What's the deal with MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) and Windows 98?

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx

If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past week)
gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the background.
It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such update
or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of simply
replacing an existing file).

Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is critical
for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply deactivating
it (via msconfig).

Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and KB891711.EXE?

Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode to
properly install it) ?

Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?

Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
160 answers Last reply
More about what deal ms05 kb891711 windows
  1. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    I removed it by the "Add/Remove programs" in the Control Panel. I too don't
    like programs running in the background.


    --
    Don
    Vancouver, USA


    "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
    >
    > If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
    >
    > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
    >
    > If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past week)
    > gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
    > certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the background.
    > It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such update
    > or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of simply
    > replacing an existing file).
    >
    > Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is critical
    > for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply deactivating
    > it (via msconfig).
    >
    > Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and KB891711.EXE?
    >
    > Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode to
    > properly install it) ?
    >
    > Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
    >
    > Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
  2. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update that has as of now
    not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need this critical update
    because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to compromise
    all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch and have not been
    updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers will be a maximum of
    3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is connected to the
    Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE" running because I am
    sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better fix but this is a
    temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe while on-line. If
    programs are not responding then discover why. People you need this CRITICAL
    PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run with the patch because
    of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove Ethernet cable, USB cable
    or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if you do not do this
    and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just asking for your system
    to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends although I know a lot
    about security on computers and weak access points and could probably do it
    without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is with keeping the
    U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers to try and get one
    small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the terriorists and
    finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others can help you with
    your computer problems. Have a nice day!

    "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
    :
    : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
    :
    : http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
    :
    : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past week)
    : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
    : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the background.
    : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such update
    : or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of simply
    : replacing an existing file).
    :
    : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is critical
    : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply deactivating
    : it (via msconfig).
    :
    : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and KB891711.EXE?
    :
    : Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode to
    : properly install it) ?
    :
    : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
    :
    : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
  3. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I want to install it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install these updates in general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But on the other hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this patch is far greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine. Keep in mind that there have been several updates this year considered "important" for Windows 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune pointed out, the difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so significant in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine probably *is* vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be 100% secure all the time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about not having this one patch installed.

    And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running WITHOUT anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I decided I would run a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what - nothing found other than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is being aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the Internet.

    Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was, but what I do know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this manner, without informing the users of the potential caveats, and apparently without testing in dial-up systems, etc.


    "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update that has as of now
    > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need this critical update
    > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to compromise
    > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch and have not been
    > updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers will be a maximum of
    > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is connected to the
    > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE" running because I am
    > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better fix but this is a
    > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe while on-line. If
    > programs are not responding then discover why. People you need this CRITICAL
    > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run with the patch because
    > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove Ethernet cable, USB cable
    > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if you do not do this
    > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just asking for your system
    > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends although I know a lot
    > about security on computers and weak access points and could probably do it
    > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is with keeping the
    > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers to try and get one
    > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the terriorists and
    > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others can help you with
    > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
    >
    > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
    > :
    > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
    > :
    > : http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
    > :
    > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past week)
    > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
    > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the background.
    > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such update
    > : or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of simply
    > : replacing an existing file).
    > :
    > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is critical
    > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply deactivating
    > : it (via msconfig).
    > :
    > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and KB891711.EXE?
    > :
    > : Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode to
    > : properly install it) ?
    > :
    > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
    > :
    > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
    >
    >
  4. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    Sure Ivan, the patch was not released in the best manner by Microsoft but I
    still give Microsoft credit for finally patching the vulnerability. If you
    or anyone else want to leave your machine unpatched without this critical
    update then don't come complaining to me later on if someone connects to your
    computer and/or network because you were unpatched and makes all kinds of
    changes. Remember, 98, 98SE and ME are in final support stage and last
    support will be elimated on 9x machines after 30 June 2006. Sure on-line
    articles and stuff will still be available but there will be no more critical
    updates unless something radical changes at Microsoft. Remember, Microsoft
    has insisted on choosing the NT line and I feel that decision is flawed and I
    have tried to change them as best as I can but the hope for the future seems
    to belong to Linux, Apple, Google, Mozilla and other open-source companies.
    Have a nice night!

