>>>>>>> about security on computers and weak access points and
> >>> could
> >>>>>> probably
> >>>>>>> do
> >>>>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>>>> without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart
> > is
> >>> with
> >>>>> keeping
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>> U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally
> > consumers
> >>> to try
> >>>>> and
> >>>>>>> get
> >>>>>>>> one
> >>>>>>>>>> small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a
> > hobby,
> >>> the
> >>>>>>>> terriorists and
> >>>>>>>>>> finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and
> > others
> >>> can
> >>>> help
> >>>>>> you
> >>>>>>>> with
> >>>>>>>>>> your computer problems. Have a nice day!
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>>> news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within
> > the
> >>> past
> >>>>> week)
> >>>>>>>>>>> gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you
almost
> >>>>>>>>>>> certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running
> > in
> >>> the
> >>>>>> background.
> >>>>>>>>>>> It is set to run automatically at startup. First
> > time
> >>> any
> >>>> such
> >>>>>>> update
> >>>>>>>>>>> or security patch has been configured to operate (instead
of
> simply
> >>>>>>>>>>> replacing an existing file).
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002
> > (KB891711.EXE)
> >>> is
> >>>>>> critical
> >>>>>>>>>>> for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply
> >>>>>>>>>>> deactivating it (via msconfig).
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and
> KB891711.EXE?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything special about it (like running it
> > in
> >>> safe
> >>>> mode
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>> properly install it) ?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 06:27:45 -0600, Me & wrote:

> Find yourself a copy of Eudora 3.0.5 (very old). It's text only
> email. If there are pictures included you can choose to view them,
> but no html email. That's all I run. I hate html in my email.
> You can still download it from Eudora, but I am not sure if it can be
> purchased any longer. I bought it many years ago, I upgraded to a
> newer version, and found the newer ones were html ONLY. I went back
> to the old version.


That's not true. I use Eudora 6.2 (paid version) and I have the option to
turn off HTML, not allow HTML executables and there are other options. You
are just not looking in the right place to find them. Go to Tools ->
Options -> Display to change some settings and also Tools -> Options ->
Viewing Mail for other settings. You can send and view in plain text only.

I use 40tude Dialog (free) for NG reading. You have the option between
text/plain or raw message to view the messages.

Patty
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

To warn people of the possible pitfalls of just blinding subscribing to the
"I need to get an update!" mantra.

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> So, your purpose in participating in this thread is......?
>
> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS MVP Shell/User
> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>
> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:OBIUs6QMFHA.2136@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> I'm computer savvy enough to know I'm done with those updates. (YMMV).
>> I've learned my lessons the hard way. That's my story, and I'm stickin
to
>> it - well, at least for the most part, anyway!
>>
>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>> I didn't mean that to sound as harsh as it looks. I fully understand why
>>> people can't or don't want to repro the issue and/or waste more time on
>>> the problem, particularly those who aren't familiar with the joys of
>>> deliberately hacking their own systems, <eg>. Only, it would certainly
>>> help if those who have experienced the problem could give more feedback
>>> to the people who are now in charge of fixing it. Particularly those
>>> folks who are especially computer savvy.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>> MS MVP Shell/User
>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>>>
>>> "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
>>> news:e$tm5IPMFHA.4044@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>> Unfortunately, the machines I saw the problems on were at work, the
update
>>>> was removed right away, and I can't put it back on to test, as it is a
work
>>>> computer and I cannot "test" on those.
>>>>
>>>> I have not been able to repro the problem on another machine
yet....maybe
>>>> this weekend I can try on some old machines here at home.
>>>> --
>>>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
>>>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>>>>
>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
>>>> news:ORZGYJMMFHA.2384@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Just read the Win98.Gen_Discussion group, or the WindowsME.General
>>>>> group, and you'll see several examples of KB891711 causing BSODs.
>>>>> Believe me, there *is* a problem, and MS *is* working on a solution.
The
>>>>> biggest problem we have, now, is most people who are having trouble
with
>>>>> KB891711 don't seem to be willing to perform some rather simple tests
>>>>> and return the results.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>> MS MVP Shell/User
>>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
>>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>>>>>
<snipped for some brevity>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

I've received a request from the team that's working on the
KB891711 issue. They would like everyone in the USA who has had problems
with KB891711 to call 1-866-PCSafety (1-866-727-2338). If you can help
them with some info, they say they're close to reproducing the
problem--first step toward solving it. I have asked for, though not yet
received, assurances that callers will be taken more seriously than has
been reported thus far.

