×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Releases Replacement Patch With Two Known Bugs

samzenpus posted about 4 months ago | from the second-time-is-usually-a-charm dept.

Microsoft 140

snydeq writes Microsoft has re-released its botched MS14-045/KB 2982791 'Blue Screen 0x50' patch, only to introduce more problems, InfoWorld's Woody Leonhard reports. "Even by Microsoft standards, this month's botched Black Tuesday Windows 7/8/8.1 MS14-045 patch hit a new low. The original patch (KB 2982791) is now officially 'expired' and a completely different patch (KB 2993651) offered in its stead; there are barely documented revelations of new problems with old patches; patches that have disappeared; a 'strong' recommendation to manually uninstall a patch that went out via Automatic Update for several days; and an infuriating official explanation that raises serious doubts about Microsoft's ability to support Windows 9's expected rapid update pace."

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

Oh microsoft (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783343)

And people still come up to me and say they can't use free software cause they need enterprise-grade quality

Re:Oh microsoft (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783403)

When free software comes with a sea of bugs without often no one taking responsibility of fixing them, I can understand those people's arguments. If we look at Linux desktop, usually the GUI does not stay in one piece, and is full of little glitches here and there. Compared to that, these Microsoft patches are a very minor worry.

Re:Oh microsoft (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783449)

BSoD, boot failure... yeah very minor compared to GUI imperfections... pinhead. And i wonder which linux desktop you're talking about or are you still in 2007? Linux Mint to say one is very sound, functional and elegant.

Re:Oh microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783633)

Just the other day I read here that Linux Mint is a poor distro when talking about Linux being ready for primetime on the desktop, and that more robust distros like Ubuntu and Red Hat should be used.

Make up your damned minds!

Re:Oh microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783805)

Indeed. I'm kind of tired of the "you are just using wrong distro" argument. Today it seems to be the easy way out when someone mentions about problems. There is no clear consensus about a robust desktop Linux distro anyway. They all seem to have their share of problems.

The whole distro arguement is retarded. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784009)

Learn a DE or Window manager you're comfortable with, learn the package manager for the distro of your choice, and learn the administration tools necessary to maintain your needed level of customization (for most people it's display settings, i8n, and network settings). Given those 5 needs fullfilled the distro itself usually doesn't matter, unless you happen to choose one that makes installing/updating your chosen packages difficult (Which honestly Microsoft is no better about since the XP->Vista transition, and the Win9x to NT transition prior.

Re:The whole distro arguement is retarded. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47785081)

But there are hundreds of distros with different package managers, DE's, should grandma and grandpa or average joe have to go through all of these distro's to find what they like, if their old brain can comprehend.

So you have xp, vista, 7, 8, 8.1 and all these can run the majority of .msi and .exe programs do to api backwards compatibility. No cli needed. Shit! I can still run my old dos programs in windows 7 and 8.1.

Unix was a shitty geeky toy and linus torvalds adopted this paradigm. Even MS dropped their xenix.

Re:Oh microsoft (0, Redundant)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | about 4 months ago | (#47784321)

Well if you read it in a post on Slashdot it must be true! No shills ever post here and try to spread misinformation about Linux! Well, er, I mean, you're the only one.

Re:Oh microsoft (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784407)

It's usually zealots not shills which post pro-Linux comments here. I believe actual shills are very rare in Slashdot (for both Microsoft and The Linux Foundation).

Re:Oh microsoft (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784443)

If you could read you would realize he said misinformation, not pro-linux.

Re:Oh microsoft (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784985)

Fair enough, then I remove the first sentence of my comment. But I still believe that the word "shill" is thrown around a bit too much here.

Re:Oh microsoft (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47785601)

Posting AC for obvious reasons, but....

My main account was paid for by Microsoft, and they send me $400 a week to post pro-Microsoft stuff. I am paid directly by Waggener Egstrom.

Re:Oh microsoft (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47785919)

Agreed. I'm the pope and also an astronaut. I am paid directly by the CIA.

Re:Oh microsoft (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784455)

Well if you read it in a post on Slashdot it must be true! No shills ever post here and try to spread misinformation about Linux! Well, er, I mean, you're the only one.

True, this place is pretty much chock full of Linux shills.

Re:Oh microsoft (0)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | about 4 months ago | (#47784467)

And as you agree by your own admission, they never spread misinformation about it :-)

Re:Oh microsoft (0, Troll)

lippydude (3635849) | about 4 months ago | (#47783485)

It's understandable why you would post anonymously ..

"When free software comes with a sea of bugs without often no one taking responsibility of fixing them, I can understand those people's arguments. If we look at Linux desktop, usually the GUI does not stay in one piece, and is full of little glitches here and there. Compared to that, these Microsoft patches are a very minor worry."