    "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
    news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    : Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I want to install it
    on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install these updates in
    general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But on the other
    hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the
    inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this patch is far
    greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine. Keep in mind that
    there have been several updates this year considered "important" for Windows
    98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune pointed out, the
    difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so significant
    in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine probably *is*
    vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be 100% secure all the
    time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about not having this
    one patch installed.
    :
    : And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running WITHOUT
    anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I decided I would run
    a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what - nothing found other
    than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is being
    aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the Internet.
    :
    : Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was, but what I do
    know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this manner,
    without informing the users of the potential caveats, and apparently without
    testing in dial-up systems, etc.
    :
    :
    :
    : "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    : > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update that has as of
    now
    : > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need this critical
    update
    : > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to
    compromise
    : > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch and have not been
    : > updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers will be a
    maximum of
    : > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is connected to the
    : > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE" running because I am
    : > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better fix but this is
    a
    : > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe while on-line.
    If
    : > programs are not responding then discover why. People you need this
    CRITICAL
    : > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run with the patch
    because
    : > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove Ethernet cable, USB
    cable
    : > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if you do not do
    this
    : > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just asking for your
    system
    : > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends although I know a
    lot
    : > about security on computers and weak access points and could probably do
    it
    : > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is with keeping the
    : > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers to try and get
    one
    : > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the terriorists
    and
    : > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others can help you
    with
    : > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
    : >
    : > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
    : > :
    : > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
    : > :
    : > : http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
    : > :
    : > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past week)
    : > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
    : > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the background.
    : > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such update
    : > : or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of simply
    : > : replacing an existing file).
    : > :
    : > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is critical
    : > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply deactivating
    : > : it (via msconfig).
    : > :
    : > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and KB891711.EXE?
    : > :
    : > : Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode to
    : > : properly install it) ?
    : > :
    : > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
    : > :
    : > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
    : >
    : >
  5. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    I meant since September 2003...

    "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I want to install it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install these updates in general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But on the other hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this patch is far greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine. Keep in mind that there have been several updates this year considered "important" for Windows 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune pointed out, the difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so significant in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine probably *is* vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be 100% secure all the time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about not having this one patch installed.
    >
    > And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running WITHOUT anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I decided I would run a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what - nothing found other than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is being aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the Internet.
    >
    > Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was, but what I do know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this manner, without informing the users of the potential caveats, and apparently without testing in dial-up systems, etc.
    >
    >
    >
    > "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update that has as of now
    > > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need this critical update
    > > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to compromise
    > > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch and have not been
    > > updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers will be a maximum of
    > > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is connected to the
    > > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE" running because I am
    > > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better fix but this is a
    > > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe while on-line. If
    > > programs are not responding then discover why. People you need this CRITICAL
    > > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run with the patch because
    > > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove Ethernet cable, USB cable
    > > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if you do not do this
    > > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just asking for your system
    > > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends although I know a lot
    > > about security on computers and weak access points and could probably do it
    > > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is with keeping the
    > > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers to try and get one
    > > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the terriorists and
    > > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others can help you with
    > > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
    > >
    > > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
    > > :
    > > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
    > > :
    > > : http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
    > > :
    > > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past week)
    > > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
    > > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the background.
    > > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such update
    > > : or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of simply
    > > : replacing an existing file).
    > > :
    > > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is critical
    > > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply deactivating
    > > : it (via msconfig).
    > > :
    > > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and KB891711.EXE?
    > > :
    > > : Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode to
    > > : properly install it) ?
    > > :
    > > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
    > > :
    > > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
    > >
    > >
  6. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    Whata's the downside of this update?

