Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Windows MHTML Vulnerability Warning From Microsoft

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the thats-bad-mmkay dept.

Security 49

jhernik writes "An HTML scripting bug impacting all supported versions of Windows is receiving Microsoft's attention Microsoft issued an advisory on a Windows security vulnerability today after exploit code for the bug went public. The bug, which lies in the MIME Encapsulation of Aggregate HTML (MHTML) protocol handler, can be exploited to cause data leakage. Though proof-of-concept code for the vulnerability has already gone public, the company said it is unaware of any attempts to exploit the bug." This might seem familiar to you, but considering how many times I saw it submitted this morning, it probably doesn't ;)

cancel ×

49 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Dupe (1, Informative)

Lord Byron II (671689) | more than 3 years ago | (#35056110)

Re:Dupe (1)

Ephemeriis (315124) | more than 3 years ago | (#35056238)

The fact that it's a dupe is actually mentioned right in the summary...

Re:Dupe (1)

Thelasko (1196535) | more than 3 years ago | (#35056284)

The fact that it's a dupe is actually mentioned right in the summary...

I think it was added after the original story, because I don't remember it being there a few minutes ago.

Re:Dupe (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35056322)

You are correct. It was a silent, unmarked edit. Design may have changed, but editor behavior hasn't.

Re:Dupe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35057044)

You are correct. It was a silent, unmarked edit. Design may have changed, but editor behavior hasn't.

Slashdot has editors? (/oblig)

Re:Dupe (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 3 years ago | (#35057376)

Sometimes a duplicate story is important. Monday morning is a nice time to re-hash a warning that some tech folk might not have seen over the weekend.

Re:Dupe (1)

1u3hr (530656) | more than 3 years ago | (#35058810)

. Monday morning is a nice time to re-hash a warning that some tech folk might not have seen over the weekend.

If it's actually your job to know this, you had better not be depending on Commander Taco to keep you informed.

Posted just after /.'s changeover to new version. (1)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | more than 3 years ago | (#35060840)

That was posted last Friday. I suspect a lot of people didn't see it because slashdot had recently changed to the new format that is virtually unreadable on older browsers - or even recent Firefox versions.

I notice that things are substantially better today, at least for the older firefox 2.0.0.8. Maybe they got fixed up enough that more people will see this posting.

Can't make a gorilla change its spots. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35056150)

So, what have we learned in 2010? MS will deny the existence of a bug, at the very least until proof-of-concept is published; afterwards, they'll downplay it by saying "it's not really critical at all, but you should update ASAP because, uh, eh, well, the stars are right or something, but definitely not critical, nosir, not at all". In other words, same old, same old. Nothing to see here, move along.

Re:Can't make a gorilla change its spots. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35056294)

There are tentacles to see if the stars are right !
Who would refuse its share of tentacles ?

Feature (1)

mbarnsdale (911081) | more than 3 years ago | (#35056210)

It's a feature, not a bug...

Re:Feature (0)

ooctav (1684044) | more than 3 years ago | (#35056242)

It's a feature, not a bug...

It's not a bug, it's Microsoft.

Re:Feature (1, Troll)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#35056898)

It is true that, for all the freetard crowing about their precious "SSH", Microsoft is an industry leader in built-in remote access and administration tools. Many of them are so easy and intuitive that they can be configured an enabled without user intervention, or simply by visiting a website!

Re:Feature (1)

h4rm0ny (722443) | more than 3 years ago | (#35057150)

Freetard == Pirates. Libre software is not in the same category. As someone who comfortably uses MS software (albeit also uses Gentoo), if you really want to promote MS Products, please lend your support to the "other side" because you ain't helping MS's PR by spouting a load of crap on their behalf. I don't know what the Hell you find worth mocking in "SSH". It's something pretty fundamental and used by everyone.

Re:Feature (1)

Jawnn (445279) | more than 3 years ago | (#35059114)

It is also sadly true that moderators (and other respondents) are often sarcasm-challenged.

Re:Feature (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#35060554)

I figured that my sarcasm was broad enough(especially since I was just elaborating the "it's a feature not a bug" stock reply); but apparently not.

Ah well. Not every day you can be accused of shilling for Bill for a comment made from Konqueror running on a remote debian host over an ssh -X tunnel...