Re:Oh microsoft (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783675)

Unlike you, who is using his real name. Your parents must have really hated you.

Re:Oh microsoft (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784145)

FUD.

Re:Oh microsoft (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784853)

The free software desktop's problems are a lack of polish. Microsoft's problems are outright neglect.

Re:Oh microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784925)

You do realize that your argument is nothing but semantics, right? ...right?

Re:Oh microsoft (4, Informative)

phantomfive (622387) | about 4 months ago | (#47786059)

I've written enterprise software, used by large banks and other corporations. Our software was so bad, I couldn't understand how it would help anyone, I'm sure the people who used it were slowed down by the process.

Finally I realized they did get one thing from it: accountability. If you've never been there, it's hard to understand how corporations are shaped by SOX compliance, and general accounting problems. If a $2000 purchase disappears at a startup, it's a minor problem. But at a large company, accountants will be looking for weeks to find what happened to it.

Those are the kinds of issues large companies deal with, and removing the accountability of the decision making process (of figuring out what software to use) and giving it to Microsoft is a real service for them. This is the same reason people use RedHat, even though RedHat gives their software away for free. It is one of those things that makes no sense to you until you've worked in that kind of environment.

Re:Oh microsoft (2)

thieh (3654731) | about 4 months ago | (#47783631)

What enterprise-grade quality?

Re:Oh microsoft (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47785789)

What enterprise-grade quality?

Software from a billion dollar plus company, which required a PO large enough to justify firing the person who approved it, not just the one who implemented it.

If MS F's up, you can blame them as they yell at you to fix it. If your cobbled together, zero budget, but works 99% of the time solution fails, then it is 100% on you.
It is completely unfair, but that's the way it is. If the Oracle DB blows up in a patch, you can point to not having a 2nd instance to use as a test system. The finance guys can point to the lack of an extra $100k to spend on a test system and the CEO can blame Oracle/budget to the board.

If the same issue occurs on mysql, everyone points at you and you alone, since you could have just set up a second system for cheap - never mind that that would double the admin/patch/test time with no corresponding increase in headcount.

Pendants: This is done in serial, not parallel, otherwise you are not staging it properly to test it.

Never useful info given with patches (5, Insightful)

RenHoek (101570) | about 4 months ago | (#47783347)

What pisses me off as a consumer is that Microsoft patches never come with any kind of useful information.

"There are X patches available", and when you click a specific patch you get "This is a stability patch for Windows 8" or something generic like that.

How can a consumer make an informed decision to go ahead and install patches or not without hours of looking up KB numbers?

I'd like more info, so that unless a patch specifically fixes a security bug, I'd rather leave the rest of the patches uninstalled as long as my system runs ok.

Re:Never useful info given with patches (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783397)

Click on the update and you should see a 'More Information' link on the right. Click it and your browser should open to a MS knowledge base page that explains what the patch does.

Seems perfectly clear to me :) (3, Interesting)

lippydude (3635849) | about 4 months ago | (#47783591)

"Click on the update and you should see a 'More Information' link on the right. Click it and your browser should open to a MS knowledge base page that explains what the patch does".

"To view this vulnerability as a standard entry in the Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures list, see CVE-2014-0318 [mitre.org] ." ref [microsoft.com]

'win32k.sys .. does not properly control access to thread-owned objects, which allows local users to gain privileges via a crafted application, aka "Win32k Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability ."'

Re:Never useful info given with patches (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783435)

What pisses me off as a consumer is that Microsoft patches never come with any kind of useful information.

"There are X patches available", and when you click a specific patch you get "This is a stability patch for Windows 8" or something generic like that.

How can a consumer make an informed decision to go ahead and install patches or not without hours of looking up KB numbers?

I'd like more info, so that unless a patch specifically fixes a security bug, I'd rather leave the rest of the patches uninstalled as long as my system runs ok.

I completely agree, but that is a problem only shared by very few Windows users. A vast majority of users aren't going to care about anything more than "This is a stability patch for Windows 8". Most won't even care about that, they just install without reviewing.

Re:Never useful info given with patches (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783493)

Yeah, because they trust the MS guys must be right in deciding those are the patches needed to actually fix or improve their systems.

Re:Never useful info given with patches (3, Insightful)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about 4 months ago | (#47784101)

Most won't even care about that, they just install without reviewing.

I doubt it's much different in other platforms. Mac OS or Android or Linux. When there is an update, most people don't have the time to carefully go over what it's doing. Nor should they.

When the plumber comes to my house, as he did yesterday, all I care about is that the hot water is coming and the toilets flush. I don't crawl under the sink to see if he properly greased the pipes or whatever the hell it is plumbers do.

I have met people who work for Microsoft and Apple and they are neat and earnest and are by all appearances proper and trustworthy citizens. I've also met people who contribute to open source OSs. They look like the guy who stands on the on-ramp with a sign asking for change. A little bit dangerous with greasy hair and a a psychotic glimmer in the eyes.