    "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
    news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I want to install
    it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install these updates in
    general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But on the other
    hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the
    inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this patch is far
    greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine. Keep in mind that
    there have been several updates this year considered "important" for Windows
    98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune pointed out, the
    difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so significant
    in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine probably *is*
    vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be 100% secure all the
    time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about not having this
    one patch installed.
    >
    > And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running WITHOUT
    anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I decided I would run
    a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what - nothing found other
    than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is being
    aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the Internet.
    >
    > Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was, but what I do
    know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this manner,
    without informing the users of the potential caveats, and apparently without
    testing in dial-up systems, etc.
    >
    >
    >
    > "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update that has as
    of now
    > > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need this critical
    update
    > > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to
    compromise
    > > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch and have not
    been
    > > updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers will be a
    maximum of
    > > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is connected to the
    > > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE" running because I
    am
    > > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better fix but this is
    a
    > > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe while on-line.
    If
    > > programs are not responding then discover why. People you need this
    CRITICAL
    > > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run with the patch
    because
    > > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove Ethernet cable, USB
    cable
    > > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if you do not do
    this
    > > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just asking for your
    system
    > > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends although I know a
    lot
    > > about security on computers and weak access points and could probably do
    it
    > > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is with keeping the
    > > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers to try and get
    one
    > > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the
    terriorists and
    > > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others can help you
    with
    > > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
    > >
    > > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
    > > :
    > > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
    > > :
    > > : http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
    > > :
    > > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past week)
    > > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
    > > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the background.
    > > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such update
    > > : or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of simply
    > > : replacing an existing file).
    > > :
    > > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is critical
    > > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply deactivating
    > > : it (via msconfig).
    > > :
    > > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and KB891711.EXE?
    > > :
    > > : Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode to
    > > : properly install it) ?
    > > :
    > > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
    > > :
    > > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
    > >
    > >
  7. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    SFB - KB3MM wrote:

    > Whata's the downside of this update?

    Run's a service in the background. Or so I've heard.

    John
  8. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    Look through some of the recent threats in win98.gen_discussion...

    "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message news:ObT$hW4JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    > Whata's the downside of this update?
    >
    > "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
    > news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > > Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I want to install
    > it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install these updates in
    > general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But on the other
    > hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the
    > inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this patch is far
    > greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine. Keep in mind that
    > there have been several updates this year considered "important" for Windows
    > 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune pointed out, the
    > difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so significant
    > in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine probably *is*
    > vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be 100% secure all the
    > time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about not having this
    > one patch installed.
    > >
    > > And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running WITHOUT
    > anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I decided I would run
    > a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what - nothing found other
    > than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is being
    > aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the Internet.
    > >
    > > Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was, but what I do
    > know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this manner,
    > without informing the users of the potential caveats, and apparently without
    > testing in dial-up systems, etc.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    > news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > > > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update that has as
    > of now
    > > > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need this critical
    > update
    > > > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to
    > compromise
    > > > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch and have not
    > been
    > > > updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers will be a
    > maximum of
    > > > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is connected to the
    > > > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE" running because I
    > am
    > > > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better fix but this is
    > a
    > > > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe while on-line.
    > If
    > > > programs are not responding then discover why. People you need this
    > CRITICAL
    > > > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run with the patch
    > because
    > > > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove Ethernet cable, USB
    > cable
    > > > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if you do not do
    > this
    > > > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just asking for your
    > system
    > > > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends although I know a
    > lot
    > > > about security on computers and weak access points and could probably do
    > it
    > > > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is with keeping the
    > > > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers to try and get
    > one
    > > > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the
    > terriorists and
    > > > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others can help you
    > with
    > > > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
    > > >
    > > > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
    > > > :
    > > > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
    > > > :
    > > > : http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
    > > > :
    > > > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past week)
    > > > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
    > > > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the background.
    > > > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such update
    > > > : or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of simply
    > > > : replacing an existing file).
    > > > :
    > > > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is critical
    > > > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply deactivating
    > > > : it (via msconfig).
    > > > :
    > > > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and KB891711.EXE?
    > > > :
    > > > : Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode to
    > > > : properly install it) ?
    > > > :
    > > > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
    > > > :
    > > > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
    > > >
    > > >
    >
  9. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    Read the discussion boards and you will see that it is causing havoc with
    some user's machines and associated software and/or hardware. For some of
    the users baddies are definately involved but definately not with all the
    users.