Re:Feature (1)

mikechant (729173) | more than 3 years ago | (#35067530)

I'll fess up and say I modded too hastily, immediately realized I was wrong and am posting to undo.
Would be nice to be able to undo an individual mistaken mod (say within a couple of minutes), but I'll try to not jump the gun in future.

Here's the MS Fixit link from the original article (4, Informative)

jayemcee (605967) | more than 3 years ago | (#35056336)

Manual method (vs. Ms FixIt) (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35056454)

TO APPLY THIS FIX:

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\MAIN\FeatureControl\FEATURE_PROTOCOL_LOCKDOWN]
"explorer.exe"=dword:00000001
"iexplore.exe"=dword:00000001
"*"=dword:00000001

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\RestrictedProtocols]

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\RestrictedProtocols\1]
"mhtml"="mhtml"

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\RestrictedProtocols\2]
"mhtml"="mhtml"

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\RestrictedProtocols\3]
"mhtml"="mhtml"

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\RestrictedProtocols\4]
"mhtml"="mhtml"

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\MAIN\FeatureControl\FEATURE_PROTOCOL_LOCKDOWN]
"explorer.exe"=dword:00000001
"iexplore.exe"=dword:00000001
"*"=dword:00000001

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\RestrictedProtocols]

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\RestrictedProtocols\1]
"mhtml"="mhtml"

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\RestrictedProtocols\2]
"mhtml"="mhtml"

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\RestrictedProtocols\3]
"mhtml"="mhtml"

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\RestrictedProtocols\4]
"mhtml"="mhtml"

----

TO UNDO THIS FIX:

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\MAIN\FeatureControl\FEATURE_PROTOCOL_LOCKDOWN]
"explorer.exe"=dword:00000000
"iexplore.exe"=dword:00000000

[-HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\RestrictedProtocols]

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\MAIN\FeatureControl\FEATURE_PROTOCOL_LOCKDOWN]
"explorer.exe"=dword:00000000
"iexplore.exe"=dword:00000000

[-HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\RestrictedProtocols]

---

(For those of you that want to "know what's 'going on', under the hood"...

APK

Re:Manual method (vs. Ms FixIt) (3, Insightful)

Smallpond (221300) | more than 3 years ago | (#35056948)

I'm going to edit my registry based on the word of AC. Seems like a reliable source.

Re:Manual method (vs. Ms FixIt) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35056990)

What, you'd rather download some MSI that's signed by Microsoft?!

Hey, stupid? It IS Ms' fix... take a read! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35058544)

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/advisory/2501696.mspx

Eat your words, you stupid little troll, and learn to READ...

I have just posted the SAME REPLY to you, in essence, as I did to the other dolt, "smallpond" (more like small brain and low literacy rate on his end, lol), as I did to here, here:

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1973914&cid=35058394

Yourself & SmallPond? Exemplary of what's wrong with the youth of today - lazy, ignorant, and STUPID! I have to generalize, but, thank god not all the young are like yourself, & SmallPond (small mind is more like it).

APK

P.S.=> Because in case you hadn't noticed, you moronic little dolt? What I posted IS what MS suggested as a valid workaround (until they TOTALLY fix this issue)... apk

Re:Hey, stupid? It IS Ms' fix... take a read! (1)

RussellSHarris (1385323) | more than 3 years ago | (#35058644)

So what you're saying is, you copied & pasted code from the MSDN website (which has "© 2011 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved." printed at the bottom) without citing the source of the information that you ripped from it.

Isn't that called plagiarism?

It's more of a contribution than your trolling (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35058962)

Ahem: In case you hadn't noticed? The poster I replied to jayemcee and HIS link/url lead right to the one I put up later in response to yourself, an AC troll, as well as the other troll "SmallPond".

I didn't see the need to post another URL from MS is all, even though I did later for you illiterate little trolls that skimmed over it from jaymcee's post URL link... but, there's NO doubting I posted valid information, and info. that came right from MS!

(Readers here could have easily seen the information I posted, and being led there from the very page that jaymcee used which I replied to, which led to the one I posted!)

APK

P.S.=> I really truly pity the likes of you online, I really do: All you do is act the ridiculous little troll to others... real "contribution" there on YOUR part, troll! apk

If you'd read the article, you'd see the same (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35058394)

See the "Suggested Actions" section, on the same link that jayemcee posted here :

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/advisory/2501696.mspx

(You'll see the same things I posted. I put up the one for 64-bit Windows is all, since more users are using it than the 32-bit version of Windows 7).

APK

P.S.=> Now, why I even BOTHER deal with some troll like yourself, that's quite obviously illiterate and lazy, I will NEVER know... but, there you are! apk

Re:If you'd read the article, you'd see the same (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35058550)

If you'd have linked to that originally, people could have had the information from a site they trusted, not some random guy posting anonymously and calling himself "apk", which appears to be a file format for the Android platform similar to the .jar Java archive filetype.

Plus they would have both the 32-bit and 64-bit instructions, not to mention that MSDN appears to know how to use basic HTML, unlike you. Here's a few pointers to get you started... hyperlinks go like this: <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/advisory/2501696.mspx">http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/advisory/2501696.mspx</a>. Quotations like this: <blockquote>paste shitload of stuff here and you might not look like a retard</blockquote>

You ridiculous little NOBODY: Patronizing me? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35058754)

Ahem: I posted completely valid information, straight from the horses mouth (MS)... which you tried to say was invalid no less... lol, now? Now, you "eat your words"!

(By the way? My reply was also up-modded to +2 also!)

Now, you? LOL, you have to sit there now, and eat your words... & that IS that!

(So, Learn to read next time, instead of shooting your stupid piehole off, and you'd be FAR better off than you are now, with egg on your face, shithead!)

APK

P.S.=>

"If you'd have linked to that originally, people could have had the information from a site they trusted, not some random guy posting anonymously and calling himself "apk", which appears to be a file format for the Android platform similar to the .jar Java archive filetype" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 31, @01:05PM (#35058550)

Ahem: I OWN "APK", far longer than GOOGLE has... they are my initials, literally, & since this day in the 1960's no less (it's my b-day today)... yet again you've shot your piehole off, only to look stupid, once more on your part.

---

"Plus they would have both the 32-bit and 64-bit instructions, not to mention that MSDN appears to know how to use basic HTML, unlike you. Here's a few pointers to get you started" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 31, @01:05PM (#35058550)

Also, before the "likes of you", a FUCKING NOBODY, tries to "patronize me"?

(You, who obviously have done nothing of note in this field in your ENTIRE LIFE you little shit?)

Well...

The day you've done more than this, and before I did, in the arena of the computer sciences that was noted well by respected publications in this art & science + ended up with my work in commercial wares also, per this PARTIAL LIST ONLY (of my favs)?

---

Windows NT Magazine (now Windows IT Pro) April 1997 "BACK OFFICE PERFORMANCE" issue, page 61

(&, for work done for EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com on PAID CONTRACT (writing portions of their SuperCache program increasing its performance by up to 40% via my work) albeit, for their SuperDisk & HOW TO APPLY IT, took them to a finalist position @ MS Tech Ed, two years in a row 2000-2002, in its HARDEST CATEGORY: SQLServer Performance Enhancement).

WINDOWS MAGAZINE, 1997, "Top Freeware & Shareware of the Year" issue page 210, #1/first entry in fact (my work is there)

PC-WELT FEB 1998 - page 84, again, my work is featured there

WINDOWS MAGAZINE, WINTER 1998 - page 92, insert section, MUST HAVE WARES, my work is again, there

PC-WELT FEB 1999 - page 83, again, my work is featured there

CHIP Magazine 7/99 - page 100, my work is there

GERMAN PC BOOK, Data Becker publisher "PC Aufrusten und Repairen" 2000, where my work is contained in it

HOT SHAREWARE Numero 46 issue, pg. 54 (PC ware mag from Spain), 2001 my work is there, first one featured, yet again!

Also, a British PC Mag in 2002 for many utilities I wrote, saw it @ BORDERS BOOKS but didn't buy it... by that point, I had moved onto other areas in this field besides coding only...

Being paid for an article that made me money over @ PCPitstop in 2008 for writing up a guide that has people showing NO VIRUSES/SPYWARES & other screwups, via following its point, such as THRONKA sees here -> http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=ee926d913b81bf6d63c3c7372fd2a24c&t=28430&page=3

Lastly, lately (this year)?

It's also been myself helping out the folks at the UltraDefrag64 project (a 64-bit defragger for Windows), in showing them code for how to do Process Priority Control @ the GUI usermode/ring 3/rpl 3 level in their program (good one too), & being credited for it by their lead dev & his team... see here -> http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/handbook/Credits.html

---

The day you yourself can show you have accomplished more than I have in this field, and before I did? That's the day you can even TRY to "act as my peer" you arrogant little bastard nobody...

About time someone told off a little shitbag troll like you, and exactly how I just have... now, let's see you backup your crap, vs. that list.

(In fact? I also strongly wager I did all that while you were still in diapers, and I have continued to do so up to the present (since 1995 no less))... apk

Re:You ridiculous little NOBODY: Patronizing me? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35059502)

Gee.. such aggression.. why?

You tried to "patronize me", troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35059630)

"Gee.. such aggression.. why?" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 31, @02:35PM (#35059502)

Yes, just as I suspected: You're a done nothing of note in computer science troll, who attempts to patronize others ontop of being shown you are incorrect in insinuating I posted bad information!

(LOL, and you had the NERVE to try to tell me "what's-what" in the realm of computer sciences? Please...)

APK

P.S.=> This "ring a bell" there, dimwit? You said this to me:

"not to mention that MSDN appears to know how to use basic HTML, unlike you. Here's a few pointers to get you started" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 31, @01:05PM (#35058550)

So, since you're "such an expert on things computing"? Well, show us you've done more than I have & earlier than I have + to equal respect/notoriety in the realm of computing as I have....

AFTER ALL:

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1973914&cid=35058754

YOU were asked to do so after your attempt @ "patronizing me" in the url above from this very exchange, & it's now rather FUNNY how you "run away" from that now, after that quote of YOUR WORDS directed MY WAY, above... apk

Re:You tried to "patronize me", troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063398)

They're probably more than one AC. You're one of the only ACs that actually gets involved in a back-and-forth conversation and frequently sockpuppets other ACs. I'm not the same AC as before. You can tell, in part, because I have a very different writing style.

You're being INCREDIBLY hostile to people suggesting that maybe you should have linked the source. It's not a good idea to follow your suggestions, even though they happen to be correct. It's a terrible idea to do it based on your say-so.

It's not personal. It can't be, given that anyone could impersonate you because you haven't logged in, so even if they did know and trust the name APK they shouldn't trust your post. It's not about you, it's about trusting an unauthenticated post on a tech blog, notorious for including trolls that post links to shock sites while mimicking honest helpfulness, to give accurate security information about rather opaque network-facing registry settings.

Please stop being so abrasive. Name-calling is juvenile and trying to put others down based on respect/notoriety in the realm of computing is unacceptable. Believing your original post would be a failure of basic computer security, on a computer security post. And please, please stop acting like you're better than everybody else. You aren't.

BULLSHIT, you ne'er-do-well troll... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35064208)

"I'm not the same AC as before. You can tell, in part, because I have a very different writing style." - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 31, @09:48PM (#35063398)

Ahem: BULLSHIT! Who do you think you are fooling?

APK

P.S.=>

"You're being INCREDIBLY hostile to people suggesting that maybe you should have linked the source." - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 31, @09:48PM (#35063398)

Uhm, troll? First of all, AGAIN:

The original poster, jaymcee, and the URL he listed? Has the one with the data from MS I used, RIGHT IN IT @ THE TOP!

There was NO real reason for me to post the URL again, even though I did to satisfy the jackass nitpicking trolls around here, who MOSTLY haven't done SHIT with themselves!

Yet, they're trying to "patronize me" & yes, also INSULT ME?

(Man, LMAO - please, give us a break & just fuck off!)

---

"It's not a good idea to follow your suggestions, even though they happen to be correct. " - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 31, @09:48PM (#35063398)

Contradicting yourself? Please - Do you have ANY IDEA how STUPID you sound after saying that?

(I.E.-> Even though I am correct, it's incorrect to use what I posted?? Even though it's been VERIFIED as coming from "The Horses Mouth", in MS???)

Again, give us a fucking break, you waste of life troll...

---

"It's a terrible idea to do it based on your say-so.." - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 31, @09:48PM (#35063398)

My "say so" carries a HELL OF A LOT MORE WEIGHT in this art & science than you & yours here EVER will, shit head... get used to it! apk

Show us all reading here you're better than I am! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35064330)

"And please, please stop acting like you're better than everybody else. You aren't." - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 31, @09:48PM (#35063398)

No, I am just saying, AND SHOWING, that in the art & science of computing, I am ONE HELL OF A LOT BETTER THAN YOU APPEAR TO BE, even though you f'd up badly in your trolling me... and?

I'm done "mincing words" with an off-topic little troll like you & even attempting to be polite to a worm like you...

So, since you said that?

WELL - Quit running away from proving YOU ARE BETTER THAN I AM IN THIS ART & SCIENCE then, big talker/armchair QB, & please: DO show us you've done more than the list below, to your name/credit!

Anyone can "talk a game", you pitiful "armchair QB"... it's QUITE another to have done the job & done well @ it... but then, you'd never know that feeling now, would you? I doubt it.

---

Windows NT Magazine (now Windows IT Pro) April 1997 "BACK OFFICE PERFORMANCE" issue, page 61

(&, for work done for EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com on PAID CONTRACT (writing portions of their SuperCache program increasing its performance by up to 40% via my work) albeit, for their SuperDisk & HOW TO APPLY IT, took them to a finalist position @ MS Tech Ed, two years in a row 2000-2002, in its HARDEST CATEGORY: SQLServer Performance Enhancement).

WINDOWS MAGAZINE, 1997, "Top Freeware & Shareware of the Year" issue page 210, #1/first entry in fact (my work is there)

PC-WELT FEB 1998 - page 84, again, my work is featured there

WINDOWS MAGAZINE, WINTER 1998 - page 92, insert section, MUST HAVE WARES, my work is again, there

PC-WELT FEB 1999 - page 83, again, my work is featured there

CHIP Magazine 7/99 - page 100, my work is there

GERMAN PC BOOK, Data Becker publisher "PC Aufrusten und Repairen" 2000, where my work is contained in it

HOT SHAREWARE Numero 46 issue, pg. 54 (PC ware mag from Spain), 2001 my work is there, first one featured, yet again!

Also, a British PC Mag in 2002 for many utilities I wrote, saw it @ BORDERS BOOKS but didn't buy it... by that point, I had moved onto other areas in this field besides coding only...

Being paid for an article that made me money over @ PCPitstop in 2008 for writing up a guide that has people showing NO VIRUSES/SPYWARES & other screwups, via following its point, such as THRONKA sees here -> http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=ee926d913b81bf6d63c3c7372fd2a24c&t=28430&page=3

Lastly, lately (this year)?

It's also been myself helping out the folks at the UltraDefrag64 project (a 64-bit defragger for Windows), in showing them code for how to do Process Priority Control @ the GUI usermode/ring 3/rpl 3 level in their program WITH CODE for it (their app's a good one too), & being credited for it by their lead dev & his team... see here -> http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/handbook/Credits.html

---

I mean, lol, if you'd done even 1/2 of that list??

Then, MAYBE THEN, I'd even pay you & those of "your ilk" online, any mind whatsoever:

APK

P.S.=> Going to run away, 2nd time now/again, from proving YOU are better than I am in this field then, even though you tried to "patronize me" with this line of crap, requoted for all reading here's reference:

"MSDN appears to know how to use basic HTML, unlike you. Here's a few pointers to get you started" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 31, @01:05PM (#35058550)

See above, drink it in & digest it, you pitiful ne'er do well arrogant troll... on your best day in your entire existence? You couldn't even do a fraction of what I can show from only a small partial list to my credit in fact... and you're trying to condescend to me/patronize me?

You're the one who has to backup his big mouth now, so go for it... big talker/armchair QB... apk

Re:Show us all reading here you're better than I a (1)

zeroshade (1801584) | more than 3 years ago | (#35109612)

Please link to some proof that you are who you say you are, and you have done what you say you have done. For all anyone knows you are a random person claiming the initials APK and claiming that you have done oh so much. In reality, it is difficult for you to prove anything seeing as you aren't even logged in so if multiple people were posting the same way, there's no way to know the difference.

If you are as knowledgeable as you claim to be, then you would know that it is stupid to follow the instructions of some person you've never heard of simply because they say they are knowledgeable and claim to have done a lot of development.

Prove who YOU are then, first... apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35119132)

Prove you are who you say you are, if you're offering such advice. Anyone can take an internet nickname and use it anywhere. It's not like you have it patented.

If you are as knowledgeable as you claim to be, then you would know that it is stupid to follow the instructions of some person you've never heard of simply because they say they are knowledgeable and claim to have done a lot of development. by zeroshade (1801584) on Saturday February 05, @12:37AM (#35109612)

If you are as knowledgeable as you *THINK* you are, offering advice as you do? Then, you'd have seen the information I posted was actually led to from the article the op posted... that is, IF people here would actually READ THE F'ING ARTICLE (& largely, many here, don't, typically).

