Dave-H

Good to hear!

Well I now have a nice clean new set of six crypt32 entries in my Application Log this morning, with no errors. Of course this happened before too, but it didn't last and the errors were soon back. Fingers crossed for this time!

Facebook now defaults to Flash if it detects that you're using Windows XP. If you want to use HTML5 you will need to change the browser user agent string for Facebook.com. An add-on like "Custom UserAgent String" will do that for you. I use that and set the string to "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:57.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/57.0". You can of course change the string for all web sites, which I did for quite a while, but I subsequently found that there was a site (britishairways.com) which wouldn't let me log in with that string set, so beware problems like that. HTH.

Well the "fix" didn't work this time! Back to the same problem as before. I will try the batch file to see if it produces a better result.

Looks like I spoke too soon, the crypt32 ID 11 error events have come back again! I've done the fix again.

Thanks as always Den! I did have a look at those threads before, but people there seemed to think there was no guaranteed workaround to get the Compatibility Pack to work properly on 98, so I didn't really pursue it. I don't really want to get into things like installing 98se2Me on the system. I thought I'd just find a 98-compatible separate reader for the docx files I have, as I'll never need to edit them on 98 anyway, but I'm not having much luck finding even that. I've tried a couple which say they work on Windows 98 but actually they don't! I will try the Office XP update files using the extracted installers, it may indeed just be the packagers that fail in 98. Cheers, Dave.

I've just updated my old Office XP on Windows XP to Office 2013, and decided to install my Office XP on the Windows 98SE side of my machine instead, which I'd never bothered to do before. It installed fine, although I was disappointed to find that there's no way of handling docx files with it. I had the Office 2007 Compatibility Pack installed on Windows XP, but of course it doesn't work with Windows 98, and I gather that there is no way around that. I now want to update my new Office XP Windows 98 installation as far as I can, being that there's no update mechanism from Microsoft for it any more of course. I've installed Service Pack 3 with no problem, and the KB947866 patch. I then found this thread, and I've downloaded the updates ZIP package. Am I right in assuming that you can't uses the supplied .cmd files to automatically install the patches on Windows 98? I gather that .cmd files only work on NT systems, and just changing them to BAT files doesn't work! I started installing them all one by one manually, and the .msp files seemed to all work, but most of the .exe files won't, they open but then crash. I have KernelEx installed, but none of its modes make any difference. Are most of these updates not compatible with Windows 98? Also, is there any way in Office XP to see what updates I have got installed? Apart for "SP3" I can't see any record of the installed updates. Any advice gratefully received. Cheers, Dave.

I did my netbook a while ago, originally just manually deleting all the files in the CryptnetUrlCache folders. I did then decide just to try the certutil command to see what else it might do. I didn't want to install the Admin Pack on that machine, so I just copied the certutil.exe and certadm.dll files from the main machine to \system32 on the netbook. When I ran the "certutil -urlcache * delete" command, I was surprised to find it appeared to do a lot more, deleting a lot of entries. They went through pretty fast but they looked like URLs, rather than the files in the CryptnetUrlCache folders, which appear to just have numbers as their names. All seems to be still working anyway.

I've had this problem a lot with Zippyshare, junk advertising pages appearing when you click the download link. If you just go back and try again, eventually you will get the correct page, although it can take a few tries.

The extra options from the Admin Pack are under Administrative Tools. 🙂

Don't worry, I know you weren't being serious! As I said, the only reason I overlooked your message was because it was on a new page, and I wasn't aware of that until I'd replied to a previous post and my reply appeared underneath it!

I'm not sure whether to be insulted by that or not! @glnz I have already fixed my main machine, I may just use @heinoganda's method when I get to my netbook.

@Thomas S. Thanks Thomas, I was about the give the link, but you saved me the trouble! All seems well, I can't imagine that installing the Server 2003 Admin Pack would cause any detrimental effects, so I'll leave it installed. If it gives you extra tools to use on XP, that's only a good thing as far as I'm concerned. I'll now run the same fix on my netbook, which was also showing the error messages. @glnz You will find when you follow the instructions in the KB article that some of the folders are not where it says they are, because it is referring to later versions of Windows. The ones in \System32\Config\SystemProfile\Application Data\Microsoft are where they say, but not the first two. Easiest is to do a system search for "CryptnetUrlCache" and that will point you to them. EDIT: Oops, hadn't seen @heinoganda's post as it was on a new page! Looks like just deleting the files is enough without running certutil at all! If that is the case you don't even need to install the Admin Pack.......

I looked at the article, and then remembered that I had been there before. Unfortunately the "certutil" program does not exist in XP, so I didn't pursue the fix at that time, and the "fix-it" links just go the MS homepage. This time I was more persistent, and I found that the "certutil" program can be added to XP by installing the Server 2003 Admin Pack. This I did, and ran the command, and cleaned the folders specified. On reboot, a lovely set of crypt32 updates in my Application log, with no errors! So, fingers crossed it's finally fixed!

Thanks, I'm not sure whether I've been to that article before or not, but I'll certainly check it out. I'm working in Windows 10 at the moment!

I'm still getting the huge numbers of error messages in my Windows Application log - "Failed extract of third-party root list from auto update cab at: <http://www.download.windowsupdate.com/msdownload/update/v3/static/trustedr/en/authrootstl.cab> with error: A required certificate is not within its validity period when verifying against the current system clock or the timestamp in the signed file." They seem to be coming regularly every seven days. Is there no way of stopping this? It's not related to @heinoganda's updater, or to HTTPSProxy, as it's now happening on my netbook too, which has never had either of them installed or run on it, or any other modification knowingly made to its certificate structure. Presumably this isn't happening for everyone, or there would be far more reports of it, so why is it happening to me?!

I've always copied the latest version of jfxwebkit.dll over along with all the other files. I've not seen any resulting issues, but I probably don't have anything that uses it anyway.

I just use search and replace on my registry editor!

I assume it's to stop any auto-update routine from still nagging you to update when you already have the latest files. Personally I've always re-named the folder to reflect the new version, rather than leave it as jre1.8.0_152, but if you do that you will need to reflect that in the registry entries of course, and manually edit the "deployment.properties" file in the "D:\Users\{username}\Application Data\Sun\Java\Deployment" folder to get the path right again. Neater for me, but I have terrible OCD about that sort of thing!

@glnz Why have you got Malwarebytes and Avast installed? I would never have more than one internet security/anti-virus program installed as they would be almost certain to conflict with each other at some point. As I said before, if a Microsoft Update scan comes up with no updates needed, and everything in Windows Explorer works fine, you must be OK with them.

I have noticed that the registry data for some XP updates does imply that they are part of SP4. HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Updates\Windows XP\SP4 I guess MS did at one time intend to release an official SP4 but never did.

When I installed @heinoganda's KB4018556-v2, I was then prompted by MS Update to reinstall KB4018556 (which I had already installed). I think this may have been an issue with the first version of Heinoganda's patch, which has now been corrected. If you weren't prompted to install KB4018556 again after you installed KB4018556-v2, I wouldn't worry about it!

If Microsoft Update says you're fully patched with up to date patches, and everything in Windows Explorer is working as it should be, I don't see any reason to uninstall any of them. In your position I would completely uninstall Malwarebytes and see if the system is then stable, with no BSODs or freezes. If it is, then try reinstalling it.

I use a driver "TCP Half Open Limited Patcher (TCP-Z)" to provide the same function. It's from someone called "deepxw". It's also still working fine.

@FranceBB If @pixelsearch2's system is XP, rather than POSReady, there's obviously no point in him reporting this to Microsoft. What's needed is for as many people as possible with genuine licensed actual POSReady systems to report it, as MS are actually shipping a buggy update (three times!) to a still supported operating system!