    "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
    news:ObT$hW4JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    : Whata's the downside of this update?
    :
    : "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
    : news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    : > Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I want to install
    : it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install these updates in
    : general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But on the other
    : hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the
    : inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this patch is far
    : greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine. Keep in mind
    that
    : there have been several updates this year considered "important" for
    Windows
    : 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune pointed out, the
    : difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so
    significant
    : in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine probably *is*
    : vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be 100% secure all the
    : time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about not having this
    : one patch installed.
    : >
    : > And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running WITHOUT
    : anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I decided I would
    run
    : a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what - nothing found
    other
    : than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is being
    : aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the Internet.
    : >
    : > Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was, but what I do
    : know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this manner,
    : without informing the users of the potential caveats, and apparently
    without
    : testing in dial-up systems, etc.
    : >
    : >
    : >
    : > "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    : news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    : > > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update that has as
    : of now
    : > > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need this critical
    : update
    : > > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to
    : compromise
    : > > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch and have not
    : been
    : > > updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers will be a
    : maximum of
    : > > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is connected to
    the
    : > > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE" running because I
    : am
    : > > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better fix but this
    is
    : a
    : > > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe while on-line.
    : If
    : > > programs are not responding then discover why. People you need this
    : CRITICAL
    : > > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run with the patch
    : because
    : > > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove Ethernet cable, USB
    : cable
    : > > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if you do not do
    : this
    : > > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just asking for your
    : system
    : > > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends although I know
    a
    : lot
    : > > about security on computers and weak access points and could probably
    do
    : it
    : > > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is with keeping
    the
    : > > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers to try and
    get
    : one
    : > > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the
    : terriorists and
    : > > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others can help you
    : with
    : > > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
    : > >
    : > > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message
    news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
    : > > :
    : > > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
    : > > :
    : > > : http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
    : > > :
    : > > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past week)
    : > > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
    : > > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the background.
    : > > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such
    update
    : > > : or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of simply
    : > > : replacing an existing file).
    : > > :
    : > > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is critical
    : > > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply
    deactivating
    : > > : it (via msconfig).
    : > > :
    : > > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and KB891711.EXE?
    : > > :
    : > > : Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode to
    : > > : properly install it) ?
    : > > :
    : > > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
    : > > :
    : > > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
    : > >
    : > >
    :
  10. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    It is indeed a running service.

    "John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
    news:O1wAQa4JFHA.2764@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    : SFB - KB3MM wrote:
    :
    : > Whata's the downside of this update?
    :
    : Run's a service in the background. Or so I've heard.
    :
    : John
  11. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.setup (More info?)

    Just on a personal experience note here, ever since I installed these latest
    security updates including: "Microsoft Security Bulletin MS05-002
    Vulnerability in Cursor and Icon Format Handling Could Allow Remote Code
    Execution (891711)"
    I have had many blue screens of death to the point of hard rebooting to get
    out. It seems that this update is causing me nothing but grief (Win98
    3.10.2222, AMD K6-2 450MHz). I am removing this one because I cannot use my
    computer with it! Has anyone else experienced this kind of behavior?

    "Ivan Bútora" wrote:

    > Look through some of the recent threats in win98.gen_discussion...
    >
    > "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message news:ObT$hW4JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    > > Whata's the downside of this update?
    > >
    > > "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
    > > news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > > > Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I want to install
    > > it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install these updates in
    > > general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But on the other
    > > hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the
    > > inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this patch is far
    > > greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine. Keep in mind that
    > > there have been several updates this year considered "important" for Windows
    > > 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune pointed out, the
    > > difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so significant
    > > in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine probably *is*
    > > vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be 100% secure all the
    > > time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about not having this
    > > one patch installed.
    > > >
    > > > And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running WITHOUT
    > > anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I decided I would run
    > > a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what - nothing found other
    > > than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is being
    > > aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the Internet.
    > > >
    > > > Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was, but what I do
    > > know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this manner,
    > > without informing the users of the potential caveats, and apparently without
    > > testing in dial-up systems, etc.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    > > news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > > > > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update that has as
    > > of now
    > > > > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need this critical
    > > update
    > > > > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to
    > > compromise
    > > > > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch and have not
    > > been
    > > > > updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers will be a
    > > maximum of
    > > > > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is connected to the
    > > > > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE" running because I
    > > am
    > > > > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better fix but this is
    > > a
    > > > > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe while on-line.
    > > If
    > > > > programs are not responding then discover why. People you need this
    > > CRITICAL
    > > > > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run with the patch
    > > because
    > > > > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove Ethernet cable, USB
    > > cable
    > > > > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if you do not do
    > > this
    > > > > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just asking for your
    > > system
    > > > > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends although I know a
    > > lot
    > > > > about security on computers and weak access points and could probably do
    > > it
    > > > > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is with keeping the
    > > > > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers to try and get
    > > one
    > > > > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the
    > > terriorists and
    > > > > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others can help you
    > > with
    > > > > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
    > > > >
    > > > > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
    > > > > :
    > > > > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
    > > > > :
    > > > > : http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
    > > > > :
    > > > > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past week)
    > > > > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
    > > > > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the background.
    > > > > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such update
    > > > > : or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of simply
    > > > > : replacing an existing file).
    > > > > :
    > > > > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is critical
    > > > > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply deactivating
    > > > > : it (via msconfig).
    > > > > :
    > > > > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and KB891711.EXE?
    > > > > :
    > > > > : Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode to
    > > > > : properly install it) ?
    > > > > :
    > > > > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
    > > > > :
    > > > > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > >
    >
  12. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    good question guy,

