update 811493

[SEM]

Iv tryed to use windowns update however, it doesnt seem
to wana work with a particular update (#811493). I
download it, install it and reboot, but next time i go to
check windows update it says i havent installed it. What
is up? How do I fix this? or where should i e-mail about
it?


SEM

[Mark Salloway]

Hi SEM
You most likely need to do one of the following two actions to make this
update install correctly. Go to start > run and enter services.msc
In the services window find an entry called cryptographic services and
double click on it. Ensure its startup type is set to automatic and start
the service if its status is stopped.
You may also need rename a folder called catroot2 in
c:\windows\system32. If one of the catalog files in the catroot2 folder
becomes corrupt some updates will fail to install properly.
If renaming catroot2 corrects things you may also want to install Q817287:
Critical Update (Catalog Database Corruption in Microsoft Windows) from the
windows update site to prevent the problem happening again in the future.

Hope that helps

--
Mark

"SEM" > wrote in message
...
> Iv tryed to use windowns update however, it doesnt seem
> to wana work with a particular update (#811493). I
> download it, install it and reboot, but next time i go to
> check windows update it says i havent installed it. What
> is up? How do I fix this? or where should i e-mail about
> it?
>
>
> SEM
>
>
>

[johnf]

You may be interested in a reply I posted to another NG.

If any of you are having problems with Q811493 and have a stand-alone PC,
just
uninstall Q811493 and leave it uninstalled - it's not necessary.

If you read the fine print, it says in part -

"For an attack to be successful, an attacker would need to be able to logon
interactively to the system, either AT THE CONSOLE or through A TERMINAL
SESSION.
Also, a successful attack would require the introduction of code in order to
exploit this vulnerability. This issue most directly affects client systems
and terminal servers."

--
Johnf

> Hi SEM
> You most likely need to do one of the following two actions to make this
> update install correctly. Go to start > run and enter services.msc
> In the services window find an entry called cryptographic services and
> double click on it. Ensure its startup type is set to automatic and
> start the service if its status is stopped.
> You may also need rename a folder called catroot2 in
> c:\windows\system32. If one of the catalog files in the catroot2 folder
> becomes corrupt some updates will fail to install properly.
> If renaming catroot2 corrects things you may also want to install
> Q817287: Critical Update (Catalog Database Corruption in Microsoft
> Windows) from the windows update site to prevent the problem happening
> again in the future.
>
> Hope that helps
>
> --
> Mark
>
> "SEM" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Iv tryed to use windowns update however, it doesnt seem
>> to wana work with a particular update (#811493). I
>> download it, install it and reboot, but next time i go to
>> check windows update it says i havent installed it. What
>> is up? How do I fix this? or where should i e-mail about
>> it?
>>
>>
>> SEM
>>
>>
>>

[Ted]

On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 05:44:33 GMT johnf > wrote:

> You may be interested in a reply I posted to another NG.
>
> If any of you are having problems with Q811493 and have a stand-alone
> PC, just uninstall Q811493 and leave it uninstalled - it's not
> necessary.

Yes, that is ok for now. Installing 811493 crashes my PC, but I don't
actually need the patch so no problem.

But... What happens when the patch is rolled up into SP2?

Ted.

[johnf]

> On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 05:44:33 GMT johnf > wrote:
>
>> You may be interested in a reply I posted to another NG.
>>
>> If any of you are having problems with Q811493 and have a stand-alone
>> PC, just uninstall Q811493 and leave it uninstalled - it's not
>> necessary.
>
> Yes, that is ok for now. Installing 811493 crashes my PC, but I don't
> actually need the patch so no problem.
>
> But... What happens when the patch is rolled up into SP2?
>
> Ted.

Hopefully there will have been enough feedback pressure by then for them to
fix it properly.
If it appears in SP2 (undeletable), they won't be one bit popular.

Johnf

[Will Denny]

Hi Johnf

How do you mean 'fix it properly'? Where does your info come from =
regarding SP2? Why are you advising that 811493 isn't needed?

