dhoffman_98

Use SkipRearm before you run SysPrep. SysPrep information

XP Service Pack 3 Pushed Back to 2008 http://redmondmag.com/news/article.asp?editorialsid=7915

Well, on doing a little more research, it looks like KB905474 was actually released on January 16th. However, it seems that as of today it is showing up as a high priority update. Here is the link for information about KB905474 but I am not able to find a link for the full redistributable version yet, so if anyone else finds it, please post a link. And here is the information link for KB900485 which shows a release date of April 25, and is available for download.

Someone posted one here but I haven't tried doing it that way. Instead I have another way that I have been getting WGA installed. If you follow that link and look at several posts before that, you'll see other info about how I was doing mine.

More updates??? New updates showed up today, both listed as High Priority. KB900485 - Prevents a stop 0x7e error in AEC.SYS KB905474 - WGA Notification Tool

You are correct. See my update post for updated information. Hopefully Incroyable Hulk will have the front page updated shortly.

Can I make a suggestion? How about instead of including long lists like this, put the list in a text file and add it as an attachment. It makes for easier reading. Just a thought.

You are installing 911565 from your svcpack.inf, but when are you installing Media Player 10? Perhaps it's showing up in your add/remove list because the files were modified for MP9. If you install MP10 after your installation (like from RunOnceEx) then the default installation may be laying down the original files and you would need to re-patch with 911565. If you install MP10 and THEN install 911565 then it should work. If there is a way to install MP10 during the base install (like an integration) then I'm interested in knowing how well that works. In the meantime, I am using RunOnceEx after all my base OS stuff is done so that after it logs in, I install several applications (including MP10 and the fix). That being said, I did run into some problems with 911565 yesterday. It seems that the version of the file that I downloaded early yesterday was version 1.0.0.0, but later in the day, there was a version 1.1.0.0 that appeared. I had errors with the earlier version, but then re-downloaded the patch again and got the new version. I have a new simulation running right now with the new version, and I'll report my findings shortly. David

It's Patch Day again... Here's what I found: ADDED: KB911565 -- Vulnerability in Windows Media Player could allow remote code execution Updated 04/11/06 Download KB911567 -- Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express Download KB908531 -- Vulnerability in Windows Explorer that could allow remote code execution Download KB912812 -- Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer Replaces KB905915 Download KB911562 -- Vulnerability in MDAC that could allow remote code execution Download KB890830 -- Updated Malicious Software Removal Tool - Version 1.15 (April 2006) Download REMOVED: KB905915 -- Superceded by KB912812 My full list now shows the following 42 Files: KB873339 -- Vulnerability in HyperTerminal could allow code execution KB885250 -- Vulnerability in server message block could allow remote code execution KB885835 -- Vulnerabilities in Windows Kernel and LSASS could allow elevation of privilege KB885836 -- A vulnerability in WordPad could allow code execution KB886185 -- Critical Update for Windows XP KB887742 -- You receive the Stop error "Stop 0x05 (INVALID_PROCESS_ATTACH_ATTEMPT)" KB888113 -- Vulnerability in hyperlink object library could allow remote code execution KB888302 -- Vulnerability in Windows could allow information disclosure KB890046 -- Vulnerability in Microsoft agent could allow spoofing KB890830 -- Microsoft® Windows® Malicious Software Removal Tool (v1.14) KB890859 -- Vulnerabilities in Windows kernel could allow elevation of privilege and denial of service KB891781 -- Vulnerability in the DHTML editing component ActiveX control could allow code execution KB893756 -- Vulnerability in Telephony service could allow remote code execution KB893803 -- Windows Installer 3.1 (v2) KB894391 -- FIX: DBCS attachment file names are not displayed in Rich Text e-mail messages and you may receive a "Generic Host Process" error message after you install security update MS05-012 KB896358 -- A vulnerability in HTML Help could allow remote code execution KB896422 -- Vulnerability in Server Message Block could allow remote code execution KB896423 -- Vulnerability in Print Spooler service could allow remote code execution KB896424 -- Vulnerabilities in Graphics Rendering Engine Could Allow Code Execution KB896428 -- Vulnerability in Telnet client could allow information disclosure KB898461 -- Installs a permanent copy of the Package Installer for Windows version 6.1.22.4 KB899587 -- Vulnerabilities in Kerberos could allow denial of service, information disclosure, and spoofing KB899589 -- Vulnerability in the Client Service for NetWare Could Allow Remote Code Execution KB899591 -- Vulnerability in Remote Desktop Protocol could allow denial of service KB900725 -- Vulnerabilities in Windows Shell Could Allow Remote Code Execution KB901017 -- Vulnerability in the Microsoft Collaboration Data Objects could allow code execution (Windows) KB901214 -- Vulnerability in Microsoft Color Management Module could allow remote code execution KB902400 -- Vulnerabilities in MS DTC and COM+ Could Allow Remote Code Execution KB904706 -- Vulnerability in DirectShow Could Allow Remote Code Execution KB905414 -- Vulnerability in Network Connection Manager Could Allow Denial of Service KB905749 -- Vulnerability in Plug and Play Could Allow Remote Code Execution and Local Elevation of Privilege KB908519 -- Vulnerability in Embedded Web Fonts Could Allow Remote Code Execution KB908531 -- Vulnerability in Windows Explorer that could allow remote code execution KB910437 -- Automatic Updates can no longer download updates after an Access Violation error occurs KB911562 -- Vulnerability in MDAC that could allow remote code execution KB911564 -- Vulnerability in Windows Media Player plug-in with non-Microsoft Internet browsers could allow remote code execution. KB911565 -- Vulnerability in Windows Media Player could allow remote code execution. (Install AFTER MP10) KB911567 -- Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express KB911927 -- Vulnerability in Web Client Service could allow remote code execution. KB912812 -- Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer KB912919 -- Vulnerability in Graphics Rendering Engine Could Allow Remote Code Execution KB913446 -- Vulnerability in TCP/IP could allow Denial of Service.