(According to at least a couple of people, when they called PSS they
were told that KB891711 wasn't a critical problem on Win98 and to just
uninstall it. KB891711 deals with a very *serious* vulnerability,
affecting pretty much all Windows systems, and anyone who can't get
patched decently should don at *least* a dozen condoms before journeying
out onto the internet.)

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP Shell/User
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm


--
Jack E. Martinelli 2002-05 MS MVP for Shell/User / DTS
Help us help you: http://www.dts-L.org/goodpost.htm

http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/default.aspx
In Memorium: Alex Nichol
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone/meetexperts/nichol.mspx
Your cooperation is very appreciated.
------
"98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
>
> If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
>
> If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past week)
> gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
> certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the background.
> It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such update
> or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of simply
> replacing an existing file).
>
> Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is critical
> for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply deactivating
> it (via msconfig).
>
> Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and KB891711.EXE?
>
> Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode to
> properly install it) ?
>
> Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
>
> Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

Again, according to at least one person who's tried this latest number,
the right hand still doesn't know what the left hand is doing at MS. An
honest to God SNAFU. Unless you are stout of heart, I now recommend
holding off on those calls until I get *real* assurances.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP Shell/User
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm

"Jack E Martinelli" <jemartin_DELETE@NO_SPAM_gis.net> wrote in message
news:Owz1r8VMFHA.3852@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> I've received a request from the team that's working on the
> KB891711 issue. They would like everyone in the USA who has had
problems
> with KB891711 to call 1-866-PCSafety (1-866-727-2338). If you can help
> them with some info, they say they're close to reproducing the
> problem--first step toward solving it. I have asked for, though not
yet
> received, assurances that callers will be taken more seriously than
has
> been reported thus far.
>
> (According to at least a couple of people, when they called PSS they
> were told that KB891711 wasn't a critical problem on Win98 and to just
> uninstall it. KB891711 deals with a very *serious* vulnerability,
> affecting pretty much all Windows systems, and anyone who can't get
> patched decently should don at *least* a dozen condoms before
journeying
> out onto the internet.)
>
> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS MVP Shell/User
> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>
>
> --
> Jack E. Martinelli 2002-05 MS MVP for Shell/User / DTS
> Help us help you: http://www.dts-L.org/goodpost.htm
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/default.aspx
> In Memorium: Alex Nichol
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone/meetexperts/nichol.mspx
> Your cooperation is very appreciated.
> ------
> "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message
news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
> >
> > If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
> >
> > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
> >
> > If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past week)
> > gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
> > certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the
background.
> > It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such
update
> > or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of simply
> > replacing an existing file).
> >
> > Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is critical
> > for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply
deactivating
> > it (via msconfig).
> >
> > Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and KB891711.EXE?
> >
> > Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode to
> > properly install it) ?
> >
> > Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
> >
> > Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

Much as I hate to come to his defense, I suspect, if Terhune were
blindly doing anything, he'd 'a' fallen into an earthquake by now!