Will

"johnf" > wrote in message =
...
>=20
>=20
> > On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 05:44:33 GMT johnf > wrote:
> >
> >> You may be interested in a reply I posted to another NG.
> >>
> >> If any of you are having problems with Q811493 and have a =
stand-alone
> >> PC, just uninstall Q811493 and leave it uninstalled - it's not
> >> necessary.
> >
> > Yes, that is ok for now. Installing 811493 crashes my PC, but I =
don't
> > actually need the patch so no problem.
> >
> > But... What happens when the patch is rolled up into SP2?
> >
> > Ted.
>=20
> Hopefully there will have been enough feedback pressure by then for =
them to
> fix it properly.
> If it appears in SP2 (undeletable), they won't be one bit popular.
>=20
> Johnf
>=20
>=20


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.501 / Virus Database: 299 - Release Date: 14/07/2003

[johnf]

By 'fix it properly', it's apparent, by reading posts on more than one
MS-related NG, that some are still encountering problems with the revised
Hotfix.

I don't recall mentioning anything regarding having any SP2 info. What I
said there is that they release SP2 with the apparently buggy fix in-situ,
there will be no way of uninstalling Q811493. That was Ted's query.

If you read what I said below, in 'read more' for Q811493, it is effectively
saying that to MALICIOUSLY take advantage of the flaw, a 3rd. person must
'hack' it either via the keyboard of the PC or access the PC via a Network.
If the PC is a stand-alone unit, there's no chance of this happening.

--
Johnf

> Hi Johnf
>
> How do you mean 'fix it properly'? Where does your info come from
> regarding SP2? Why are you advising that 811493 isn't needed?
>
> Will
>
> "johnf" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>>
>>> On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 05:44:33 GMT johnf > wrote:
>>>
>>>> You may be interested in a reply I posted to another NG.
>>>>
>>>> If any of you are having problems with Q811493 and have a stand-alone
>>>> PC, just uninstall Q811493 and leave it uninstalled - it's not
>>>> necessary.
>>>
>>> Yes, that is ok for now. Installing 811493 crashes my PC, but I don't
>>> actually need the patch so no problem.
>>>
>>> But... What happens when the patch is rolled up into SP2?
>>>
>>> Ted.
>>
>> Hopefully there will have been enough feedback pressure by then for
>> them to
>> fix it properly.
>> If it appears in SP2 (undeletable), they won't be one bit popular.
>>
>> Johnf
>>
>>
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.501 / Virus Database: 299 - Release Date: 14/07/2003

[Will Denny]

Hi

The revised 811493 is OK - I haven't seen any problems with it apart =
from the OP in this thread.

Quote - from your posting "If it appears in SP2 (undeletable), they =
won't be one bit popular" - that would indicate you have prior knowledge =
of any SP2 update that may be available at a later date.

A 3rd person 'could' be on the same Intranet - in which case there =
wouldn't much 'hacking' involved.

Will

"johnf" > wrote in message =
...
> By 'fix it properly', it's apparent, by reading posts on more than one
> MS-related NG, that some are still encountering problems with the =
revised
> Hotfix.
>=20
> I don't recall mentioning anything regarding having any SP2 info. What =
I
> said there is that they release SP2 with the apparently buggy fix =
in-situ,
> there will be no way of uninstalling Q811493. That was Ted's query.
>=20
> If you read what I said below, in 'read more' for Q811493, it is =
effectively
> saying that to MALICIOUSLY take advantage of the flaw, a 3rd. person =
must
> 'hack' it either via the keyboard of the PC or access the PC via a =
Network.
> If the PC is a stand-alone unit, there's no chance of this happening.
>=20
> --
> Johnf
>=20
> > Hi Johnf
> >
> > How do you mean 'fix it properly'? Where does your info come from
> > regarding SP2? Why are you advising that 811493 isn't needed?
> >
> > Will
> >
> > "johnf" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 05:44:33 GMT johnf > =
wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> You may be interested in a reply I posted to another NG.
> >>>>
> >>>> If any of you are having problems with Q811493 and have a =
stand-alone
> >>>> PC, just uninstall Q811493 and leave it uninstalled - it's not
> >>>> necessary.
> >>>
> >>> Yes, that is ok for now. Installing 811493 crashes my PC, but I =
don't
> >>> actually need the patch so no problem.
> >>>
> >>> But... What happens when the patch is rolled up into SP2?
> >>>
> >>> Ted.
> >>
> >> Hopefully there will have been enough feedback pressure by then for
> >> them to
> >> fix it properly.
> >> If it appears in SP2 (undeletable), they won't be one bit popular.
> >>
> >> Johnf
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.501 / Virus Database: 299 - Release Date: 14/07/2003
>=20
>=20


