main

Critical Windows Hotfix Causes Problems

dw2003   on 17 October 2005 - 09:36 · 50 comments & 8833 views

Advertisement (Why?)
A Microsoft patch meant to fix critical security flaws in Windows 2000, Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 is causing trouble for some users, the company said Friday.

The patch was released Tuesday to fix four Windows flaws, including one that experts predict will be exploited by a worm in the coming days. The flaw, tagged "critical" by Microsoft, lies in a Windows component for transaction processing called the Microsoft Distributed Transaction Coordinator, or MSDTC.

Installing the patch can cause serious problems, Microsoft said in an advisory posted to its Web site Friday. The patch could lock users out of their PC, prevent the Windows Firewall from starting, block certain applications from running or installing, and empty the network connections folder, among other things, the software maker said.

View: Resolution from Microsoft Support
News source: C|Net News


Alright. Fine. People tend to steal cars. I give them credit. I sure don't have the guts to do it, but if I did, I certainly would pick a car that blends in. You know, not a high end sports car, for example. They did the right thing by picking a Ford Escort. Lots of those around, right?

Well, unfortunately, this dark blue Ford Escort had a missing hubcap, and the license plates were from Missouri. Strike one, guys....you live in Florida.

But wait, kids....that's not all. They happened to find this diamond in the rough at the gas station. Unbeknownst to them, the car's owner, Pam Pease, was employed at the gas station. So off they went, obviously giddy with excitement that they pulled off the heist.

Around 7:30, Pease realized her car had been stolen, and reported it to the authorities.

Obviously not on their way to Bible study, Castillo and Garcia noted that the car needed gas. Oh noes.

And now we see the evolution of a criminal's mind. Minds that are so sharp when it comes to doing the actual crime but become dull as as river rocks afterwards.

Back to the police. Deputies were entering the stolen vehicle data into the computer when they received the second call from Parade employees that the car had reappeared. Obviously a mistake, right? The entire Pensacola police had not even been alerted from the dispatcher that the car was stolen.

Well, the brilliant thieving minds came back to the same gas station to get some gas. Hey...the place was friendly enough to give us a car, why not gas!

Pease was sweeping up cigarette butts when all of a sudden here comes her Escort, rolling into the service station. Strike two guys. Nguyen, who speaks Spanish, asked the pair what they were doing back at the station.

"They told him they needed gas," Pease said.

Nguyen shut off the vehicle and offered the men water while co-workers called 911. They must have thought..."Free cars, free gas, free water!! This is the best gas station evar!"

Police arrived and after a short foot chase, the two were apprehended and were charged with grand theft auto and resisting arrest. They are being held in the Escambia County Jail on $7,500 bond each.

"That's a new one. Maybe they were lost," noted Sgt. Ted Roy, Sheriff's Office spokesman. "Crimes like that are good for our job security."

And also good for a laugh.

Since the weekend is slow in terms of tech news, we will try to enlighten you on the strange news that you may not have seen on your late local news. Neowin's Strange News of the Week will hopefully show you, our esteemed readers, that your life isn't all that bad. -- BOOG

News source: The Pensecola News Journal

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 50 additional comments
#1 Nexx295 on 17 Oct 2005 - 09:45
It couldn't get worse than this...
(3 replies) #2 Jugalator on 17 Oct 2005 - 09:47
Ironically enough, this security fix may fail to work and cause these severe problems if an admin has taken care to secure the Windows folder.

I think locking out the admin group and system account would be stupid, but it seems to fail even if unprivileged users don't have read acccess to it. Huh?? Why should that at all matter for the patch system and fix? Isn't that run with admin/SYSTEM rights anyway?

Microsoft's "fix"? To give everyone using your computer access to the Windows folder again...

Last edited by 21023 on 17 Oct 2005 - 10:02
#2.1 BudMan on 17 Oct 2005 - 11:54
"Microsoft's "fix"? To give everyone using your computer access to the Windows folder again..."

Not sure I would call "READ" permissions to the "registration" folder and its files, and the ability to transverse the parent folder(s).. so that the registration folder can be read - access to the windows folder?

Did you even read the article?
#2.2 Jugalator on 17 Oct 2005 - 12:39
I read the KB article, yes.

Yes, in specific it's about the Registration folder under the Windows folder, but why should admins bother with making that one an exception when they haven't ever needed to before? Sounds like a crappy fix if it's about opening up your security just for this patch to work to me (and even mess up parts of your install if you don't). What's next? Poking a hole in your firewall to help a patch do its job?

Something is very wrong when they release this patch without a warning of its requirements of how the system is setup.

Last edited by 21023 on 17 Oct 2005 - 12:51
#2.3 BudMan on 17 Oct 2005 - 13:30
"crappy fix if it's about opening up your security just for this patch to work"

What?? Dude again I have to ask -- did you read the article? The ONLY reason there could be an ISSUE is if the "DEFAULT" permissions where changed..

QUOTE

Systems that have changed the default Access Control List permissions on the %windir%registration directory may experience various problems


Why should an admin remove the ability for the users of the machine to READ a folder and its files?? That quite clearly is required for the OS, and or some sub functions to perform correctly..

Do you remove the ability of users of the machine to READ /etc or /bin on a nix box?
(3 replies) #3 Civilian on 17 Oct 2005 - 09:48
lol thats worse then some virii
#3.1 M2Ys4U on 17 Oct 2005 - 10:47
The plural of virus is viruses. NOT virii.

Virii is actually the plural of 'man' if I'm not mistaken.
#3.2 M2Ys4U on 17 Oct 2005 - 10:54
I can't seem to be able to edit my post so I'll add this here:
Unless you meant 'That's worse than some men'
#3.3 Civilian on 17 Oct 2005 - 11:17
hmm *googles it*

yeah your right, damn been wrong all these years
#4 Nexx295 on 17 Oct 2005 - 09:51
Would it solve the problem if I'd just uninstall the patch?
#5 Jexel on 17 Oct 2005 - 09:53
this isn't good.
#6 DJ Prem on 17 Oct 2005 - 09:56
(3 replies) #7 reowdes on 17 Oct 2005 - 10:53
If is true why Microsoft don't denounce the "hotfix" company?... i couldn't install the path fortunately
#7.1 Airlink on 17 Oct 2005 - 13:46
Um, becasue they ARE the hotfix company.
#7.2 todd on 17 Oct 2005 - 18:56
His native language clearly isn't English and I think he may've been trying to get a different point across.
#7.3 Z3r0 on 18 Oct 2005 - 18:23
I think he is saying why do microsoft not remove the hotfix
(1 reply) #8 Ideas Man on 17 Oct 2005 - 11:08
I think we got hit by this, after I rebooted our domain controller, Windows said it could not log me in because the domain was not available. eek!

Last edited by 33280 on 17 Oct 2005 - 15:18
#8.1 Ideas Man on 18 Oct 2005 - 00:11
Ah, It's cool, rebooted again and it fixed itself, maybe it wasn't the same problem
#9 RanCorX2 on 17 Oct 2005 - 11:46
I installed the patch my stuff is working fine
(1 reply) #10 rickm550 on 17 Oct 2005 - 11:47
ooops, looks like my WSUS server downloaded it and its already been deployed to the servers and clients

i wondered where all my ftp site dissappeared to in the connections folder
#10.1 shao on 17 Oct 2005 - 12:23
that's why you don't auto approve stuff on wsus.. and infact, wsus is why you don't use automatic updates, as it allows you test deployments first.

Last edited by 25229 on 21 Oct 2005 - 14:59
#11 naap51stang on 17 Oct 2005 - 12:38
Hey! here's a real easy fix for this fix.........just disconnect from the
internet.......problem solved!!

Yeah, like that will happen on my computer


#12 rickm550 on 17 Oct 2005 - 12:39
fortunatly for me it was only in the development environment, but im hoping it doesnt cause disruptions as i'll have to end up fixing them
(1 reply) #13 Buttus on 17 Oct 2005 - 12:49
does anyone know when the patch for the patch is coming out? and what about the patch for that patch?

#13.1 Express on 17 Oct 2005 - 14:10
Read the KB article. There is no 'patch for the patch'.
Follow steps in the KB if system is effected. I highly doubt that even 1 computer in 1 million has had permissions changed on windir folder.
#14 Malbojia on 17 Oct 2005 - 13:22
Is their a fix for this fix out yet i wonder. Like a patch to auto do what it mentioned in the KB article, wouldnt wanna do this to each clients pc I come to. Oh boy I can just see it now I read that this patch can fubar the os to some extent i think i apply to this so fix it for free lol.
(3 replies) #15 Airlink on 17 Oct 2005 - 13:41
Ah, MS. Fixes for your fixes and patches for your patches. Will it never end?
#15.1 Buttus on 17 Oct 2005 - 14:24
people do make mistakes, that's why they need to test these things before they are released...

and with Microsoft's track record, they should have a legion of people testing their stuff before they let it out for the public...
#15.2 markjensen on 17 Oct 2005 - 14:24
Will it ever end? Yeah, switch to Linux! Oh, wait. Pretty much the same thing can happen there, too. Same for OSX. You know... It seems that this isn't really a Microsoft-specific issue, after all.

People are programmers, people make mistakes. And this one seems to be due to an admin removing read permissions unnecessarily. Sort of an unusual situation to begin with.

I am not a Microsoft fan, by any stretch of the imagination, but mistakes happen. Some fixes will introduce problems to a minority of boxes. These will be fixed, I am reasonably sure.
#15.3 mr_demilord on 17 Oct 2005 - 15:52
QUOTE

people do make mistakes, that's why they need to test these things before they are released...

and with Microsoft's track record, they should have a legion of people testing their stuff before they let it out for the public...

I do believe MS tests the patches , but not on millions of diferent configurations.
Software is created by human beings and human beings makes mistakes like this for example. I don blame ms for this, it will get fixed I 100% sure of it.

Testing software, doesn't mean it will work for 100% on all the configurations.

Last edited by 108898 on 17 Oct 2005 - 16:23
#16 cork1958 on 17 Oct 2005 - 13:45
So far, it doesn't look like it meesed up anything on the 2 computers that still have Windows on them of mine. Have switched 2 other machines over to Suse Linux though. Will switch third one sometime in near future. Unfortunately, I have to keep 1 windows box for the wife and kid.
#17 Frank on 17 Oct 2005 - 13:58
What I don't understand is why ANYONE would want to take read permissions away from the Windows folder for users? Possibly on servers but even then I don't see how that is going to help secure the OS.
#18 King Rilian on 17 Oct 2005 - 14:40
Looks like they already flagged it as "expired" in our server's WSUS database.
#19 warwagon on 17 Oct 2005 - 15:12
It still suprises me how these patches that go on millions and millions of computers don't break more things.
#20 matt74441 on 17 Oct 2005 - 15:21
Comments Cleaned

Lets keep it clean guys. Everyone makes mistakes.
(5 replies) #21 Krome on 17 Oct 2005 - 15:23
Yup... I thought it only happens to me... I guess it is MS fault... I found out that if I issue the command "shutdown -r -t 0" inside a batch at the end of a chain install, it will lock me out... I had to format my computer like 3 times to know that it was "shutdown" command that cause the lockup...
#21.1 markjensen on 17 Oct 2005 - 16:03
QUOTE
shutdown -r -t 0
Isn't that a *nix shutdown syntax, anyhow?
Microsoft uses shutdown /r /t:0
#21.2 M2Ys4U on 17 Oct 2005 - 16:06
Actually you can use both
#21.3 markjensen on 17 Oct 2005 - 16:33
That's odd. I never knew that!

I know for a fact that aborting with shutdown -a on Windows (2000, anyhow) box does not work. It complains, and you must use the /a option.