--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
"Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:%23cCQ6vWMFHA.2736@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
| To warn people of the possible pitfalls of just blinding subscribing
to the
| "I need to get an update!" mantra.
|
| Gary S. Terhune wrote:
| > So, your purpose in participating in this thread is......?
| >
| > --
| > Gary S. Terhune
| > MS MVP Shell/User
| > http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
| > http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
| >
| > "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| > news:OBIUs6QMFHA.2136@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
| >> I'm computer savvy enough to know I'm done with those updates.
(YMMV).
| >> I've learned my lessons the hard way. That's my story, and I'm
stickin
| to
| >> it - well, at least for the most part, anyway!
| >>
| >> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
| >>> I didn't mean that to sound as harsh as it looks. I fully
understand why
| >>> people can't or don't want to repro the issue and/or waste more
time on
| >>> the problem, particularly those who aren't familiar with the joys
of
| >>> deliberately hacking their own systems, <eg>. Only, it would
certainly
| >>> help if those who have experienced the problem could give more
feedback
| >>> to the people who are now in charge of fixing it. Particularly
those
| >>> folks who are especially computer savvy.
| >>>
| >>> --
| >>> Gary S. Terhune
| >>> MS MVP Shell/User
| >>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
| >>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
| >>>
| >>> "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
| >>> news:e$tm5IPMFHA.4044@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| >>>> Unfortunately, the machines I saw the problems on were at work,
the
| update
| >>>> was removed right away, and I can't put it back on to test, as it
is a
| work
| >>>> computer and I cannot "test" on those.
| >>>>
| >>>> I have not been able to repro the problem on another machine
| yet....maybe
| >>>> this weekend I can try on some old machines here at home.
| >>>> --
| >>>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
| >>>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
| >>>>
| >>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
| >>>> news:ORZGYJMMFHA.2384@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
| >>>>> Just read the Win98.Gen_Discussion group, or the
WindowsME.General
| >>>>> group, and you'll see several examples of KB891711 causing
BSODs.
| >>>>> Believe me, there *is* a problem, and MS *is* working on a
solution.
| The
| >>>>> biggest problem we have, now, is most people who are having
trouble
| with
| >>>>> KB891711 don't seem to be willing to perform some rather simple
tests
| >>>>> and return the results.
| >>>>>
| >>>>> --
| >>>>> Gary S. Terhune
| >>>>> MS MVP Shell/User
| >>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
| >>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
| >>>>>
| <snipped for some brevity>
|
|
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

I didn't say it with disrespect, but just as a cautionary measure. And I
think we are all entitled to have our own opinions.

I don't think there is one "right" answer for everyone in all situations -
that's all.

PCR wrote:
> Much as I hate to come to his defense, I suspect, if Terhune were
> blindly doing anything, he'd 'a' fallen into an earthquake by now!
>
> --
> Thanks or Good Luck,
> There may be humor in this post, and,
> Naturally, you will not sue,
> should things get worse after this,
> PCR
> pcrrcp@netzero.net
> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:%23cCQ6vWMFHA.2736@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> To warn people of the possible pitfalls of just blinding subscribing to
the
>> "I need to get an update!" mantra.
>>
>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>> So, your purpose in participating in this thread is......?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>> MS MVP Shell/User
>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>>>
>>> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>> news:OBIUs6QMFHA.2136@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>> I'm computer savvy enough to know I'm done with those updates. (YMMV).
>>>> I've learned my lessons the hard way. That's my story, and I'm
stickin
>>>> to it - well, at least for the most part, anyway!
>>>>
>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>> I didn't mean that to sound as harsh as it looks. I fully understand
why
>>>>> people can't or don't want to repro the issue and/or waste more time
on
>>>>> the problem, particularly those who aren't familiar with the joys of
>>>>> deliberately hacking their own systems, <eg>. Only, it would certainly
>>>>> help if those who have experienced the problem could give more
feedback
>>>>> to the people who are now in charge of fixing it. Particularly those
>>>>> folks who are especially computer savvy.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>> MS MVP Shell/User
>>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
>>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>>>>>
>>>>> "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:e$tm5IPMFHA.4044@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> Unfortunately, the machines I saw the problems on were at work, the
>>>>>> update was removed right away, and I can't put it back on to test, as
it
>>>>>> is a work computer and I cannot "test" on those.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have not been able to repro the problem on another machine
yet....maybe
>>>>>> this weekend I can try on some old machines here at home.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
>>>>>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:ORZGYJMMFHA.2384@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>> Just read the Win98.Gen_Discussion group, or the WindowsME.General
>>>>>>> group, and you'll see several examples of KB891711 causing BSODs.
>>>>>>> Believe me, there *is* a problem, and MS *is* working on a solution.
The
>>>>>>> biggest problem we have, now, is most people who are having trouble
with
>>>>>>> KB891711 don't seem to be willing to perform some rather simple
tests
>>>>>>> and return the results.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>> MS MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
>>>>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>>>>>>>
>> <snipped for some brevity>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

