Blocking Windows Update via Router


Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

We've got a bit of an issue at the moment, we're using DeepFreeze to lock down our PCs on the call floor, the issue is that they're all redownloading Windows Updates automatically every morning. Now I'm going to go around and disable this so we can manually do it once every few months but immediately we need to have Windows Update blocked as our internet connection is barely functioning right now.

Can anyone tell me what Domains / Ports etc Windows Update on Windows XP uses?

Thanks

Chris

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/984862-blocking-windows-update-via-router/
Share on other sites

i believe update.microsoft.com is the hostname of the windows update servers, not sure about the port though, leme see if i can track it down (Y)

edit: windows update services use port 80 and 443, lol

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb490846.aspx

Windows update uses the following DNS for updates;

update.microsoft.com

windowsupdate.microsoft.com

you could block these at the firewall if your router supports DNS blocking that would be the simple option i guess.

If you have a Windows Server you could implement a group policy?

EDIT: Riggers beat me to it

Hey guys,

Blocking those two hostnames seams to have done the job for now, well enough at least. I'll update these PCs manually in a few weeks then disable Windows Update on them.

Which group policy are you guys talking about?

They're hooked up to a Server 2008 R2 Domain Controller.

Through Group policy you can control Windows Update, ideally you would do this with WSUS (free) to give you a centralized control of updates allowing you to control what does and what does not get installed

Then when you want to apply an update you OK it in WSUS and all the machines will download it per the scheduling you have already laid out

  On 24/03/2011 at 14:23, Teebor said:

Through Group policy you can control Windows Update, ideally you would do this with WSUS (free) to give you a centralized control of updates allowing you to control what does and what does not get installed

Then when you want to apply an update you OK it in WSUS and all the machines will download it per the scheduling you have already laid out

This, also you can have deepfreeze thaw during a scheduled time period so that updates can be applied. Say between 3am to 5am on thrusdays for example (a time that usually no one is working).

Yeah, controlling Windows Update via Group Policy isn't really worth it, nor is WSUS, When we move to a Windows Multipoint Server base or move from XP to 7 then I'll worry about such things. These machines are used for a basic Java app and nothing else, so updates are barely important, they're even firewalled off from 99.9% of the web.

I'll just let them be and disable automatic updates soon as I get time.

Spending time fixing up PCs from the dark ages isn't my concern, ensuring it doesn't affect the productivity of the office is my concern. lol.

  On 24/03/2011 at 15:59, Vegetunks said:

Yeah, controlling Windows Update via Group Policy isn't really worth it, nor is WSUS, When we move to a Windows Multipoint Server base or move from XP to 7 then I'll worry about such things. These machines are used for a basic Java app and nothing else, so updates are barely important, they're even firewalled off from 99.9% of the web.

I'll just let them be and disable automatic updates soon as I get time.

Spending time fixing up PCs from the dark ages isn't my concern, ensuring it doesn't affect the productivity of the office is my concern. lol.

30 min gets you wsus and the appropriate group policies in place (even to disable windows updates for those specific machines, this would take 5 min if you have a domain). Dunno how it isnt worth it. Dunno how WSUS isn't worth free.

computer configuration

admin templates

windows components

windows update

Configure automatic updates

"If the status is set to Disabled, any updates that are available on Windows Update must be downloaded and installed manually. To do this, go to http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com or click Start, click Programs (or click All Programs), and then click Windows Update."

This is a computer setting so it applies only to computers, add the computers that you want to apply this gpo to not the users within the group policy management console in active directory.

On the Domain Controller, Start, Administrative tools, Group Policy Management Console.

Make a new group policy under the main domain name, edit the policy. I will provide screen shots in my next post, I will start getting them done now.

when you are in the group policy management console, you single click on the policy on right it displays scope tab, at the bottom of the scope tab there is security filtering. add computers in there. You will have to modify the object type to include computers to be able to add them.

then on a computer that is going to be effected by the group policy you can force it to apply by going to a command prompt and typing in:

gpupdate

to verify that this has been applied you can either use the gpresults command or going to start run rsop.msc and navigating to the windows update section. All pcs will follow suit within 15-45 min, you may want to schedule a one time thaw so that these updates can take place and be in there always, even after a reboot.

Very powerful the group policies are, I would suggest making group policies as granular as possible. They can really lock down a computer. The computer configuration section applies to computers, the user configuration section applies to users. If you change something to the computer configuration and try to apply that to users it will will not apply and if you change something in the user configuration and have that apply to computers it will not apply.

You can make groups and apply policies to groups (you can put computers in a group).

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • If you look at all RAID implementations that exist, you're going to find exceptions. However, all the modern consumer varieties tend to have some things in common (by default). I'll stick to describing those. When you add a disk to a RAID array, metadata is stored at the end of the disk. It records the array the disk is part of, which other disks are in the array, etc. This is called the RAID superblock. If you create a RAID 1 array, your operating system will see them all as a single disk that is very slightly smaller than a single disk (due to the superblock). Everything you write to the RAID disk gets written identically to each of its member disks by the storage controller. Technically, disks are read/written in blocks (each block is multiple sectors in size), but this is all transparent to the user. Every file you create or change or delete is created/changed/deleted on every member disk simultaneously. This is true whether you have 2 disks in the array or more than 2.  If one disk completely fails, you can still operate just fine off the remaining disk(s) (but see the caution below). If you remove one disk and attach it to another PC, it should work fine. The partition information and everything is all at the front of the disk, just as expected. The superblock will just appear as some extra junk at the very end of the disk, outside any partition. In some scenarios, where it is recognized as a RAID member disk from another PC, there might be an extra step before it will let you use it, but it's all very doable. Caution:  Blocks are read from the disks in a staggered fashion. For example, with 2 disks, all the odd blocks are read from one disk and all the even blocks are read from the other. By working together like this, read speeds can be practically doubled. But this comes with a huge drawback. If a disk doesn't fail completely, but instead develops bad sectors, you may not realize it. The bad sectors may happen to be in blocks that are never read on that disk. In some cases, people have had bad sectors develop on one disk, then had the other disk fail, and only then realized that the remaining disk has bad sectors and corrupt data. Every backup method has its pros and cons. Never trust just RAID, or just an external HDD, or just the cloud. Use multiple methods to backup important data.
    • Evidence that it affects "most" people negatively? Based on what? The fact that their are millions of users in fact show me the opposite, that "most" are quite happy.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      Kavin25 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      Leonard grant earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      pcdoctorsnet earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rising Star
      Phillip0web went up a rank
      Rising Star
    • One Month Later
      Epaminombas earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      537
    2. 2
      ATLien_0
      205
    3. 3
      +FloatingFatMan
      167
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      151
    5. 5
      Som
      127
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!