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.501 / Virus Database: 299 - Release Date: 14/07/2003

[Ted]

On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 14:25:30 +0100 Will Denny >
wrote:

> Hi
>
> The revised 811493 is OK -

That's just plain wrong. It is patently not ok for everybody.


> I haven't seen any problems with it apart from the OP in this thread.

Then you have not been looking much. There have been a number of problems
reported in this very newsgroup, and elsewhere.

Why are you un-willing to believe that they may still be problem with
the 811493 patch? Just because it does not happen to cause YOU a problem?

Ted.

[johnf]

Thanks, Ted, I'm glad that someone knew where I was coming from.
Time to ignore Will, he appears to read innuendos into everything.

--
Johnf

> On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 14:25:30 +0100 Will Denny >
> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> The revised 811493 is OK -
>
> That's just plain wrong. It is patently not ok for everybody.
>
>
>> I haven't seen any problems with it apart from the OP in this thread.
>
> Then you have not been looking much. There have been a number of
> problems reported in this very newsgroup, and elsewhere.
>
> Why are you un-willing to believe that they may still be problem with
> the 811493 patch? Just because it does not happen to cause YOU a
> problem?
>
> Ted.

[Ted]

"Ted" > wrote in message =
. ..
> On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 14:25:30 +0100 Will Denny >=20
> wrote:
>=20
> > Hi
> >=20
> > The revised 811493 is OK -
>=20
> That's just plain wrong. It is patently not ok for everybody.
>=20
>=20
> > I haven't seen any problems with it apart from the OP in this =
thread.
>=20
> Then you have not been looking much. There have been a number of =
problems=20
> reported in this very newsgroup, and elsewhere.
>=20
> Why are you un-willing to believe that they may still be problem with=20
> the 811493 patch? Just because it does not happen to cause YOU a =
problem?
>=20
> Ted.

Will Denny, the MVP arse kissing ****, won't see your post, because =
anyone with the same name as mine is plonked!

[Unknown]

Ever think that some people are just blaming 811493 and in fact it is some
other problem? Think about that.
"johnf" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks, Ted, I'm glad that someone knew where I was coming from.
> Time to ignore Will, he appears to read innuendos into everything.
>
> --
> Johnf
>
> > On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 14:25:30 +0100 Will Denny >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> The revised 811493 is OK -
> >
> > That's just plain wrong. It is patently not ok for everybody.
> >
> >
> >> I haven't seen any problems with it apart from the OP in this thread.
> >
> > Then you have not been looking much. There have been a number of
> > problems reported in this very newsgroup, and elsewhere.
> >
> > Why are you un-willing to believe that they may still be problem with
> > the 811493 patch? Just because it does not happen to cause YOU a
> > problem?
> >
> > Ted.
>
>

[Will Denny]

I have thought about that, yes. If anyone has a real problem with =
811493, please post your error messages, I will report them and =
hopefully have a 'fix'.

"Unknown" - you could of course guarantee the same?