    it turned up running in the background on my computer after i did a
    critical update.

    i have so far disabled it using <msconfig>.

    would like to know what it is all about as well?

    tia

    len

    snipped
    --
    happy gardening
    'it works for me it could work for you,'

    "in the end ya' gotta do what ya' gotta do" but consider others and the environment
    http://members.optusnet.com.au/~gardenlen1/

    my e/mail addies have spam filters you should know what to delete before you send.
  13. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    Get rid of OE.

    John

    len gardener wrote:

    > good question guy,
    >
    > it turned up running in the background on my computer after i did a
    > critical update.
    >
    > i have so far disabled it using <msconfig>.
    >
    > would like to know what it is all about as well?
    >
    > tia
    >
    > len
    >
    > snipped
  14. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    Why? What does OE have to do with KB891711.EXE?

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS MVP Shell/User
    http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
    http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm

    "John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
    news:u08QvY2JFHA.2736@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    > Get rid of OE.
    >
    > John
    >
    > len gardener wrote:
    >
    > > good question guy,
    > >
    > > it turned up running in the background on my computer after i did a
    > > critical update.
    > >
    > > i have so far disabled it using <msconfig>.
    > >
    > > would like to know what it is all about as well?
    > >
    > > tia
    > >
    > > len
    > >
    > > snipped
  15. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    Nothing AFAIK. It is just a side conversation, I guess. <???>
    BTW, John I do have Mozilla Thunderbird working in both this newsgroup and
    the xp general newsgroup. I tried it and it was great. However, I just
    choose to continue to use Outlook Express.

    "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
    news:%23Dqypw4JFHA.3076@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    : Why? What does OE have to do with KB891711.EXE?
    :
    : --
    : Gary S. Terhune
    : MS MVP Shell/User
    : http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
    : http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
    :
    : "John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
    : news:u08QvY2JFHA.2736@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    : > Get rid of OE.
    : >
    : > John
    : >
    : > len gardener wrote:
    : >
    : > > good question guy,
    : > >
    : > > it turned up running in the background on my computer after i did a
    : > > critical update.
    : > >
    : > > i have so far disabled it using <msconfig>.
    : > >
    : > > would like to know what it is all about as well?
    : > >
    : > > tia
    : > >
    : > > len
    : > >
    : > > snipped
    :
  16. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    Microsoft Security Bulletin MS05-002
    Vulnerability in Cursor and Icon Format Handling Could Allow Remote Code
    Execution (891711)

    Vulnerability Details

    Cursor and Icon Format Handling Vulnerability - CAN-2004-1049:

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the way that cursor,
    animated cursor, and icon formats are handled. An attacker could try to
    exploit the vulnerability by constructing a malicious cursor or icon
    file that could potentially allow remote code execution if a user
    visited a malicious Web site or viewed a malicious e-mail message. An
    attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could take
    complete control of an affected system.

    Mitigating Factors for Cursor and Icon Format Handling Vulnerability -
    CAN-2004-1049:


    In a Web-based attack scenario, an attacker would have to host a Web
    site that contains a Web page that is used to exploit this
    vulnerability. An attacker could also attempt to compromise a Web site
    to have it serve up a Web page with malicious content attempting to
    exploit this vulnerability. An attacker would have no way to force users
    to visit a Web site. Instead, an attacker would have to persuade them to
    visit the Web site, typically by getting them to click a link that takes
    them to the attacker's site or a site compromised by the attacker.