APK

Cut the bullshit, troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130736)

"Please link to some proof that you are who you say you are, and you have done what you say you have done. For all anyone knows you are a random person claiming the initials APK and claiming that you have done oh so much." - by zeroshade (1801584) on Saturday February 05, @12:37AM (#35109612)

First, prove who YOU are, behind your childish little "nickname" you use here... ok? Your attempt @ logic here "backfires" on you, because I can ask the SAME of you.

---

"In reality, it is difficult for you to prove anything seeing as you aren't even logged in so if multiple people were posting the same way, there's no way to know the difference." - by zeroshade (1801584) on Saturday February 05, @12:37AM (#35109612)

What a load of horseshit. Pretty much everyone here knows who I am, & even things I've done (because it's not the 1st time I posted the list I use).

----

"If you are as knowledgeable as you claim to be, then you would know that it is stupid to follow the instructions of some person you've never heard of simply because they say they are knowledgeable and claim to have done a lot of development" - .by zeroshade (1801584) on Saturday February 05, @12:37AM (#35109612)

I only claimed I knew what was up in this thread, technically, & I also posted some things I have done in the field of computing that did well. That's all. As far as verifying it? I posted means to do so through this thread, & if anyone wishes to verify them, please - FEEL FREE to do so.

APK

P.S.=> The true "bottom-line" here, is this: The op's original link leads right to the data I posted in fact, right at its outset/start in fact... Thus, I felt no need to post the link, because MS always posts a DETAILED LINK of what their "FixIt" tools in fact, really do, which is what I posted!

(Then again though, you'd have to expect readers here to be intelligent enough to "RTFA", & most? Most apparently, do not)...

Why is WHY, nevertheless, my post is still "modded up" +1 INFORMATIVE... despite all the b.s. "protests" here... argue with that! apk

Let's put the shoe on the other foot (yours) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35148930)

"Please link to some proof that you are who you say you are, and you have done what you say you have done." - by zeroshade (1801584) on Saturday February 05, @12:37AM (#35109612)

See subject-line, prove who YOU are, first... ok? Additionally, I have proofs of what I say I do, and I have had others here 'test them' before, & they ended up eating their own words, and pretty much everyone here who comes here regularly knows who I am anyways!

---

"For all anyone knows you are a random person claiming the initials APK and claiming that you have done oh so much. " - by zeroshade (1801584) on Saturday February 05, @12:37AM (#35109612)

More than yourself, or my other "naysayers" here... that much is certain, based on their lack of being able to produce 1 single thing they've done of note in the art & science of computing that did well & was a credit to them, via the critique of others (especially in printed publications like books or magazines in the field of computing, or commercial code to their credit, or being winners/finalists at something like MsTechEd 2 yrs. in a row in its hardest category (as I have been)).

---

"In reality, it is difficult for you to prove anything" - " - by zeroshade (1801584) on Saturday February 05, @12:37AM (#35109612)

Not really: What exactly would you like proof of from my statements? I can back up pretty much all of it easily enough.

---

"If you are as knowledgeable as you claim to be" - by zeroshade (1801584) on Saturday February 05, @12:37AM (#35109612)

NO, I only claimed to have done well in this art & science, and I have visible accomplishments I can put up to MY credit easily from having done well at it (unlike most others around here).

---

"then you would know that it is stupid to follow the instructions of some person you've never heard of simply because they say they are knowledgeable and claim to have done a lot of development." - by zeroshade (1801584) on Saturday February 05, @12:37AM (#35109612)

Again, where did I say I was "knowledgeable"? Thanks for the compliment then, I suppose. On the note of development?? I've been at that, professionally, for almost 17 yrs. now... how about you???

Secondly/lastly: What I posted IS correct, and works (and can be undone too)... & if folks here would bother READ THE F'ING ARTICLE?? They would have seen that much... though I even posted the direct link to the info. I put up, from MS, and the op's original post leads right to it, from its outset early on no less!

APK

Re:Manual method (vs. Ms FixIt) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35062692)

Actually that's a completely legitimate patch that was posted because if you'd actually have read the article that the op jaymcee put up in his post, you'd have seen that nearly right away the information the anonymous coward put up is actually what the Microsoft FixIt tool does for you.