Naturally, I, too, have only ever insulted Terhune entirely by accident.
And the day his Poodles fail to catch him by the toes toppling into an
earthquake, I will be the FIRST to write his obituary!

OK, then. Just, keep your most important stuff isolated from the NET,
then, if you don't want any updates. Don't get lazy like I did &
ultimately keep a copy of your taxes on the hard drive! OK, bye.


--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
"Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:eE7PZPXMFHA.3704@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| I didn't say it with disrespect, but just as a cautionary measure.
And I
| think we are all entitled to have our own opinions.
|
| I don't think there is one "right" answer for everyone in all
situations -
| that's all.
|
| PCR wrote:
| > Much as I hate to come to his defense, I suspect, if Terhune were
| > blindly doing anything, he'd 'a' fallen into an earthquake by now!
| >
| > --
| > Thanks or Good Luck,
| > There may be humor in this post, and,
| > Naturally, you will not sue,
| > should things get worse after this,
| > PCR
| > pcrrcp@netzero.net
| > "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| > news:%23cCQ6vWMFHA.2736@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
| >> To warn people of the possible pitfalls of just blinding
subscribing to
| the
| >> "I need to get an update!" mantra.
| >>
| >> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
| >>> So, your purpose in participating in this thread is......?
| >>>
| >>> --
| >>> Gary S. Terhune
| >>> MS MVP Shell/User
| >>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
| >>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
| >>>
| >>> "Bill in Co." <someone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| >>> news:OBIUs6QMFHA.2136@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
| >>>> I'm computer savvy enough to know I'm done with those updates.
(YMMV).
| >>>> I've learned my lessons the hard way. That's my story, and I'm
| stickin
| >>>> to it - well, at least for the most part, anyway!
| >>>>
| >>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
| >>>>> I didn't mean that to sound as harsh as it looks. I fully
understand
| why
| >>>>> people can't or don't want to repro the issue and/or waste more
time
| on
| >>>>> the problem, particularly those who aren't familiar with the
joys of
| >>>>> deliberately hacking their own systems, <eg>. Only, it would
certainly
| >>>>> help if those who have experienced the problem could give more
| feedback
| >>>>> to the people who are now in charge of fixing it. Particularly
those
| >>>>> folks who are especially computer savvy.
| >>>>>
| >>>>> --
| >>>>> Gary S. Terhune
| >>>>> MS MVP Shell/User
| >>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
| >>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
| >>>>>
| >>>>> "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
| >>>>> news:e$tm5IPMFHA.4044@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| >>>>>> Unfortunately, the machines I saw the problems on were at work,
the
| >>>>>> update was removed right away, and I can't put it back on to
test, as
| it
| >>>>>> is a work computer and I cannot "test" on those.
| >>>>>>
| >>>>>> I have not been able to repro the problem on another machine
| yet....maybe
| >>>>>> this weekend I can try on some old machines here at home.
| >>>>>> --
| >>>>>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
| >>>>>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
| >>>>>>
| >>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
| >>>>>> news:ORZGYJMMFHA.2384@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
| >>>>>>> Just read the Win98.Gen_Discussion group, or the
WindowsME.General
| >>>>>>> group, and you'll see several examples of KB891711 causing
BSODs.
| >>>>>>> Believe me, there *is* a problem, and MS *is* working on a
solution.
| The
| >>>>>>> biggest problem we have, now, is most people who are having
trouble
| with
| >>>>>>> KB891711 don't seem to be willing to perform some rather
simple
| tests
| >>>>>>> and return the results.
| >>>>>>>
| >>>>>>> --
| >>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
| >>>>>>> MS MVP Shell/User
| >>>>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
| >>>>>>> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
| >>>>>>>
| >> <snipped for some brevity>
|
|
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

OK! OK! OOOKKK!!!