    An attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could gain the
    same user rights as the local user. Users whose accounts are configured
    to have fewer user rights on the system could be less impacted than
    users who operate with administrative user rights.


    By default, Outlook Express 6, Outlook 2002, and Outlook 2003 open HTML
    e-mail messages in the Restricted sites zone. Additionally, Outlook 2000
    opens HTML e-mail messages in the Restricted sites zone if the Outlook
    E-mail Security Update has been installed. Outlook Express 5.5 Service
    Pack 2 opens HTML e-mail messages in the Restricted sites zone if
    Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-018 has been installed. The Restricted
    sites zone helps reduce attacks that could attempt to exploit this
    vulnerability.

    The risk of attack from the HTML e-mail vector can be significantly
    reduced if you meet all the following conditions:


    Apply the update that is included with Microsoft Security Bulletin
    MS03-040 or a later Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer.


    Use Internet Explorer 6 or later.


    Use the Microsoft Outlook E-mail Security Update, use Microsoft Outlook
    Express 6 or later, or use Microsoft Outlook 2000 Service Pack 2 or
    later in its default configuration.


    Microsoft Windows XP Service Pack 2 is not affected by this vulnerability.
    Top of sectionTop of section

    Workarounds for Cursor and Icon Format Handling Vulnerability -
    CAN-2004-1049:

    Microsoft has tested the following workarounds. While these workarounds
    will not correct the underlying vulnerability, they help block known
    attack vectors. When a workaround reduces functionality, it is
    identified below.


    Install the Outlook E-mail Security Update if you are using Outlook 2000
    SP1 or earlier.

    By default, Outlook Express 6, Outlook 2002 and Outlook 2003 open HTML
    e-mail messages in the Restricted sites zone. Additionally, Outlook 2000
    opens HTML e-mail messages in the Restricted sites zone if the Outlook
    E-mail Security Update has been installed.

    Outlook Express 5.5 Service Pack 2 opens HTML e-mail messages in the
    Restricted sites zone if Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-018 has been
    installed. Customers who use any of these products could be at a reduced
    risk from an e-mail-borne attack that tries to exploit this
    vulnerability unless the user clicks a malicious link in the e-mail message.


    Read e-mail messages in plain text format if you are using Outlook 2002
    or later, or Outlook Express 6 SP1 or later, to help protect yourself
    from the HTML e-mail attack vector.

    Microsoft Outlook 2002 users who have applied Office XP Service Pack 1
    or later and Microsoft Outlook Express 6 users who have applied Internet
    Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 can enable this setting and view e-mail
    messages that are not digitally signed or e-mail messages that are not
    encrypted in plain text only.

    Digitally signed e-mail messages or encrypted e-mail messages are not
    affected by the setting and may be read in their original formats. For
    more information about enabling this setting in Outlook 2002, see
    Microsoft Knowledge Base Article 307594.

    For information about this setting in Outlook Express 6, see Microsoft
    Knowledge Base Article 291387.

    Impact of Workaround: E-mail messages that are viewed in plain text
    format will not contain pictures, specialized fonts, animations, or
    other rich content. In addition:


    The changes are applied to the preview pane and to open messages.


    Pictures become attachments so that they are not lost.


    Because the message is still in Rich Text or HTML format in the store,
    the object model (custom code solutions) may behave unexpectedly.

    John

    Gary S. Terhune wrote:

    > Why? What does OE have to do with KB891711.EXE?
    >
  17. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    Dan wrote:

    > I just choose to continue to use Outlook Express.

    Good for you, keep on applying them security patches that run as services.

    John
  18. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    That hardly answers the question. All that says is that viewing email in
    HTML format can be risky. I don't see how switching from OE to some
    other newsreader will change that. If you view email in HTML format, you
    are much more at risk than if you view it in plain text, period. Not
    only from the vulnerabilities mentioned in this Security Bulletin, but
    from a myriad of other vulnerabilities involving HTML rendering. So, the
    answer is: View email in PlainText only. Fortunately, OE6 and up have
    this option--to view email in PlainText only. Does your newsreader have
    that option? And do you use it? If not, you're engaging in risky
    behavior.

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS MVP Shell/User
    http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
    http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm

    "John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
    news:eeLJ2h5JFHA.3420@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > Gary S. Terhune wrote:
    >
    > > Why? What does OE have to do with KB891711.EXE?
    > >
    verbatim copy of MS05-002 snipped.
  19. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    OK, Just looked with TaskInfo 2003:
    KB891711.exe is indeed running and consuming 0.04% of the CPU.

