Jody Thornton Posted December 12, 2017 Author Share Posted December 12, 2017 Well, I find it interesting that December's security-only update (KB4054523) for Server 2012 is only 1.4 MB. Wonder what's in it that makes it so small. I suppose I always worry that Microsoft will find a way to kill off what we're doing in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jody Thornton Posted December 13, 2017 Author Share Posted December 13, 2017 Oh well I dove in and installed my updates. I have a Vista-based VS enabled so it doesn't look like Windows 8, but it is 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenhillmaniac Posted December 19, 2017 Share Posted December 19, 2017 Would you look at the time... I haven't updated the repository in 2 months! Here we go: Replaced Monthly Rollup with the new one, KB4054520; Replaced the Flash Player update with the new one, KB4053577; Added this and previous month's Security Only updates, KB4048962 and KB4054523; Replaced Internet Explorer's cumulative update with the new one, KB4052978; Replaced all of the .NET Framework Security and Quality Rollups with the new ones: KB4041776 for .NET 4.6, 4.6.1, 4.6.2 and 4.7; KB4040975 for .NET 4.5.2 and KB4040979 for .NET 3.5; Replaced Timezone update in the Extras folder with the new KB4051956. I think that's all. Sorry for the delay https://mega.nz/#F!ExhDEbDA!pUhzXKVp5-hgzvylW_btfQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenhillmaniac Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 Small repository update. More updates probably coming on Patch Tuesday: Updated Monthly Rollup Update to KB4056896; Added Security Only Update KB4056899 and updated IE10 Cumulative Update to KB4056568 (only on x86. Microsoft only provided the January IE10 update to Server 2012 so far). I'd also like to mention that these updates don't fix the recent CPU exploits, as mencioned on Microsoft's own article: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4072698 so they should be safe to install. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jody Thornton Posted January 9, 2018 Author Share Posted January 9, 2018 I was just about to install these greenhillmaniac. They look to be the same: IE 10 Cumulative Security Update (KB4056568) Security Only Update (KB4056899) Should I just wait for the ones to come down today? Or should I install both? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenhillmaniac Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 14 minutes ago, JodyT said: Should I just wait for the ones to come down today? Or should I install both? I think those are the patches that Microsoft would release today, if not for the whole CPU exploit debacle. Unless you have an old AMD system (with an Athlon 64), you should be clear to install them. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jody Thornton Posted January 10, 2018 Author Share Posted January 10, 2018 Can anyone answer how far back the cumulative updates go? So If I update to January 2016, can install the most recent cumulative update, and pretty much cover the last two years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenhillmaniac Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 7 hours ago, JodyT said: Can anyone answer how far back the cumulative updates go? So If I update to January 2016, can install the most recent cumulative update, and pretty much cover the last two years? They until October 2016. From October until January 2016 you have to install the individual updates (that I have on separate folders in my repository). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jody Thornton Posted January 18, 2018 Author Share Posted January 18, 2018 Am I getting this right: that the recent patches for Windows Server 2012 and 2008 do not mitigate the effects of Spectre and Meltdown? https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4072698/windows-server-guidance-to-protect-against-the-speculative-execution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dencorso Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 Yes. And no patches to any x86 Windows yet (or forevermore?). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jody Thornton Posted January 18, 2018 Author Share Posted January 18, 2018 Yikes! Should I be worried about this, or treat it like FUD (which is a mindset I usually don't like to subscribe to) Still awaiting a bios update, but it appears HP is taking its sweet time. since it's an old machine, that may not come to pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dencorso Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 At present I think treating it as FUD is the best option. Two of the variants require direct access to the machine to compromise it. The other one is more serious: while Windows (any NT 5.x+ AFAIK) is immune to it, browsers and JavaScript inside them (and maybe Java, too) may not be. So: using safe browsers and up-to-date Java (or no Java), should keep common people safe enough. Big corporations are surely at risk, though, it's a question of cost/benefit ratio, obviously. BTW, I doubt there'll ever be a BIOS update for my IvyBridges... if I had to bet, I'd bet on Intel leting owners of older processors out in the rain. Their rep is tarnished already, you know... Give the attachment below careful consideration, and see whether you agree with me or not. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenhillmaniac Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 1 hour ago, JodyT said: Yikes! Should I be worried about this, or treat it like FUD (which is a mindset I usually don't like to subscribe to) Honestly, I think it's good news... No performance loss for Intel CPUs on NT 6.2. Another plus for me 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jody Thornton Posted January 18, 2018 Author Share Posted January 18, 2018 I like your thinking greenhillmaniac. And thanks for your feedback dencorso. I'll remain calm 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jody Thornton Posted June 12, 2018 Author Share Posted June 12, 2018 I've downloaded but not installed the following updates: KB4284846, KB4230450 (IE10), KB4287903 (Flash), KB4095518 (.NET 4.5) (all part of the 4099638 .NET Package) When I move back to Windows 8, I'll have lots of updates in front of me. What I was doing was: Installing all of the automatic updates until January 2016 Then starting at the most recent updates, and installing backwards. I find that I can skip a bunch of superseded updates that way. Is this a good move? Repeat the process for IE10, Flash, and .NET Feedback desired :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now