I'm kidding of course, and just tweaking people who use Linux (like myself), but as Eclipse (played by Frank McRae) said to Sylvester Stallone upon his imprisonment in the classic American film Lock Up, "You gotta trust somebody. Let me hip you to the joint."

Re:Never useful info given with patches (4, Informative)

MrL0G1C (867445) | about 4 months ago | (#47783487)

You beat me to it, this page is what we need:
https://technet.microsoft.com/... [microsoft.com]

But of course that info should be right there on the windows update window.

Re:Never useful info given with patches (4, Insightful)

TubeSteak (669689) | about 4 months ago | (#47785065)

But of course that info should be right there on the windows update window.

It was there in WinXp.
Microsoft seems to think that dumbing down all their user interfaces = the future of computing.

How is this insightful? Are links difficult now? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783495)

You are talking about the short summary in the windows update UI, but there is always a direct link to a Knowledge Base article with much more details.

Are Slashdot posters really unable to follow a direct hyperlink to the information you are after without spending hours on it?? WTF??

Don't know what you are talking about (3, Insightful)

benjymouse (756774) | about 4 months ago | (#47783523)

Perhaps you should give it 3 secs investigation before you shout off.

3 secs should be just enough to click the "more information" link.

Re:Don't know what you are talking about (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783563)

3 secs should be just enough to click the "more information" link.

Every time I have clicked a "more information" link, I have been taken to a completely useless webpage that contains no information about the KB in question.

Re:Don't know what you are talking about (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783643)

3 secs should be just enough to click the "more information" link.

Every time I have clicked a "more information" link, I have been taken to a completely useless webpage that contains no information about the KB in question.

I don't know which "more information" links you have been clicking, but the *KB in question* is directly linked in the short summary about the update.

Re:Don't know what you are talking about (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47785725)

I just ran updates on my Win7 box because of this comment, and I can verify this: The more information link does NOT take you to a related KB article. In fact three of the links timed out, the rest went to pages with zero information about what the update did, and no further information can be found.

I can, however, Google the patch to find the exact KB article I need. There is no way to find that page from any line of clicking that starts from Windows Update though.

Re:Don't know what you are talking about (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47786107)

It worked for me last night when I read the "known issues" bit and declined to install the patch. Maybe you should talk to your network administrator.

Re:Don't know what you are talking about (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783687)

Not sure what you're talking about. The link on Windows Update takes you to the KB article directly. In the introduction of that KB article is a clearly marked link for more information for IT professionals, which takes you to the TechNet security advisory.

For the patch in question, here are those URLs:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2993651 [microsoft.com]
https://technet.microsoft.com/library/security/MS14-045 [microsoft.com]

I read every single one of them before installing. They've never been remotely difficult to find.

Re:Don't know what you are talking about (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783627)

Before you get too smug, please explain how clicking on "more information" would help explain the mystery of Windows Update Agent 7.6.7600.320 and all of the associated problems it causes? That's only one example of many over the last couple decades.

There has always been *lots* of holes in the Microsoft KB and explanations of patches. Saying just click on more information implies that Microsoft has documented everything and the OP is simply an idiot and/or lazy. In this case he isn't.

Re:Don't know what you are talking about (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783679)

Before you get too smug, please explain how clicking on "more information" would help explain the mystery of Windows Update Agent 7.6.7600.320 and all of the associated problems it causes? That's only one example of many over the last couple decades.

There has always been *lots* of holes in the Microsoft KB and explanations of patches. Saying just click on more information implies that Microsoft has documented everything and the OP is simply an idiot and/or lazy. In this case he isn't.

He said MS patches never comes with any kind of useful information, only a short generic description, and that he needs to spend hours to find KB information -- when this is directly hyperlinked in the update. Maybe idiot is to strong word, but it is uninformed nonsense.

Re:Don't know what you are talking about (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about 4 months ago | (#47784115)

3 secs should be just enough to click the "more information" link.

I'm pretty sure that unless he's suffering from the DTs, it won't take him 3 seconds to click a link.

Why are they hiding information? (2)

sjbe (173966) | about 4 months ago | (#47784217)

3 secs should be just enough to click the "more information" link.

You apparently have never bothered to click the "more information" link. It is a pretty good approximation of useless unless you click several layers deep and shouldn't be necessary in the first place. A short description of what the patch actually is intended to do would not kill Microsoft. I shouldn't have to go hunting for that information if I want it. Yes I know how to find out what the patch is for but Microsoft has made it needlessly hard.

Put bluntly, I shouldn't have to click ANY links to see a summary of what a patch is supposed to do.