    It was started by MPREXE.EXE

    It has 464 KB in memory with 0KB in use for data.

    It has 488 KB in memory with 0KB in use for code.

    "John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
    news:O1wAQa4JFHA.2764@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > SFB - KB3MM wrote:
    >
    > > Whata's the downside of this update?
    >
    > Run's a service in the background. Or so I've heard.
    >
    > John
  20. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    If you like services running in the background good for you. I don't
    like it.

    John

    SFB - KB3MM wrote:

    > OK, Just looked with TaskInfo 2003:
    > KB891711.exe is indeed running and consuming 0.04% of the CPU.
    >
    > It was started by MPREXE.EXE
    >
    > It has 464 KB in memory with 0KB in use for data.
    >
    > It has 488 KB in memory with 0KB in use for code.
    >
    > "John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
    > news:O1wAQa4JFHA.2764@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    >
    >>SFB - KB3MM wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Whata's the downside of this update?
    >>
    >>Run's a service in the background. Or so I've heard.
    >>
    >>John
    >
    >
  21. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    Apple is open source now? Hard to believe.

    "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    news:uSdX0g4JFHA.3196@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > Sure Ivan, the patch was not released in the best manner by Microsoft but
    I
    > still give Microsoft credit for finally patching the vulnerability. If
    you
    > or anyone else want to leave your machine unpatched without this critical
    > update then don't come complaining to me later on if someone connects to
    your
    > computer and/or network because you were unpatched and makes all kinds of
    > changes. Remember, 98, 98SE and ME are in final support stage and last
    > support will be elimated on 9x machines after 30 June 2006. Sure on-line
    > articles and stuff will still be available but there will be no more
    critical
    > updates unless something radical changes at Microsoft. Remember,
    Microsoft
    > has insisted on choosing the NT line and I feel that decision is flawed
    and I
    > have tried to change them as best as I can but the hope for the future
    seems
    > to belong to Linux, Apple, Google, Mozilla and other open-source
    companies.
    > Have a nice night!
    >
    > "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
    > news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > : Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I want to install
    it
    > on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install these updates in
    > general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But on the
    other
    > hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the
    > inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this patch is far
    > greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine. Keep in mind
    that
    > there have been several updates this year considered "important" for
    Windows
    > 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune pointed out, the
    > difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so
    significant
    > in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine probably *is*
    > vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be 100% secure all the
    > time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about not having
    this
    > one patch installed.
    > :
    > : And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running WITHOUT
    > anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I decided I would
    run
    > a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what - nothing found
    other
    > than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is being
    > aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the Internet.
    > :
    > : Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was, but what I do
    > know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this manner,
    > without informing the users of the potential caveats, and apparently
    without
    > testing in dial-up systems, etc.
    > :
    > :
    > :
    > : "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    > news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > : > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update that has as
    of
    > now
    > : > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need this critical
    > update
    > : > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to
    > compromise
    > : > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch and have not
    been
    > : > updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers will be a
    > maximum of
    > : > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is connected to
    the
    > : > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE" running because I
    am
    > : > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better fix but this
    is
    > a
    > : > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe while on-line.
    > If
    > : > programs are not responding then discover why. People you need this
    > CRITICAL
    > : > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run with the patch
    > because
    > : > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove Ethernet cable,
    USB
    > cable
    > : > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if you do not do
    > this
    > : > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just asking for your
    > system
    > : > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends although I know
    a
    > lot
    > : > about security on computers and weak access points and could probably
    do
    > it
    > : > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is with keeping
    the
    > : > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers to try and
    get
    > one
    > : > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the
    terriorists
    > and
    > : > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others can help you
    > with
    > : > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
    > : >
    > : > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message
    news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
    > : > :
    > : > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
    > : > :
    > : > : http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
    > : > :
    > : > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past week)
    > : > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
    > : > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the
    background.
    > : > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such
    update
    > : > : or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of simply
    > : > : replacing an existing file).
    > : > :
    > : > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is critical
    > : > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply
    deactivating
    > : > : it (via msconfig).
    > : > :
    > : > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and KB891711.EXE?
    > : > :
    > : > : Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode to
    > : > : properly install it) ?
    > : > :
    > : > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
    > : > :
    > : > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
    > : >
    > : >
    >
    >
  22. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    My goof. Apple is not open source -- LOL!!