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
"Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:OJ6$CGWMFHA.3340@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
| Again, according to at least one person who's tried this latest
number,
| the right hand still doesn't know what the left hand is doing at MS.
An
| honest to God SNAFU. Unless you are stout of heart, I now recommend
| holding off on those calls until I get *real* assurances.
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS MVP Shell/User
| http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
| http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
|
| "Jack E Martinelli" <jemartin_DELETE@NO_SPAM_gis.net> wrote in message
| news:Owz1r8VMFHA.3852@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
....snip
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

The latest from MS:

"Microsoft has received reports about issues with KB891711 on Windows
98,
Windows 98 SE and Windows ME. At this point, we have been able to
confirm these reports and are currently working on a resolution.

"Please note that by uninstalling the current update, the machine will
return to a vulnerable state. At this point, we are currently not aware
of customer's being exploited by way of the vulnerability fixed in
MS05-002 on Windows 98, Windows 98 SE and Windows ME. If you need
additional assistance regarding this update, please contact +1 (866)
PCSAFETY."

I'm now assured, and fairly confident, that anyone who answers that
number will be up to speed on the issue.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP Shell/User
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm

"Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:OJ6$CGWMFHA.3340@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Again, according to at least one person who's tried this latest
number,
> the right hand still doesn't know what the left hand is doing at MS.
An
> honest to God SNAFU. Unless you are stout of heart, I now recommend
> holding off on those calls until I get *real* assurances.
>
> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS MVP Shell/User
> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
> http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
>
> "Jack E Martinelli" <jemartin_DELETE@NO_SPAM_gis.net> wrote in message
> news:Owz1r8VMFHA.3852@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > I've received a request from the team that's working on the
> > KB891711 issue. They would like everyone in the USA who has had
> problems
> > with KB891711 to call 1-866-PCSafety (1-866-727-2338). If you can
help
> > them with some info, they say they're close to reproducing the
> > problem--first step toward solving it. I have asked for, though not
> yet
> > received, assurances that callers will be taken more seriously than
> has
> > been reported thus far.
> >
> > (According to at least a couple of people, when they called PSS they
> > were told that KB891711 wasn't a critical problem on Win98 and to
just
> > uninstall it. KB891711 deals with a very *serious* vulnerability,
> > affecting pretty much all Windows systems, and anyone who can't get
> > patched decently should don at *least* a dozen condoms before
> journeying
> > out onto the internet.)
> >
> > --
> > Gary S. Terhune
> > MS MVP Shell/User
> > http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
> > http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jack E. Martinelli 2002-05 MS MVP for Shell/User / DTS
> > Help us help you: http://www.dts-L.org/goodpost.htm
> >
> > http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/default.aspx
> > In Memorium: Alex Nichol
> >
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone/meetexperts/nichol.mspx
> > Your cooperation is very appreciated.
> > ------
> > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message
> news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
> > >
> > > If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
> > >
> > > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
> > >
> > > If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past week)
> > > gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
> > > certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the
> background.
> > > It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such
> update
> > > or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of
simply
> > > replacing an existing file).
> > >
> > > Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is
critical
> > > for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply
> deactivating
> > > it (via msconfig).
> > >
> > > Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and
KB891711.EXE?
> > >
> > > Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode
to
> > > properly install it) ?
> > >
> > > Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
> > >
> > > Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
> >
> >
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 21:50:26 -0700, "Bill in Co."

>I can tell you this much, everything is working over here, including the
>troubleshooters!

>Well, except for that stupid file copy/delete problem in copying a large
>number of files in Windows Explorer (with IE 6 and Win98SE) - but that's
>been fixed by swapping those two DLL files.

More on that, please? Which two .DLL files?



>---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
Gone to bloggery: http://cquirke.blogspot.com
>---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts