main

Microsoft patch can cause IE trouble

Hurmoth   on 16 August 2006 - 02:37 · 20 comments & 9730 views

Advertisement (Why?)
On Tuesday, Microsoft reported that after people apply the MS06-042 update, rated "critical" by Microsoft, IE may crash when certain websites are viewed. The problem affects IE6 with Service Pack 1 on Windows 2000 and Windows XP systems according to the software giant.

"Microsoft has identified an issue with the security update MS06-042," the company said in a statement Tuesday. It plans to re-release the bulletin and patch on Aug. 22 for all affected users.

The problem occurs when IE users view Web sites that use version 1.1 of HTTP alongside compression, according to Microsoft's notice. HTTP, or hypertext transfer protocol, is the standard protocol used to browse websites.

MS06-042 is an update for IE that addresses eight vulnerabilities in the popular browser. It is one of a dozen security updates that Microsoft released last week on Patch Tuesday.

Patches have caused trouble at times, on occasion prompting Microsoft to fix already released updates. In April, it released a second version of a Windows Explorer update because the original interfered with Hewlett-Packard software and nVidia drivers. In June, it had to fix a patch that caused network connection trouble for some people.

News source: CNET News.com

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 20 additional comments
#1 Pc_Madness on 16 Aug 2006 - 02:49
And IE causes Windows trouble! The irony. : philosophical :
#2 Danrarbc641 on 16 Aug 2006 - 03:13
Doesn't everything cause IE trouble?
#3 thenewbrgnewman on 16 Aug 2006 - 03:35
That's the exact issue I was having here with both of my Windows 2000 computers! I even posted the problem here: http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=486246

- Barret
#4 macstorm on 16 Aug 2006 - 04:29
Yeah I've been experiencing such issue with some webpages.
(5 replies) #5 superhuman on 16 Aug 2006 - 04:32
upgrade to IE7. IE6 can't be cured anymore
#5.1 blx on 16 Aug 2006 - 05:16
Why bother, when you can switch to superior browser?
#5.2 billyea on 16 Aug 2006 - 05:56
I am an avid Firefox user but I do use IE7 and I do find it good at what it's supposed to do: browse the web, much better than IE6.
The inferior browser works like a charm with the right software backing it up.
#5.3 Jugalator on 16 Aug 2006 - 06:31
Some never grew tired of browser wars.
#5.4 billyea on 16 Aug 2006 - 07:39
Quote - Jugalator said @ #5.3
Some never grew tired of browser wars.

exactly
why can't we all get along????
but then I can't make world peace
#5.5 mrbester on 16 Aug 2006 - 09:45
Incongruency check (relevant text emboldened to emphasise the point):
Quote - OA
The problem affects IE6 with Service Pack 1 on Windows 2000 and Windows XP systems according to the software giant.

Quote - superhuman
upgrade to IE7. IE6 can't be cured anymore


If you still don't get it, answer this: where can you get IE7 for Windows 2000?
#6 medion on 16 Aug 2006 - 06:59
thats why I had problems
#7 RAID 0 on 16 Aug 2006 - 07:18
"Oh CRAP! We've done it again!"
(4 replies) #8 mrmckeb on 16 Aug 2006 - 08:28
**** happens... it's not like every other company doesn't release software updates - why should people think that Microsoft is any worse than any other company. In product size to number of updates ratio, Microsoft is probably not far off most other software vendors (including Apple - OSX ~40 updates in the same period that Windows ~60).
#8.1 mealies on 16 Aug 2006 - 09:43
I am not trying to start an flame war but the problem in this situation is not the amount of patches, but the fact that patches break things, important things at that.

I ran the updates on my work machine yesterday afternoon, and i have had IE crash 7 times since then and explorer crash once, not too clever.

So what do i do, i have to wait to check that the patches don't break servers & workstations but if i don't patch i leave my systems potentially vunerable to attack. After all, the patches are all labelled critical and should be installed immediately according to Microsoft.
#8.2 dangel on 16 Aug 2006 - 09:52
Quote - mealies said @ #8.1
I am not trying to start an flame war but the problem in this situation is not the amount of patches, but the fact that patches break things, important things at that.


So you've never done anything with unforseen consequences? It's a fact of life for software developers (me - guilty as charged) whether they work for large or small companies. Yes it's annoying for end users but unless _every_ patch breaks stuff you really don't have too much to whine about - report the issue and let MS fix it. Roll back the patch if it's that bad - use system restore or uninstall the KB in question.
#8.3 mrmckeb on 16 Aug 2006 - 10:05
Quote - dangel said @ #8.2
Quote - mealies said @ #8.1
I am not trying to start an flame war but the problem in this situation is not the amount of patches, but the fact that patches break things, important things at that.


So you've never done anything with unforseen consequences? It's a fact of life for software developers (me - guilty as charged) whether they work for large or small companies. Yes it's annoying for end users but unless _every_ patch breaks stuff you really don't have too much to whine about - report the issue and let MS fix it. Roll back the patch if it's that bad - use system restore or uninstall the KB in question.

It's not as though the patch made Windows explode... it just caused some issues. Yes MS should do more Beta testing on these updates, but they try and thats the important thing.
#8.4 mealies on 16 Aug 2006 - 10:10
Quote - dangel said @ #8.2


So you've never done anything with unforseen consequences? It's a fact of life for software developers (me - guilty as charged) whether they work for large or small companies. Yes it's annoying for end users but unless _every_ patch breaks stuff you really don't have too much to whine about - report the issue and let MS fix it. Roll back the patch if it's that bad - use system restore or uninstall the KB in question.


Your right in that software can & will go wrong and everyone has written patches which kill another part of their software. If i install non-critical patches and have to rollback, thats ok on a desktop but annoying on a server, but i am still not that bothered as no real damage has been done.

However i get annoyed when security updates break functionality in servers and workstations as i have a choice to either see what damage it does and attempt to fix that or leave the machines unpatched and and trust in my other security systems to warn me in time. Thats the problem because now i don't trust microsoft updates.
#9 Orange on 16 Aug 2006 - 10:35
"critical" by Microsoft lol lmao rofl, how about microsoft is a critical company.
#10 cork1958 on 16 Aug 2006 - 10:51
No issues on my 2 XP boxes or my 1 W2K box, as far as I can tell. Don't use Winblows much anymore.
#11 thejohnnyq on 16 Aug 2006 - 12:36
I posted this issue last Wednesday on Activewin.com. MS refused to acknowledge the problem when i talked to them.

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?)