Re:Why are they hiding information? (2)

nabsltd (1313397) | about 4 months ago | (#47785431)

A short description of what the patch actually is intended to do would not kill Microsoft. I shouldn't have to go hunting for that information if I want it.

In addition, if you have set Windows Update to "download but not install", then it is possible that you don't have Internet access at the time you are thinking of applying the already-downloaded patch.

Re:Don't know what you are talking about (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47785755)

Why should there even be a 'click for more info' link. Provide it immediately instead of wasting my time with yet an 'Click here' (and then click here...and then click there...and you'll need to provide your credit card info...and home phone number...and your first born, etc., etc., etc.

Re:Never useful info given with patches (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783595)

In the dreams of a certain mega-corporation consumers only salute, say yes sir and happily apply whatever crap that same corporation graces them with.

Actually most of the consumers I know almost never bother installing upgrades, patches and the like. They only consume.

Re:Never useful info given with patches (4, Insightful)

MobyDisk (75490) | about 4 months ago | (#47783667)

How can a consumer make an informed decision to go ahead and install patches or not without hours of looking up KB numbers?

Consumers don't make such decisions. If you want that level of control over your OS, don't use Windows. This isn't a knock against Windows or anything: it's just part of the closed-source model. You trust them. If they do a good job, then it saved you effort. If they do not, you get burned. That is the trade-off.

Re:Never useful info given with patches (1)

westlake (615356) | about 4 months ago | (#47784489)

What pisses me off as a consumer is that Microsoft patches never come with any kind of useful information.

"This patch makes Windows 8 a little more stable." states its purpose clearly and simply.

The link to the KB --- which is always there --- implies a deeper understanding of the OS than most users are likely to have or need.

It won't make their decision to install the patch any easier.

Re:Never useful info given with patches (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784557)

Over the next few days after the release of a patch the KB links in the patch information window point to the actual documents instead of 404.

OH NOES! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783351)

But how is this NEWS? MS has fallen into the shitcan for sure, mama!

What about security against Microsoft? (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783405)

"People are aware that Windows has bad security but they are underestimating the problem because they are thinking about third parties. What about security against Microsoft? Every non-free program is a 'just trust me program'. 'Trust me, we're a big corporation. Big corporations would never mistreat anybody, would we?' Of course they would! They do all the time, that's what they are known for. So basically you mustn't trust a non free programme."

"There are three kinds: those that spy on the user, those that restrict the user, and back doors. Windows has all three. Microsoft can install software changes without asking permission. Flash Player has malicious features, as do most mobile phones."

"Digital handcuffs are the most common malicious features. They restrict what you can do with the data in your own computer. Apple certainly has the digital handcuffs that are the tightest in history. The i-things, well, people found two spy features and Apple says it removed them and there might be more""

From:

Richard Stallman: 'Apple has tightest digital handcuffs in history'
www.newint.org/features/web-exclusive/2012/12/05/richard-stallman-interview/

Other strange update issues.. (5, Informative)

wbr1 (2538558) | about 4 months ago | (#47783459)

Yesterday in my repair shop I started getting a 0x80246002 error when checking for updates. Only on Win 7, (8 and vista were unaffected). This first occurred on a customer box that had a malware infection. The KB for this error simply states:

This problem may occur if Windows Update or Microsoft Update determines there is a file hash mismatch when you try to search for available updates from the Windows Update Web site or from the Microsoft Update Web site.

I spent a couple hours down the rabbit hole, thinking malware had broken updates on this box. Not unusual, and normally fixable by one of several means. When all attempts failed, and then another box presented the same error, I checked, every single windows 7 box would not check for updates.

I found that it was not something strange in our router or firewall, and it even occurred on other building tenants computers using a separate internet connection. Everyone in the building is on Comcast. Even more interesting, if I connected a computer to another ISP (tethering on my phone in this instance), the update check would succeed. You could then reconnect to comcast and download and install the updates.

Further all of these computers were running Windows Update Agent 7.6.7600.320, which is a recent (KB less and not able to be skipped) update to Windows update, that you cannot roll back easily. However, by going to a restore point prior to this update, checking for updates magically worked again, until this Agent updated itself and it was broken again.

So somehow, for whatever reason, the way Windows Update on Win 7 with this version of the agent checks for updates was being blocked by Comcast (Business class). Try explaining that to a comcast support rep. Fortunately today it seems to be working again.

Re:Other strange update issues.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783503)

you know, it would've saved you a lot of hassle if you just used apt-get.

your post reminds me of Mrs. Doubtfire in the kitchen, burning her fake tits.

Re:Other strange update issues.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784053)

your post reminds me of Mrs. Doubtfire in the kitchen, burning her fake tits.

Too soon, man. Too soon!

Re:Other strange update issues.. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783593)

Had the same problem yesterday on a newly patched Windows 7 laptop and then today on a Windows Server 2008 R2 server.

