Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


tommyp

Windows Updates

Recommended Posts

I'm not so sure that KB2616676 replaces KB2607712.

...

thoughts?

Yes, I wrote this, because of this MSRC-Blog-Posting:

...

In an effort to protect customers, last week we released Security Advisory 2607712 along with a non-security update to add fraudulent DigiNotar certificates to the Windows Untrusted Certificate Store. Today, we are releasing another update (2616676), adding six additional DigiNotar root certificates that are cross-signed by Entrust and GTE, to the Untrusted Certificate Store. Update 2616676 supersedes 2607712 and contains the full list of certificates which are:

  • DigiNotar Root CA
  • DigiNotar Root CA G2
  • DigiNotar PKIoverheid CA Overheid
  • DigiNotar PKIoverheid CA Organisatie - G2
  • DigiNotar PKIoverheid CA Overheid en Bedrijven
  • DigiNotar Root CA Issued by Entrust (2 certificates)*
  • DigiNotar Services 1024 CA Issued by Entrust*
  • Diginotar Cyber CA Issued by GTE CyberTrust (3 certificates)*

...

But with the issue-description in KB2616676 it's better to use also 2607712.

-- EDIT

Link to MSRC-Blog added

Edited by Mim0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest

Silly MS! :realmad:

So which is it? What's said in More on DigiNotar Certificates, and September Bulletins or KB2616676?

EDIT:

Oh wait. Read the bottom...

UPDATE: We have updated the Known Issues section of KB 2616676 to notify customers using Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 who downloaded update 2616676, that the update only contains the latest six digital certificates that are cross-signed by GTE and Entrust. These update versions do not also contain the digital certificates that were included in update 2607712. Customers who install update 2607712, and then install update 2616676, will be protected against the fraudulent certificates described in Security Advisory 2607712.

I guess you need both.

Edited by -X-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..

...We have updated the Known Issues section of KB 2616676 ...
...

I guess you need both.

Yes, that's also my thought when reading it...

...

But with the issue-description in KB2616676 it's better to use also 2607712.

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it seems not slipstreaming both of them but rather install/get them manually (2607712 before 2616676) after the os is set up is easiest way to ensure all certification stuff is applied correctly until M$

issue an update to update 2616676
:wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Windows 2000 Post-SP4 Updates for HFSLIP

18 September 2011

Added: updates

- Added 982214 v2 (thanks WildBill).

- Added 927779 v2 (for MDAC 2.81), 2510587 (for Windows Script 5.6), Script 5.8 (for Windows Script 5.8), 927489 (thanks tomasz86).

- Added 839264 (thanks tomasz86).

Other changes

- Updated the advice regarding the choice between Script updates.

- Updated the advice regarding MDAC updates.

Superseded updates

- 927779 (is superseded by 927779 v2).

- 971961 and 981350 (are superseded by 2510587).

Removed

- Removed 982214 (replaced by 982214 v2).

For all changes, please read the Changelog.

Edited by bristols

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Windows 2000 Post-SP4 Updates for HFSLIP

25 September 2011

Added: updates

- 927489 v2 (thanks tomasz86).

- 2616676 v2 (thanks tomasz86).

- Added Adobe Flash Player SWFLASH.CAB, 21 September 2011 release (10.3.183.10) (thanks jvidal).

Removed

- Removed 927489 (replaced by 927489 v2).

- Removed 2524375 (replaced by 2616676 v2).

- Removed Adobe Flash Player SWFLASH.CAB, 25 August 2011 release (10.3.183.7).

Changelog shows all recent changes.

Edited by bristols

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

New Flash. Flash 11. Exact version: 11.0.1.152

http://fpdownload.ad...h_player_ax.exe still shows 10.3.183.10 as of this writing. I guess the major version change might have something to do with it and they either changed the URL or something. I'm hoping not.

EDIT: I found a download link at DSLReports.

http://fpdownload.adobe.com/get/flashplayer/pdc/11.0.1.152/install_flash_player_ax_32bit.exe

Edited by -X-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New Flash. Flash 11. Exact version: 11.0.1.152

http://fpdownload.ad...h_player_ax.exe still shows 10.3.183.10 as of this writing. ...

But the file Flash11c.ocx has the correct version inside.

There is a new file: ..\system32\FlashPlayerCPLApp.cpl which contains a control-panel-AddIn. With this AddIn you can do now modify flash-player-settings w/o being online.

As far as I remember right, HFSLIP should place this file automatically to system32. But I think a modification may be necessary to "activate" this AddIn. Or are all System32\*.cpl automatically integrated in the control-panel?

Maybe this has to be be added to the INF:

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Control Panel\Extended Properties\{2CA4F306-B280-4ab2-B5E1-1DFA3583F046}]
"C:\\WINDOWS\\system32\\FlashPlayerCPLApp.cpl"=dword:0000000a

All downloads are possible here:

http://www.adobe.com/special/products/flashplayer/fp_distribution3.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe this has to be be added to the INF:

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Control Panel\Extended Properties\{2CA4F306-B280-4ab2-B5E1-1DFA3583F046}]
"C:\\WINDOWS\\system32\\FlashPlayerCPLApp.cpl"=dword:0000000a

If this is true, i think is better to replace "WINDOWS" with "%Windir%" without the quotes.

Im outdated by now. :whistle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you shouldn't use "WINDOWS" as:

1. Some users may have different Windows folder's name.

2. It's "WINNT" for Windows 2000 ;)

Edited by tomasz86

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...