Will

"Unknown" > wrote in message =
.com...
> Ever think that some people are just blaming 811493 and in fact it is =
some
> other problem? Think about that.
> "johnf" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Thanks, Ted, I'm glad that someone knew where I was coming from.
> > Time to ignore Will, he appears to read innuendos into everything.
> >
> > --
> > Johnf
> >
> > > On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 14:25:30 +0100 Will Denny =
>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi
> > >>
> > >> The revised 811493 is OK -
> > >
> > > That's just plain wrong. It is patently not ok for everybody.
> > >
> > >
> > >> I haven't seen any problems with it apart from the OP in this =
thread.
> > >
> > > Then you have not been looking much. There have been a number of
> > > problems reported in this very newsgroup, and elsewhere.
> > >
> > > Why are you un-willing to believe that they may still be problem =
with
> > > the 811493 patch? Just because it does not happen to cause YOU a
> > > problem?
> > >
> > > Ted.
> >
> >
>=20


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.501 / Virus Database: 299 - Release Date: 14/07/2003

[Edward]

On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 23:44:34 +0100 Will Denny >
wrote:

> I have thought about that, yes. If anyone has a real problem with
> 811493, please post your error messages, I will report them and
> hopefully have a 'fix'.

Ok...Here goes...


Firstly, I have installed all available updates apart from 811493. My PC
is perfectly stable and runs for days on end with no crashing/lockup
problems at all.

I then install 811493 and after a random time, usually 2 to 3 hours, the
PC suddenly locks up solid. There is no warning. There are no on-screen
error messages or any indications of anything unusual. The screen/
keyboard/mouse/etc just suddenly freeze. Nothing is logged anywhere (no
error events logged). The PC is just TOTALLY locked up, suggesting to me
that the CPU itself has crashed, therefore no further activity can take
place.


A hard reset is the only option. The PC re-boots quite normally and
everything looks and runs fine until another few hours go past and it
suddenly locks up again.

I can't post any "error messages" as there aren't any.
There are no clues
whatsoever as to what exactly triggered the lockup.
Once the PC is locked
up there is nothing I can do except hit the reset button.

This problem occurs regardless of what program(s) the PC is running at the
time. It even occurs if I shut down all running applications (including
firewall, virus scanner, etc) and leave it just idling.

If I then un-install 811493, the PC is perfectly stable again.

Now where would you place the blame for this problem. To me it suggests
that 811493 is the culprit or certainly the catalyst. Without that patch
the PC is perfectly stable.

Ted.

[Will Denny]

Hi

I agree with you, 811493 would seem to be the problem in your case. =
I'll see if this problem is still being reported. Is there any 'hint' =
in Event Viewer as to what might have caused your PC to freeze up:

Start>Run - then type in "eventvwr.msc" - without the quotes - click on =
'Application' in the left hand pane.

Will

"Edward" > wrote in message =
.. .
> On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 23:44:34 +0100 Will Denny >=20
> wrote:
>=20
> > I have thought about that, yes. If anyone has a real problem with=20
> > 811493, please post your error messages, I will report them and=20
> > hopefully have a 'fix'.
>=20
> Ok...Here goes...
> =20
>=20
> Firstly, I have installed all available updates apart from 811493. My =
PC=20
> is perfectly stable and runs for days on end with no crashing/lockup=20
> problems at all.
>=20
> I then install 811493 and after a random time, usually 2 to 3 hours, =
the=20
> PC suddenly locks up solid. There is no warning. There are no =
on-screen=20
> error messages or any indications of anything unusual. The screen/
> keyboard/mouse/etc just suddenly freeze. Nothing is logged anywhere =
(no=20
> error events logged). The PC is just TOTALLY locked up, suggesting to =
me=20
> that the CPU itself has crashed, therefore no further activity can =
take=20
> place.
>=20
>=20
> A hard reset is the only option. The PC re-boots quite normally and=20
> everything looks and runs fine until another few hours go past and it=20
> suddenly locks up again.
>=20
> I can't post any "error messages" as there aren't any.
> There are no clues=20
> whatsoever as to what exactly triggered the lockup.
> Once the PC is locked=20
> up there is nothing I can do except hit the reset button.
>=20
> This problem occurs regardless of what program(s) the PC is running at =
the=20
> time. It even occurs if I shut down all running applications =
(including=20
> firewall, virus scanner, etc) and leave it just idling.
>=20
> If I then un-install 811493, the PC is perfectly stable again.
>=20
> Now where would you place the blame for this problem. To me it =
suggests=20
> that 811493 is the culprit or certainly the catalyst. Without that =
patch=20
> the PC is perfectly stable.
>=20
> Ted.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.501 / Virus Database: 299 - Release Date: 14/07/2003

[Edward]

On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 11:22:56 +0100 Will Denny >
wrote:

> Hi
>
> I agree with you, 811493 would seem to be the problem in your case.
> I'll see if this problem is still being reported. Is there any 'hint'
> in Event Viewer as to what might have caused your PC to freeze up:

No, nothing whatsoever. Normal events appear to be recorded up to (some
time before) the lockup. The lockup is sudden and complete. The PC just
stops dead in it's tracks.

I have tried installing 811493 several times, both before and after
installing other new updates, and each time the result was the same.
Sudden total lockup after a hour or two.

Ted.

[johnf]

> On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 11:22:56 +0100 Will Denny >
> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> I agree with you, 811493 would seem to be the problem in your case.
>> I'll see if this problem is still being reported. Is there any 'hint'
>> in Event Viewer as to what might have caused your PC to freeze up:
>
> No, nothing whatsoever. Normal events appear to be recorded up to (some
> time before) the lockup. The lockup is sudden and complete. The PC just
> stops dead in it's tracks.
>
> I have tried installing 811493 several times, both before and after
> installing other new updates, and each time the result was the same.
> Sudden total lockup after a hour or two.
>
> Ted.

Are you installing the latest from the Update site each time & not from a
back-up?
That has all the symptoms displayed by the March release (first noticable
symptom - cursor suddenly freezes for about 30 secs. then temporarily frees
up again.)
--

Johnf

[Will Denny]

OK, Ted, I'll see what I can find out for you.

Will

"Edward" > wrote in message =
.. .
> On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 11:22:56 +0100 Will Denny >=20
> wrote:
>=20
> > Hi
> >=20
> > I agree with you, 811493 would seem to be the problem in your case. =

> > I'll see if this problem is still being reported. Is there any =
'hint'=20
> > in Event Viewer as to what might have caused your PC to freeze up:
>=20
> No, nothing whatsoever. Normal events appear to be recorded up to =
(some=20
> time before) the lockup. The lockup is sudden and complete. The PC =
just=20
> stops dead in it's tracks.
>=20
> I have tried installing 811493 several times, both before and after=20
> installing other new updates, and each time the result was the same.=20
> Sudden total lockup after a hour or two.
>=20
> Ted.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.501 / Virus Database: 299 - Release Date: 14/07/2003

[Edward]

On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 12:51:20 GMT johnf > wrote:

> Are you installing the latest from the Update site each time & not from
> a back-up?

Yes, a fresh download from the MS site each time.

> That has all the symptoms displayed by the March release (first
> noticable
> symptom - cursor suddenly freezes for about 30 secs. then temporarily
> frees up again.)

No, it's not that. The lockup is complete and permanent (until I reboot).
The whole PC just stops dead. ALL activity ceases.

Ted.

[Edward]

On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 14:04:01 +0100 Will Denny >
wrote:

> OK, Ted, I'll see what I can find out for you.
>
> Will

Thank you. I do realise that without any error messages, or other similar
reports, it is very difficult to even guess what the real problem is.

My real concern, as I stated earlier, is not with this specific update (
which I can well live without)
but with the possibility it will be
incorporated in a future SP2 along with other new fixes, and I will then
be unable to install SP2.

Ted.

[macjinty]

Hi

I am having exactly the same problem with 811493.
On 7th June downloaded and installed. Within minutes Pc locked up.
Used restore and system fine.
Reinstalled 811493 on 3 more occasions and symptoms repeated.
Finally left it off completely.
System running fine with all other updates to present.

Then today I installed 811493 from the CD ROM with Sept issue of Windows
Xp -the Official magazine to see if this worked any different.
Within 2 minutes the PC froze and I had to reset. This after several weeks
without any crashes.
I have since used system restore to remove and system fine again.
I shall leave this update completely.

Mac


"Edward" > wrote in message
.. .
> On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 14:04:01 +0100 Will Denny >
> wrote:
>
> > OK, Ted, I'll see what I can find out for you.
> >
> > Will
>
> Thank you. I do realise that without any error messages, or other similar
> reports, it is very difficult to even guess what the real problem is.
>
> My real concern, as I stated earlier, is not with this specific update (
> which I can well live without)
> but with the possibility it will be
> incorporated in a future SP2 along with other new fixes, and I will then
> be unable to install SP2.
>
> Ted.

[Edward]

On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 19:41:20 +0100 macjinty >
wrote:

> I am having exactly the same problem with 811493.
> On 7th June downloaded and installed. Within minutes Pc locked up.
> Used restore and system fine.
> Reinstalled 811493 on 3 more occasions and symptoms repeated.
> Finally left it off completely.
> System running fine with all other updates to present.
>
> Then today I installed 811493 from the CD ROM with Sept issue of Windows
> Xp -the Official magazine to see if this worked any different.
> Within 2 minutes the PC froze and I had to reset. This after several
> weeks
> without any crashes.
> I have since used system restore to remove and system fine again.
> I shall leave this update completely.
>
> Mac

Hi Mac,
Nice to know I am not the only one with this problem with 811493. Your
experience does sound exactly the same as mine. Lets hope Microsoft can
fix it before it gets incorporated into SP2.

Edward.

[António Figueiredo]

There is a new version of the notorious 811493 update dated August 25.
Since I've had nothing but trouble with the 2 previous versions
(frequent lockups), I am hesitating to install this new one. Anyone
out there with the lockups problem that has tried this new version?

Regards,
Antonio

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 20:39:11 -0700, "SEM" >
wrote:

>Iv tryed to use windowns update however, it doesnt seem
>to wana work with a particular update (#811493). I
>download it, install it and reboot, but next time i go to
>check windows update it says i havent installed it. What
>is up? How do I fix this? or where should i e-mail about
>it?
>
>
>SEM
>
>

[Gene K]

Yes, with no problems.
Gene K
"António Figueiredo" > wrote in message
...
> There is a new version of the notorious 811493 update dated August 25.
> Since I've had nothing but trouble with the 2 previous versions
> (frequent lockups), I am hesitating to install this new one. Anyone
> out there with the lockups problem that has tried this new version?
>
> Regards,
> Antonio
>
> On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 20:39:11 -0700, "SEM" >
> wrote:
>
> >Iv tryed to use windowns update however, it doesnt seem
> >to wana work with a particular update (#811493). I
> >download it, install it and reboot, but next time i go to
> >check windows update it says i havent installed it. What
> >is up? How do I fix this? or where should i e-mail about
> >it?
> >
> >
> >SEM
> >
> >
>
>

[Chris]

On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 21:58:00 +0100 António Figueiredo .
utl.pt> wrote:

> There is a new version of the notorious 811493 update dated August 25.
> Since I've had nothing but trouble with the 2 previous versions
> (frequent lockups), I am hesitating to install this new one. Anyone
> out there with the lockups problem that has tried this new version?
>
> Regards,
> Antonio

This "new" version still causes my PC to crash, just as the previous
version did. A sudden and complete freeze. No warnings, no error messages,
no reports. The PC just stops dead in its tracks. Without 811493 the PC is
100% reliable.

Chris.