Latest Windows 2000 patch can lock system

Advertisement (Why?)

A software patch that fixes a serious security vulnerability in Microsoft's Windows 2000 can cause systems running the operating system to fail, Microsoft said Tuesday.

The patch, announced Monday in security bulletin MS03-007, is incompatible with 12 software fixes for Windows 2000 issued by Microsoft's Product Support Services (PSS) between December 2001 and February 2002. Users running any of those fixes won't be able to reboot their Windows 2000 systems after applying the "critical" patch, according to a revised version of Microsoft's bulletin issued Tuesday.

Customers running Windows 2000 with Service Pack 2 installed should verify the version of a file called "ntoskrnl.exe" on their system before applying the patch. Versions of this file from 5.0.2195.4797 up to and including 5.0.2195.4928 were distributed by PSS and are not compatible with the patch, according to Microsoft.

Users who have an incompatible file on their system need to contact Microsoft PSS before applying the patch. If the patch is installed on a system with the incompatible file, the machine will fail on the first reboot and will have to be recovered using the Windows 2000 recovery console, Microsoft said.

View: Revised version of Microsoft's bulletin

View: The full story

News source: InfoWorld

How many beta builds of Windows Server 2003 have there been?
The development team creates a new build each night, and at checkpoints creates interim builds that are made available to beta testers. Beta 1, Beta 2, Beta 3, RC1 and RC2 are the key development milestones.

How many beta testers were there for Windows Server 2003?
Nearly 300,000 customers, partners, OEMs, developers and other testers had access to the beta releases, beginning with Beta 2.

What product line does Windows Server 2003 follow?
Windows Server 2003 is the best upgrade for Windows 2000 Server and Windows NT4 customers. The next product to follow Windows Server 2003 will be Blackcomb.

What's the current timeline for the first service Pack for Windows Server 2003?
This information is not yet available.

What flavors of Windows Server 2003 are there?
There are currently four editions of Windows Server 2003: Web Edition, Standard Edition, Enterprise Edition and Datacenter Edition. The Enterprise and Datacenter Editions will be available in both 32- and 64-bit versions.

Does Microsoft support Windows Server 2003 when modified as per Neowin Workstation Guide?
Windows Server 2003 is a server product.

(2 replies) #1 xStainDx on 19 Mar 2003 - 16:19

Well anyone still runing SP2 is a complete moron, IMO, SP3 has been out for really long time! I mean SP4 is already in BETA Testing, I would think, its time Update Your Systems

Microsoft Should change the Hotfix to Require SP3 then, this will resolve this problem. They clearly Stat in the revision of the bulletin that if you have SP3 Installed, you will NOT encounter any errors. [i]Why has Microsoft changed the information in the Caveats section of this bulletin? Microsoft was made aware that some customers who had received a hotfix from Product Support Services experienced stop errors on boot after applying the patch released for this bulletin. We've assessed this issue and now know that it only occurs under a specific set of circumstances. A series of Windows 2000 hotfixes that were only available through Product Support Services and were issued between December 2001 and February 2002 were incompatible with the patch for this vulnerability. Customers who are running one of those 12 hotfixes on Windows 2000 Service Pack 2 will experience a stop error on reboot after applying this patch. More information on how to determine if you have installed a hotfix that is incompatible with this patch is available in the Addition Information section under Caveats. [b]Customers who are running Windows 2000 Service Pack 3 or are not running one of these hotfixes will not encounter this problem.[/b][/i]

Last edited by 335 on 19 Mar 2003 - 16:26

#1.1 Neobond on 19 Mar 2003 - 16:24

Well believe it or not some companies who have 100's or 1000's of machines take up to and around a year to fully implement a service pack sometimes (as it is tested first)

#1.2 xStainDx on 19 Mar 2003 - 16:27

Yes I Know, Just like the same thing resides "Well we didn't update SQL Server 2000" Blah blah...

(2 replies) #2 Silver Dragon on 19 Mar 2003 - 16:26

Reason 493 you should be using Mac OS X

#2.1 xStainDx on 19 Mar 2003 - 16:28

So i can......?

#2.2 KvalCom on 19 Mar 2003 - 22:08

[neoquote=#2.0 by Silver Dragon]Reason 493 you should be using Mac OS X

[/neoquote] Yes, can't get much more secure than having a computer that doesn't run! ROFL

#3 guinnessman on 19 Mar 2003 - 16:41

Well at least people would be able to hack into your PC then

#4 aaje on 19 Mar 2003 - 17:00

I agree people SHOULD upgrade to SP3, but that's not always possible! Thanks to applications that aren't written properly, patching is often a tricky business. Sure, if you own one or two machines it's no big deal, but once you're dealing with a datacenter full of servers (managed hosting), where customers install their own apps, patching truly becomes a nightmare.

(3 replies) #5 dougkinzinger on 19 Mar 2003 - 17:44

i'm getting really sick of ms's pi$$ poor handling of patches here.........

#5.1 Mr. Black on 19 Mar 2003 - 17:54

[QUOTE] i'm getting really sick of ms's pi$$ poor handling of patches here......... [/QUOTE] Same here. I haven't seen this much poor product quality assurance and practically non-existant testing of software before it is released. If it isn't a problem in the first place, it's a problem created by something that was supposed to fix the first problem... M$ has [b]VERY BAD[/b] programmers and QA practices. PERIOD.

#5.2 JaggedFlame on 19 Mar 2003 - 19:32

Oh, and you honestly think it gets better anywhere else? Does this problem not plague Linux as well?

Yeah, I think the fact that only one patch goes wrong out of hundreds if a very good sign of testing. If it were as bad as you said, there would be a hell of a lot more. So unless you actually work at Microsoft, I really don't think you should be making assumptions regarding their testing process, because you aren't going to know how it works. The same goes for a Linux company. Don't assume if you don't know.

#5.3 Mr. Black on 19 Mar 2003 - 22:05

I'll express my opinion about Microsoft and their patch failures if I want to. It's called Free Speech. The only thing you do is flame ppl when they post their opinions about Microsoft. You need to accept the fact that just like people don't like the Police, they don't like Microsoft either. You'd make a great person for their PR team - "Microsoft programs do not crash. We say so. We are Microsoft. Have a good day, reporters."

#6 on 19 Mar 2003 - 18:47

i like what #4 said....it's no big deal if it's 1 or 2 pc's, but what about a data center!

#7 eXtermia on 20 Mar 2003 - 08:49

well if you have a data center where you can manage at least the server admin then in this case I use St. Benard Update Expert to push to multiple machines at once with scheduled updates.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Neowin.net