Useless features. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35056364)

I'm pretty sure if MHTML were wiped off the face of the earth tomorrow, nobody would miss it. Why must we have all these useless data formats / protocols / standards? They are nothing but security holes.

MHTML is HTML in a MIME container (2)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#35056492)

MHTML [wikipedia.org] is nothing more than a MIME multipart message containing HTML. If there's a vulnerability in IE's handling of MHTML, then there's probably a vulnerability in each mail client that Microsoft maintains.

Are you at risk if you use an "alternate" browser? (2)

HouseOfMisterE (659953) | more than 3 years ago | (#35056378)

Are you at risk if you use an alternate web browser like Firefox, Opera, or Chrome?

Re:Are you at risk if you use an "alternate" brows (1)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 3 years ago | (#35056582)

Chrome seems to just render a blank document for mhtml: urls, and doesn't let you enter them in the omnibox directly (it searches instead). Firefox gets confused and thinks mhtml: is not associated with any application and so refuses to open it. (Even if it didn't, IIRC it'll ask you whether you want to open it or not.)

Re:Are you at risk if you use an "alternate" brows (1)

RussellSHarris (1385323) | more than 3 years ago | (#35058096)

Chrome seems to just render a blank document for mhtml: urls, and doesn't let you enter them in the omnibox directly... Firefox gets confused and thinks mhtml: is not associated with any application

Yeah. Probably because "mhtml" isn't a valid URL protocol, according to HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT.

"My Computer\HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\mhtml" doesn't exist.

"My Computer\HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\mhtmlfile" exists, but it doesn't have the "URL Protocol" REG_SZ flag set.

Here we have yet another example of Internet Explorer / Windows doing things in non-standard ways and breaking everything else. The MSDN Library even has a how-to page describing how to register an application to a URL protocol [microsoft.com] ...

For instance, to add an "alert:" protocol, add an alert key to HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT, as follows [...] Under this new key, the URL Protocol string value indicates that this key declares a custom protocol handler. Without this key, the handler application will not launch. [...]

HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT
    alert

        (Default) = "URL:Alert Protocol"
        URL Protocol = ""
        DefaultIcon
            (Default) = "alert.exe,1"
        shell
            open
                command

                    (Default) = "C:\Program Files\Alert\alert.exe" "%1"quote>

Re:Are you at risk if you use an "alternate" brows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35056868)

It depends.

For web browsing? no.

But IE isn't just used for browsing. That's why MS argued so heavily that they *can't* unbundle IE from the OS.

Use Outlook Express for reading email? IE does the work of rendering the email's body in the window.
Use any applications with MS-standard helpfiles? IE is used to render those.
These are just two examples.

The question is, do any programs that delegate content rendering to IE choke if they're used to open MTML content, or do they just blindly pass it along?

Re:Are you at risk if you use an "alternate" brows (3, Informative)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 3 years ago | (#35056926)

Opera has fixed this. Firefox crashes. I would hope Chrome has fixed it because Google is the company that discovered the problem.

Re:Are you at risk if you use an "alternate" brows (1)

RussellSHarris (1385323) | more than 3 years ago | (#35058270)

Firefox does not "crash". It pops up an alert message which reads as follows:

Firefox doesn't know how to open this address, because the protocol (mhtml) isn't associated with any program.

...which it isn't. Go check HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT...

Re:Are you at risk if you use an "alternate" brows (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 3 years ago | (#35059460)

So wait, it affected Opera as well? Is it because it used some IE bits to handle MHTML, or because any naive implementation of it is prone to that bug?

"alternate"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35057014)

Are you at risk if you use an alternate web browser like Firefox, Opera, or Chrome?

Firefox, Opera,and Chrome are browsers.

Internet Explorer is the badly named front end for Windows Update in Windows XP and earlier. Sure, you can use it for other tasks, but that's like using a hand grenade as a hammer.

Re:Are you at risk if you use an "alternate" brows (1)

Ol Olsoc (1175323) | more than 3 years ago | (#35068130)

Yes, because plenty of programs use IE, even if it doesn't appear that way. Make sure you install the fix.

impacting all supported versions of Windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35058996)

You mean present in all releases of the product.
Better yet, all releases have this flaw.

"Impact" is what happens when a solid object strikes another solid object.

"Impacting" means almost nothing but suggests the vulnerability occurred recently.
No, it has been present all along.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?