Problems with Windows Update Agent 7.6.7600.320 and DNS [microsoft.com] seems to be where this is headed.

But I'm holding off on KB 2993651 [microsoft.com] and Windows Update Agent 7.6.7600.320 [microsoft.com] until this one gets resolved too.

Re:Other strange update issues.. (1)

wbr1 (2538558) | about 4 months ago | (#47783715)

I did not see this thread. It (like many) seems to have a lot of useless info, but that DNS issues is probably key. We use open DNS here, and I did not even think to change DNS. If it recurs I will certainly check that. You sir deserve a +1.

Re:Other strange update issues.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783767)

Dang, we're OpenDNS here as well. Thanks for mentioning that. I'll move the Windows 7 laptop to another service later today and see if that helps.

Re: Other strange update issues.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784533)

You can log into the opendns dashboard and there's an area where you can check the cached DNS settings for a particular domain and refresh it if necessary. It has really saved my ass in the past

Re:Other strange update issues.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47785401)

Thanks. Why are there so many f'ing DNS problems, worldwide, lately? I know Charter's outage was a DDoS, but there have been many many DNS issues affecting lots of providers within the past month. What is going on?

Wouldn't have "hit you" *IF* you used this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47785913)

Hardcoding fav. sites in hosts (see "B" & "D3" below) - My FREE program for hosts adds speed, security, reliability, & more doing more, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' issues:

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:

http://start64.com/index.php?o... [start64.com]

---

A.) Hosts do more than:

1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... [techcrunch.com] )
2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G... [wikipedia.org]
3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... [slashdot.org]

B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).

C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... [slashdot.org] w/ less "moving parts" complexity

D.) Hosts files yield more:

1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
3.) Reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable dns, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ isp level + weak vs Fastflux + dynamic dns botnets)
4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).

---

* Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

* Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.

* Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too(4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... [mozilla.org] )

Instead, work w/ a native kernelmode part - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack)

APK

P.S.=> Hardcodes wouldn't help others' complaints regarding "Windows Update" though (MS bypasses HOSTS it - DIRECT hardcoded 4 update servers) but would have on yours for DNS

...apk

Re:Other strange update issues.. (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 4 months ago | (#47783671)

Comcast blocking windows update?

Re:Other strange update issues.. (1)

eric31415927 (861917) | about 4 months ago | (#47783725)

My experience somewhat mirriors yours:
On the 2nd Tuesday, I connected my Win7 box to the Internet to install the 2nd Tuesday patches.
After reading a Slashdot article, I uninstalled two patches on the bad-patch list.

Yesterday, I connected it to the Internet to install the August 27 patches.
This was a no go. Windows Update was broken and the Windows Update Troubleshooter was no use.
Only a rollback to a mid-July restore point got the machine going properly again.

My Windows box (which is not my main box) is generally off the Internet, so I don't know why I patched it so promptly.
In the future, I'll wait a few weeks longer before applying patches.

Re: Other strange update issues.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784585)

That's what sucks about Microsoft dropping the ball so terribly lately, especially regarding updates.

I'm pretty much the resident IT guy in my extended family and among many friends and I usually do recommend staying current on updates because it's the secure thing to do. But after letting people know to uninstall those last bad updates, and now this, I have to start recommending "you know what, hold off on updates for a couple weeks after they come out..." Which is crap advice because MS shouldn't be sucking this bad given the Windows 8 debacle.

Does anyone here that works at Microsoft know if things have been getting bad internally management-wise?

Comcast / TWC shared errors = scary (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783745)

Yesterday in my repair shop I started getting a 0x80246002 error when checking for updates. Only on Win 7, (8 and vista were unaffected). This first occurred on a customer box that had a malware infection. The KB for this error simply states:

This problem may occur if Windows Update or Microsoft Update determines there is a file hash mismatch when you try to search for available updates from the Windows Update Web site or from the Microsoft Update Web site.

I spent a couple hours down the rabbit hole, thinking malware had broken updates on this box. Not unusual, and normally fixable by one of several means. When all attempts failed, and then another box presented the same error, I checked, every single windows 7 box would not check for updates.

I found that it was not something strange in our router or firewall, and it even occurred on other building tenants computers using a separate internet connection. Everyone in the building is on Comcast. Even more interesting, if I connected a computer to another ISP (tethering on my phone in this instance), the update check would succeed. You could then reconnect to comcast and download and install the updates.

Further all of these computers were running Windows Update Agent 7.6.7600.320, which is a recent (KB less and not able to be skipped) update to Windows update, that you cannot roll back easily. However, by going to a restore point prior to this update, checking for updates magically worked again, until this Agent updated itself and it was broken again.

So somehow, for whatever reason, the way Windows Update on Win 7 with this version of the agent checks for updates was being blocked by Comcast (Business class). Try explaining that to a comcast support rep. Fortunately today it seems to be working again.

I live in a time warner sector. Our primary hardware distributor uses TWC for internet, and the same thing was happening yesterday, but they have a ATT DSL backup line that when switched over to was able to update the machine.

I have a feeling we are seeing the same issues, additionally I think that TWC and comcast are already crossing their streams.

Great. FCC needs to stop this nonsense cold (even though I know they won't).

Re:Other strange update issues.. (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about 4 months ago | (#47784151)

Yesterday in my repair shop

Wait, there are still computer repair people?

Say, if I buy a new video card, you think you could come over to my house and install it before Assassin's Creed Unity comes out? There's $50 in it for you. I live in Chicago.

Re:Other strange update issues.. (1)

wbr1 (2538558) | about 4 months ago | (#47784221)

Yes there are. This shop mostly supports our business IT techs by setting up and rebuilding stuff that goes out to businesses. But the shop also picks up plenty of residential infections and failed hardware.

I can go to Chicago to install your GPU, however, it will cost about $900-$1500 in travel expenses.

Re:Other strange update issues.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784187)

Just had the same issue. Comcast biz account in NJ. Was pulling hair trying to figure out since all PC's were fresh installs. Typical Comcast BS.

Re:Other strange update issues.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784251)

Fixed by switching to google DNS server 8.8.8.8

Re:Other strange update issues.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784375)

I was tearing my hair out about this 0x80246002 error for several hours, when trying to set up a new laptop for my family.

I reinstlalled Windows over and over again to figure out why it started, both from the recovery disk and from a clean install. It updated once just fine, but then would stop working. Following the old KB article about this did not work.

Apparently setting your DNS as 8.8.8.8 fixes it. I'm on Verizon FIOS.

No Patch Info (4, Informative)

MrL0G1C (867445) | about 4 months ago | (#47783475)

What pigs me off is that when you use Windows Update and look at a patch it gives you no info, so you click the patch and still no info', you click the link given but that pretty much just says it's a patch and you should install it, finally after following another link, scrolling down and expanding a section of page you get to find out whether or not the patch is actually relevant to your installation and not just a fix for something you will never use.

I don't use and don't need patches for One-Note, IE, Windows Media Centre, SQL Server. Privilege escalation bugs don't bother me, if you've been compromised that far then you're probably f**ked anyway.

The only bugs that look half-dangerous this month are MS14-046 and MS14-047 because they can lead to you being rooted when joined with browser etc bugs

For future use: https://technet.microsoft.com/... [microsoft.com]

Re:No Patch Info (1)

phorm (591458) | about 4 months ago | (#47784495)

Yeah, no kidding. If half the patches are for "issues when entering text with the Klingon language when your locale is set to Alpha Centuri" then I don't need the farging patch. Give me useful information, and don't load me up with patches that frankly don't apply.

Re:No Patch Info (1)

Jesus_666 (702802) | about 4 months ago | (#47784683)

Well, the IE patches should matter. They might affect the rendering engine, which is used everywhere.

Re:No Patch Info (2)

jittles (1613415) | about 4 months ago | (#47786195)

I don't use and don't need patches for One-Note, IE, Windows Media Centre, SQL Server. Privilege escalation bugs don't bother me, if you've been compromised that far then you're probably f**ked anyway.

Uh you don't have to be compromised initially to fall victim to a privilege escalation bug. And you should care about bugs in IE or any other piece of software that is installed (and cannot be removed) from your system. Gone are the simple days of black hats using a single bug to take control of your system. They will chain together vulnerabilities until they can get to your unimportant privilege escalation, and that could very well take advantage of some bug in IE that you neglected to patch because it is unimportant to you.

What I especially liked (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783525)

was after the forced reboot (wonderful design, you leave for lunch and you lose everything), Firefox lost all my tab history.

What's the connection between the two things? In an era of multigigabyte RAM and terabyte storage, we can't store a few kilobytes of text to remember what URLs were open in a dozen tabs?

Re:What I especially liked (1)

mlw4428 (1029576) | about 4 months ago | (#47783663)

And this has what to do with the topic?

Re:What I especially liked (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783759)

It's a windows update? You know, like the topic?

Need developers? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783551)

Dear Microsoft,

I, and possibly many others, would like to offer our services. We charge $200+/hour, and don't move very fast because we like to think about our solutions. We dislike cargo programming a lot. I understand that the prospect of hiring us shakes some CEO's yacht more than the waves of the South Indian ocean displace the ships mapping the seabed in search for MH370, but we're not going to drop our costs and standards, even though you will. Even more so, considering the predicament you find yourselves in (no, we do not love you one bit, Microsoft).

Cheers,
        The Real Developers

Re:Need developers? (-1, Flamebait)

BitZtream (692029) | about 4 months ago | (#47784107)

Dear Asshat,

We make more money each second than you'll make in your entire life. Your arrogant attitude makes us laugh. We have MBAs who have forgotten more about development than you think you know, and about 8 orders of magnitude more than you actually know.

We're sorry you think our predicament is so bad, but we do enjoy floating our yacht on ocean sized volumes of cash, our yachts are big enough the waves aren't an issue, perhaps if you pulled your head out of your ass for a second you would realize this and you would realize that while you try to act like some one cares what you think, you are nothing, hence your AC post. Oh? You don't love us ... I'm sure will lose sleep at night over that.

Cheers,
        A company which actually turns a profit

I'd bet a months pay you don't make $20/hour, let alone 200. Your ignorance wreaks that of a 15 year old without a clue how the real world operates and certainly indicates that you have absolutely no idea what happens in a company the scale of Microsoft. You seem to think %0.00001 of your customers having an issue with regressions is the end of the world.

Seriously, get a clue.

Re:Need developers? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784435)

It's not about profit, it's about product quality, idiot.

Re:Need developers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47786039)

Haha, you said "MBAs who have forgotten more about development". After having worked at MS, I can safely say there isn't a single executive that could program their way out of a paper bag. Grow some pubes kiddo, and quit huffing the corporate duster. You clearly need to preserve as many brain cells as possible.

Re:Need developers? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784121)

Dear AC,

Thank you for expressing your interest in a position at Microsoft. Unfortunately we are not currently hiring developers who test their code.

Sincerely,
Microsoft

And people use MS servers... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783581)

Actually not two days ago someone was complaining about the quality of Ubuntu - new surprise with every upgrade, let alone dist-upgrade. As opposed to the experience with RHEL where everything works forever and ever.

I love watching these threads... (1, Insightful)

Phics (934282) | about 4 months ago | (#47783777)

There are so many ACs who post in response to MS-centric articles. It's almost as if you can feel the shame and terror as you read your way through.

Re:I love watching these threads... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784231)

Is not shame, this place is just full of retards that can't tolerate that you don't find Linux a good OS.

Any comment about MS or Windows not saying it is shit, is immediatelly modded down, so, What is the point?, this place is full of Linux nazis, exactly like most of the "linux support communities", where you get attacked for asking a question.

Re:I love watching these threads... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784317)

^ This. Linux sucks on the desktop. Always will. Get over yourselves fanbois.

Re:I love watching these threads... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784441)

Yeah, i don't want to have anything to do with you, you're also a retard

Re:I love watching these threads... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47785105)

You are right but you left out some details: You suck on the desktop and windows sucks on the desktop.

You've noticed that too? Welcome to /. ... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784535)

Home of the disgruntled "penguins" & "Pro-*NIX" trolls with multiple sockpuppets to do what you said, no less!

However, on this "patch" (screwup is more like it)?

Heck - Even I had to criticize MS for this one, BOTH here http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... [slashdot.org] AND HERE http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... [slashdot.org]

Why?

* THIS IS A "F-UP" OF THE MOST MAJOR ORDER IS WHY!

(Don't get ME wrong either: Around here, I'm practically "the poster child" for "MS Fanboy", but this time I had to "sound off" in the negative on this "fix" (that breaks more than it fixes, as in MOST ALL APPS on rightclick & trayicon application popup menus!)

APK

P.S.=> However, in the end? YOU ARE "DEAD-ON RIGHT" about the "hivemind" around here - funniest part is, the YEARS OF "FUD" OF "Windows != Secure, & Linux = Secure" b.s. went RIGHT OUT THE WINDOWS with Android (yes, a Linux variant since it uses a Linux kernel/core) being EXPLOITED DAILY (since it has 'the' TOPSPOT in terms of being the most used on another hardware platform, showing its TRUE COLORS, being exploited thus + so much, since "most used = most attacked", always)...

... apk

Re:I love watching these threads... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784433)

It would appear you have never been e-stalked by someone who would rather try to ruin your life than admit a comment he made on the internet was wrong. Consider yourself lucky.

In the meantime, not being condescending to people who have different lives than you would be a grown up thing to do.

Not really related... (1)

Junta (36770) | about 4 months ago | (#47783853)

about Microsoft's ability to support Windows 9's expected rapid update pace."

I don't think this stuff is expected to go any faster. To be fair to microsoft, the frequency of updates is already pretty respectable (latency and quality on the other hand...). The rumors are that MS will start mixing in functional changes more. Of course this seems like a mistake, their competitors really aren't mixing it up much on the fundamental level anymore (Google churned pretty hard because they needed too, but Jelly Bean seems to have marked where they broke out the functcion).