Well, that is for the next Service Pack, but that doesn't mean that it would be impossible to expect a roll-up package before then... or at least we can hope for one.

Probably shortly after they release Vista...

Is anyone getting the new 890830 package? This page (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/890830) is showing that version 1.14 was released today, but follow the link in the page to download the actual package, and it takes you to a page where version 1.13 is still showing as the latest. Also version 1.14 is showing up on the Windows Update site. Is anyone else getting the new version yet?

@Sonic... I never said there was a problem. I simply was asking people for other ideas about how they were doing it, or if the way I was doing it seemed to be the best solution.

OK, I guess you were replying to me after all. Not that I could tell from the post since you didn't indicate... But I did a little looking into the inf file that controls laying down the WGA installation, and found the CLSID key you referred to. However, the explanation for why that key is added to the registry says "Limit Add-On Manager to always enabled". Basically what this key does is it forces the WGA ActiveX contol to be locked in the enable state in Internet Explorer. Explanation (for anybody who might be confused) In IE, select "Tools -> Manage Add-Ons". This list shows you additional controls loaded into your IE, and by selecting each one, you have an option to enable or disable the add-on. The reg key that boooggy provided forces the WGA add-on to stay enabled. I suppose I could add that key, but I don't see the benefit. If you turn it off in the Add-On Manager, then next time you need to validate, you will be told to download the control again.

Who's post were you replying to? I don't think it was mine, because I don't have to add the registry key, and you can't do direct integration if they don't provide a redistributable installation package. If you weren't replying to my post... nevermind...

I have a question about the Windows Genuine Advantage "thing".... I know there has been some discussion about this, and between here and Ryan's forum, I don't recall seeing any specific "Here's how to do it". So I want to explain the way I do it and ask if there is any reason why I shouldn't do it this way or if there is something that I'm missing. Note: I am NOT looking to cheat Microsoft. My Unattended Install is used in a corporate environment which is fully licensed and legitimate. The only issue I'm trying to take care of is implementing the WGA stuff so that users dont get faced with the pop up messages about installing ActiveX controls for the WGA items, and to make our unattended installation as complete as possible. So... There is a DLL file called LegitCheckControl.DLL. On my installation image, I included that file (currently version 1.5.512.0) in my "$OEM$/$$/System32" folder so that during installation it is automatically copied to my "C:\Windows\System32" directory. Then, after my base install is completed, I have a line that runs from RunOnceEx that copies that executes "regsvr32.exe /s %systemdrive%\WINDOWS\System32\LegitCheckControl.dll" and sure enough after the install is complete, if I try to go to Microsoft and download something that requires validation, it checks out ok. The only downside to this is that while Microsoft assigns a KB number to the WGA installation (892130), they don't appear to have a redistributable version to be used when building images or doing a mass deployment, and when they decide to upgrade the version of the DLL file, you don't find out until you try to do something that requires validation again. So anyhow... to my questions... 1. What are the rest of you doing to accomplish this as part of your installation (or do you just ignore it until you try to do something that needs to be validated?) 2. Does anyone see anything wrong with the way I'm doing this, or know of something that's going to cause problems if I do it this way. and finally, 3. Is there a better way to do it? (I know this is asking for opinion, but this is a discussion forum, so be kind;) Thanks, David

What purpose will this serve that the first post of this forum does not? The first post on this forum is updated as hotfixes are released from Microsoft. That is basically all this forum is for. This forum is here so that people who are building and maintaining their unattended installations have a central resource to go to where they can get information about what was released. And more than that, the first post even contains links to Microsoft where you can go to get more information about each update, and download it. So I'm a little confused about what your goal is. David