Go figure.
#21.4 Krome on 17 Oct 2005 - 21:24
But in my case I did not use shutdown to abort... I use that at the very end of the batch command line after everything has finished install but figure out a proper way

{ DO }
------------[ Batch ]----------
CLS
@echo off
setlocal
set PATHTOFIXES=G:TempPreSP3

echo.
echo Installing Microsoft Java Virtual Machine...
echo Q816093_W2K_SP4_X86_EN.exe
%PATHTOFIXES%Q816093_W2K_SP4_X86_EN.exe /N /Z /Q /U

;
; More here
;

echo.
echo Installing Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer...
echo WindowsXP-KB896688-x86-ENU.exe
%PATHTOFIXES%WindowsXP-KB896688-x86-ENU.exe /F /N /Q /U

exit
----------------[ End ]------------

{ DON'Ts }
------------[ Batch ]-------------
CLS
@echo off
setlocal
set PATHTOFIXES=G:TempPreSP3

echo.
echo Installing Security Update in Network Connection Manager Could Allow DoS Attack...
echo WindowsXP-KB905414-x86-ENU.exe
%PATHTOFIXES%WindowsXP-KB905414-x86-ENU.exe /N /Z /Q /M /U

;
; More here
;

echo.
echo Installing Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer...
echo WindowsXP-KB896688-x86-ENU.exe
%PATHTOFIXES%WindowsXP-KB896688-x86-ENU.exe /N /Z /Q /M /U

echo.
echo Computer is now shutting down in 15 seconds...
shutdown -r -t 15

EXIT
---------[ End of batch script ]------------
This will lock up the computer. When I say lock up, you can't log in even if you have the right username or password...
#21.5 Krome on 17 Oct 2005 - 21:27
But in my case I did not use shutdown to abort... I use that at the very end of the batch command line after everything has finished install but figure out a proper way

{ DOs }
QUOTE
CLS
@echo off
setlocal
set PATHTOFIXES=G:TempPreSP3

echo.
echo Installing Microsoft Java Virtual Machine...
echo Q816093_W2K_SP4_X86_EN.exe
%PATHTOFIXES%Q816093_W2K_SP4_X86_EN.exe /N /Z /Q /U

;
; More here
;

echo.
echo Installing Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer...
echo WindowsXP-KB896688-x86-ENU.exe
%PATHTOFIXES%WindowsXP-KB896688-x86-ENU.exe /F /N /Q /U

exit



{ DON'Ts }
QUOTE
CLS
@echo off
setlocal
set PATHTOFIXES=G:TempPreSP3

echo.
echo Installing Security Update in Network Connection Manager Could Allow DoS Attack...
echo WindowsXP-KB905414-x86-ENU.exe
%PATHTOFIXES%WindowsXP-KB905414-x86-ENU.exe /N /Z /Q /U

;
; More here
;

echo.
echo Installing Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer...
echo WindowsXP-KB896688-x86-ENU.exe
%PATHTOFIXES%WindowsXP-KB896688-x86-ENU.exe /N /Z /Q /U

echo.
echo Computer is now shutting down in 15 seconds...
shutdown -r -t 15

EXIT


This will lock up the computer. When I say lock up, you can't log in even if you have the right username or password...
#22 gate1975mlm on 17 Oct 2005 - 15:30
Did they pull the patch from windows update?
(1 reply) #23 hotdog963al on 17 Oct 2005 - 15:53
-> <-
#23.1 mr_demilord on 17 Oct 2005 - 16:25
Everyone makes mistakes, it's a part of being a human
(1 reply) #24 Nautica on 17 Oct 2005 - 19:37
dont they test these patches for a while before they put them out???
#24.1 mr_demilord on 18 Oct 2005 - 07:28
Read the comments
#25 j0j081 on 18 Oct 2005 - 00:32
glad i was too lazy to update last week.
(2 replies) #26 AutoMe on 18 Oct 2005 - 04:16
The zero tolerance policy is hateful and encourages a victim mentality.

Here's yet another reason NOT to immediately apply patches.

#26.1 mr_demilord on 18 Oct 2005 - 07:30
I agree, I also wait atleast 1 week before I apply them, I also have automatic updates disables, btw this is not the first time a patch causes problems.
#26.2 gate1975mlm on 18 Oct 2005 - 14:25
If someone goes to Windows Update now will the update that causes problems be there?

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.

Advertisement (Why?)