Microsoft is only bested on the 'faster' (latency and frequency) front by Linux Desktop distros, and see how much that has made people in the wider market care. It's a shame because Android updates are pretty infrequent *and* get deployed extremely slowly. This means a great deal of mobile Chrome browsers continue to have SSL vulnerabilities, mitigated somewhat by most reputable servers having addressed it on their end. If MS was botching a security update that badly the community would be all over them. Though again, the wider market doesn't really care except to be pissed at having to deal with frequent update related interruptions (where again I think linux desktop distros seem to have the right balance of availability but not being so heavy handed).

Windows 9 update frequency (1)

freeze128 (544774) | about 4 months ago | (#47784733)

How often will Windows 9 receive updates? I heard on the TWIT podcast that it would be once a month.

***NEWS FLASH***

Windows is ALREADY updated once a month, so I don't see how that is any more frequent.

They "F'd-Up" ALL of my rightclick menus... apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783913)

Even in their OWN apps e.g. IE11, MS Security Essentials, & others in the OS (trayicon & popup menus not working & of all kinds) - which causes me difficulty using them (there isn't always a main menubar alternate either, especially nowadays with the stupid ribbon one vs. classic menus). Heck - I had to go to commandline for Explorer.exe itself (just IE front now too) to change filenames &/or attributes, for Pete's sake!

* Microsoft: When you "F" up? You *really* "F-UP", now don't you?

(WTF were your devs thinking changing "Z-order" on windows?)

APK

P.S.=> Unbelievable - FIX THIS!!! apk

Addendum: Can't UNINSTALL it either (WTF!!!) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47783995)

Per my last post I replied to, see subject-line: "WTF!!!", & here is the EXACT problem I am experiencing (known issue? STUPID creation of a huge problem is what this is knocking out rightclick menus & trayicon popup menus too) -> https://support.microsoft.com/... [microsoft.com]

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

"Known issue 2
After you install this update, the z-order of the windows is changed. (The z-order calls the SetWindowPos function together with the HWND_TOP parameter.) Therefore, the windows of certain applications may become invisible or may be incorrectly displayed behind other windows.

Status
We are currently working on a resolution for this issue.

Notes
  This issue also occurs after you install the following updates:
2965768 Stop error 0x3B when an application changes the z-order of a window in Windows 7 SP1 and Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1
2970228 Update to support the new currency symbol for the Russian ruble in Windows
2973201 MS14-039: Description of the security update for Windows on-screen keyboard: July 8, 2014
2975719 August 2014 update rollup for Windows RT 8.1, Windows 8.1, and Windows Server 2012 R2"

---

* Lastly, per my subject-line: I *tried* to UNINSTALL it, to go back to the previous GDI32.DLL & Win32k.sys files, & it's a "no go" on that too... wtf!

APK

P.S.=> "We are currently working on a resolution for this issue." ? HURRY THE HELL UP & FIX THIS since this IS an UNACCEPTABLE "fix" that breaks more than it fixes... imo @ least! That, is all I can say... apk

Here's a thought... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784057)

..don't use Windows.

Stack ranking quality? (1)

clawsoon (748629) | about 4 months ago | (#47784069)

Is this mess possibly the long-term result of Microsoft's previous embrace of stack ranking? Too much cultural focus on back-stabbing and ladder-climbing instead of writing solid code and testing it properly?

Re:Stack ranking quality? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47784165)

I suspect it's more due to laying off lots of testers a while back.

I mean, any MBA can see that developers who write crappy code will be perfectly capable of testing their crappy code.

Microsoft has lost control of the monster... (4, Funny)

QuietLagoon (813062) | about 4 months ago | (#47784493)

Microsoft has lost control of the monster it created in Windows.

.
It now appears that Windows has taken on a life of its own, and is now roaming the countryside, harassing the villagers.

Where is Dr. Frankenstein when you really need him?

Re:Microsoft has lost control of the monster... (1)

lgw (121541) | about 4 months ago | (#47785895)

He was laid off with all the QA guys. He got a nice severance package though.

MS is reliable (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47785297)

That's what I love about MS: its reliability. You know that when there is something stupid to be done, they'll do it.

QA isn't important, my ass... (1)

barfy (256323) | about 4 months ago | (#47785541)

Hopefully this will change Nadella's mind. QA is part of the process, and has to be independent of engineering...

wizard went sleepy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47785847)

dunno why geo-location is tied to what DNServer is used instead of the source ip.
srsly it would make more sense to assign a local CDN by looking at the source/requesting/client computers IP instead of by looking at the DNSserver being used by the client computer.
i have found that some "heavy" sites like steam, microsoft (updates), youtube have country or region specific caches, and that they assign the "correct" cache not by my Ip address but by the dns server i have configured.
so assume i'm in india using a netherland dns server i get a CDN in netherland even thou i'm not hidding my IP address at all ... go figure : //

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?