These hotfixes were removed. They are no longer needed because newer hotfixes superceded these. The monthly summary information on the first post shows when they were removed. By looking into the details for new releases that month, you can see that newer releases replaced the need for some of the older ones. MS05-012 was not a two-part hotfix. Microsoft released KB873333 (MS05-012) in February 2005. In November 2005, Microsoft realized that a new problem was occurring as a result of having installed the KB873333 hotfix. To address this new problem, they released KB894391. So yes, KB894391 is only a patch and is only required if KB873333 is installed (and also is only needed on XP SP2). In October 2005, Microsoft released KB902400 (MS05-051). This hotfix supercedes KB873333, which is why it was removed from the update list. And because KB873333 is no longer needed, neither is KB894391. KB893086 (MS05-016) was released in April 2005, and was superceded by KB900725 (MS05-049) which was released in October 2005. KB893086 was removed from the list. KB899588 (MS05-039) was released in August 2005, and was superceded by KB905749 (MS05-047) which was released in October 2005. KB899588 was removed from the list. Did this answer your questions?

OK I'm stumped. This looks like an application that applies hotfixes while windows is already running. So basically it does the same thing as Windows Update / Microsoft Update. So then the question becomes: Why would you use a third party application to download and install hotfixes if you already have that capability? I don't see the point, other than taking a chance installing some application that someone in another country wrote, with no idea of how secure, virus free, spyware free it might be. Just my opinion though... Thoughts? David

This is what the first page of this forum is for. That page is updated as new hotfixes are released (by MICROSOFT) and tested by some people who help to keep this forum up to date. You say you have 280 hotfixes for the English version of Windows. And then you say that some of them may be superceded already. If you are running XP SP2, there are only maybe 40 ACTIVE hotfixes required. Sure it may be interesting to know what they all were, but a huge majority of people who watch this thread are using SP2 which already includes all the PRE-SP1 and PRE-SP2 hotfixes which would be in your list. I wouldn't sweat over wasting much time trying to compile a package to distribute on here. Perhaps if you wanted to create an actual text listing of what they were and ATTACH it to a post, someone might find it useful. Also, as Todd stated, if your sources are not Microsoft, then there will potentially be some doubt as to how legitimate your sources are. Of course they could be reputable, but Microsoft is the only official source of what hotfixes are available. David

OK First of all, the /quiet and /passive switches don't get used together. Setup modes are one or the other. The description you are referring to clearly states that: Setup Modes /passive Unattended Setup mode. No user interaction is required, but installation status is displayed. If a restart is required at the end of Setup, a dialog box will be presented to the user with a timer warning that the computer will restart in 30 seconds. /quiet Quiet mode. This is the same as unattended mode, but no status or error messages are displayed. Second, the /q /n as Hulk posted in the first page ARE correct, as they are shortcuts for /quiet /norestart. So it was not "mindlessly copied". David

Hulk, Could you double check these? My test machine is still asking for 886185 and 873339. David

1. Know that the second tuesday of every month is Microsoft Patch Day, and some time during that day you could go to the Microsoft Update site to see what's new for your system. 2. You could visit http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/current.aspx to see what updates came out when and look at the most recent security bulletins. 3. You could visit http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/...tin/notify.mspx and register for notification when bulletins are released. 4. You could keep watching this forum. While the first page does not get updated immediately (and that is only because Incroyable Hulk likes to do some real testing before just putting the information out there), quite often the end of the thread will have been updated by several people as soon as any new releases are posted.

I'm sure as soon as Microsoft actually releases a hotfix that addresses this problem, this forum will be updated. Of course anyone should know that this forum only repeats information after Microsoft releases it, so if you are really hyped about getting bleeding edge updates as soon as they are released, you should be at Microsoft's site, not MSFN's (only because it sometimes takes a day or two to get the fully tested updates listed on the first page, and that's only because Hulk wants to be sure everything is tested properly). In the meantime... Microsoft has NOT released a hotfix for this yet. For those of you who don't know what Gouki is talking about, and wishing he would provide more information... here is a link to an article about this... http://entmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=7111 And here is the security advisory released by Microsoft: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/...ory/912840.mspx Stay tuned for more information as it becomes available... David

Interesting point. You probably would be protected in advance, but why waste the space on your installation to install files on every machine JUST IN CASE you need it on one machine? In my opinion, and the way I do my installs... If I have a "special case" machine that needs something unique, then I'll do the core install and then patch with an extra step for that machine. But I don't see the value for increasing the size of your install base to install patches and fixes that are unneccesary. It's like how the first post of this thread stays updated with hotfixes that can be removed each month because they are superceded. If you want to install EVERY hotfix that has been released, you sure can go ahead and do that... but why waste your install time and CD space installing one that doesn't matter?