Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Pulls Broken XP Update

Posted by michael on from the repatch-and-sin-no-more dept.

Cally writes "Yahoo! reports that Microsoft have pulled a Windows XP update from the Windows Update servers after it killed network access for some users of the claimed 600,000 who installed it. (Does this mean only 600,000 XP users trust Windows Update?) The story hints that the problem was something to do with VPN or IPSec drivers clashing with Symantec software - however I haven't found anything about this on the Microsoft KnowledgeBase (the link Yahoo provide goes to the generic support home page.) Anyone got more info?"

14 of 478 comments (clear)

  1. updated link by Carl_Cne · · Score: 4, Informative

    try http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb; en-us;818043

  2. Re:Microsoft Security by Dot.Com.CEO · · Score: 4, Informative
    RTFA. I mean it is not entirely your fault, the idiotic "reporting" of "news" from michael leaves a lot to be desired, but in the article, as well as in the three line summary to which you reply, there is a mention of some people only losing network connectivity after installing the patch. Actually READING the article (a novel idea, but bear with me) renders the following:

    ""There were hundreds of thousands of people who downloaded this, and we know of only a handful of people who had the problem."

    --
    Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
  3. Before you all complain about auto update... by 26199 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The article says that since this wasn't a critical patch, just an 'improvement', auto update doesn't install it.

  4. attribution by Cally · · Score: 4, Informative

    Story submitter here - I forgot the attribution (my bad); I picked this up from the Full Disclosure mailing list, specifically, this post by Richard M. Smith.

    --
    "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
  5. It wasn't just Symantec by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yet another example of MS trying toi pass the buck and dodge the bullet...

    I had NO symantec s/ware on my system, (I use Mcafee) and I lost all networking / internet access.

    Also, the Yahoo article says that the update had to be removed which is bull$hit, the update could NOT be removed, and the only way to fix my system was to re-install and re-update Windoze.

    MS said only a small number complained, well, I did, and a couple of days later the update was pulled, no reply to my email though, not even a thank you or aknowlegment - typical MS =O(

    fLaMePr0oF

    1. Re:It wasn't just Symantec by Johnny318 · · Score: 5, Informative

      On Friday 5/23 I had a customer complain that our wireless DSL was down. After doing all the usual junk over the phone, I drove out there and checked all wires, etc. Nothing. His machine was grabbing an IP dynamically, so the wiring HAD to be correct. I asked him, "When is the last time this worked properly?" and he said Wednesday (5/21). I was about to uninstall his virus checker (Mcafee online), but first went into the XP System Restore utility, and I noticed a restore point on Wednesday due to the installation of a Microsoft update. I restored to the way the system was before Wednesday and everything worked great! Unbelievable. Microsoft is totally underplaying this one.

  6. Re:If only they had apt-get by Saint+Stephen · · Score: 5, Informative

    I got tired of apt-get blowing up my unstable Debian, so I wrote this to make it transactional:

    sub=dists/latest/binary-i386
    dt=`date +"%y%m%d_%H%M%S"`
    cd /data/apt
    dpkg-scanpackages latest /dev/null > $sub/Packages
    grep -Ex "Filename: latest/.+" $sub/Packages | sed "s/Filename: latest\/\(.*\)/\1/" > old/L$dt
    pushd $sub
    rm Packages.gz
    gzip Packages
    popd
    mv latest $dt
    mkdir latest
    for x in `cat old/L$dt`; do mv $dt/$x latest; done
    if [[ `ls $dt | wc -l` -eq 0 ]]; then rm -r $dt; fi

    If it blows up, I can easily roll back, and keep a history of all the intermedate versions.

  7. Re:Why is this news? by theCoder · · Score: 5, Informative

    True enough, but then again, I heard this story on NPR on my way to work today, so it's only natural that /. would carry something about it.

    But you're right, this does remind me of the kernel-that-never-should-have-been. I don't remember the version number (it was in the 2.4 series), but it was the one that corrupted your drives when you unmounted them. Of course, IIRC, that kernel wasn't pulled, the next version was just released very quickly. You can still get that kernel version if you really want to corrupt your data :)

    --
    "Save the whales, feed the hungry, free the mallocs" -- author unknown
  8. Re:That's the problem with automatic patching by DShor · · Score: 5, Informative

    To the best of my knowledge, the auto-patch would not download this as it was a "security improvement" not an "urgent repair". The only people who would get affected by this are the ones who manually downloaded it themselves.

    --


    Why is it that people always hear what I say, and not what I mean?
  9. difficulty with software upgrades by e**(i+pi)-1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Every software update is a risk. Especially OS updates. With software, I always fear that beside enhancements, also restrictions will be built in (happend with quicktime once years ago). Therefore, I usually
    keep a copy of the old software or to make full backups before upgrading the OS. Updating software is not trivial because it X + A + B is not equal X + B + A : the update A can and will in general change something of the modification B. After a few such operations it becomes very difficult to keep track about all possible
    states the users can have on their machine.

    My experiences from updates:

    - even for modern Linux distributions, it is a good idea
    to make full new installs rather then upgrading. I personally
    always had problems with upgrades and almost never had problems
    with full reinstalls.

    - the OS X updates went all smooth so far. Still, I always upgrade
    first one machine, wait to see if everything works fine before
    updating the others.

    - XP updates. No problem with vmware. Just keep an copy of the
    old virtual machine around. If something screws up or one of
    the software has decided to "upgrade" itself:

    rm -rf winXPHome
    mv old.winXPHome winXPHome

    Virtual machines can also easily be copied from one machine to
    an other.

  10. Automatic Updates by bjb · · Score: 5, Informative
    I think the biggest problem is how the Windows Automatic Update feature is turned on by default on everyone's machines.

    For most people, it is the only way they're ever going to install updates on their computer. However, I've found production Windows 2000 servers with this feature enabled! This is at least the 2nd or 3rd time that I've read a story on /. about a Windows XP/2000 patch that was no good.

    If you want to disable automatic updates on your computer, go to Control Panel->System->Automatic Updates tab and click the buttons to turn it off. You'll be better off picking what you want to update manually.

    --
    Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
  11. updated clickable ..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb; en-us;818043 ...

  12. Also don't install the 811493 fix by drwtsn32 · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you're running XP SP1, you definitely do not want this fix. It will bring your system to a crawl. See this for more info.

  13. The Fix by Davak · · Score: 4, Informative
    This problem should be easily fixable on any system.

    When the update occurs, XP makes a new restore point.

    If you are ever having problems after an update... just roll the system back. Easy.
    Restore Point Link


    DavaK