    "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
    news:%23odReB5JFHA.1528@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    : Apple is open source now? Hard to believe.
    :
    : "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    : news:uSdX0g4JFHA.3196@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    : > Sure Ivan, the patch was not released in the best manner by Microsoft but
    : I
    : > still give Microsoft credit for finally patching the vulnerability. If
    : you
    : > or anyone else want to leave your machine unpatched without this critical
    : > update then don't come complaining to me later on if someone connects to
    : your
    : > computer and/or network because you were unpatched and makes all kinds of
    : > changes. Remember, 98, 98SE and ME are in final support stage and last
    : > support will be elimated on 9x machines after 30 June 2006. Sure on-line
    : > articles and stuff will still be available but there will be no more
    : critical
    : > updates unless something radical changes at Microsoft. Remember,
    : Microsoft
    : > has insisted on choosing the NT line and I feel that decision is flawed
    : and I
    : > have tried to change them as best as I can but the hope for the future
    : seems
    : > to belong to Linux, Apple, Google, Mozilla and other open-source
    : companies.
    : > Have a nice night!
    : >
    : > "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
    : > news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    : > : Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I want to
    install
    : it
    : > on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install these updates in
    : > general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But on the
    : other
    : > hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the
    : > inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this patch is
    far
    : > greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine. Keep in mind
    : that
    : > there have been several updates this year considered "important" for
    : Windows
    : > 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune pointed out, the
    : > difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so
    : significant
    : > in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine probably *is*
    : > vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be 100% secure all
    the
    : > time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about not having
    : this
    : > one patch installed.
    : > :
    : > : And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running WITHOUT
    : > anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I decided I would
    : run
    : > a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what - nothing found
    : other
    : > than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is being
    : > aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the Internet.
    : > :
    : > : Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was, but what I do
    : > know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this manner,
    : > without informing the users of the potential caveats, and apparently
    : without
    : > testing in dial-up systems, etc.
    : > :
    : > :
    : > :
    : > : "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    : > news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    : > : > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update that has
    as
    : of
    : > now
    : > : > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need this critical
    : > update
    : > : > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to
    : > compromise
    : > : > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch and have not
    : been
    : > : > updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers will be a
    : > maximum of
    : > : > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is connected to
    : the
    : > : > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE" running because
    I
    : am
    : > : > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better fix but this
    : is
    : > a
    : > : > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe while
    on-line.
    : > If
    : > : > programs are not responding then discover why. People you need this
    : > CRITICAL
    : > : > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run with the patch
    : > because
    : > : > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove Ethernet cable,
    : USB
    : > cable
    : > : > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if you do not do
    : > this
    : > : > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just asking for your
    : > system
    : > : > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends although I
    know
    : a
    : > lot
    : > : > about security on computers and weak access points and could probably
    : do
    : > it
    : > : > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is with keeping
    : the
    : > : > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers to try and
    : get
    : > one
    : > : > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the
    : terriorists
    : > and
    : > : > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others can help
    you
    : > with
    : > : > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
    : > : >
    : > : > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message
    : news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
    : > : > :
    : > : > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
    : > : > :
    : > : > : http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
    : > : > :
    : > : > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past week)
    : > : > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
    : > : > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the
    : background.
    : > : > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such
    : update
    : > : > : or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of simply
    : > : > : replacing an existing file).
    : > : > :
    : > : > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is critical
    : > : > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply
    : deactivating
    : > : > : it (via msconfig).
    : > : > :
    : > : > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and
    KB891711.EXE?
    : > : > :
    : > : > : Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode to
    : > : > : properly install it) ?
    : > : > :
    : > : > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
    : > : > :
    : > : > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
    : > : >
    : > : >
    : >
    : >
    :
  23. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    Any particular boards?

    Is this well founded and some one has absolute proof, or just some one
    saying it must be ...?

    "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    news:eNc9wh4JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
    > Read the discussion boards and you will see that it is causing havoc with
    > some user's machines and associated software and/or hardware. For some of
    > the users baddies are definately involved but definately not with all the
    > users.
    >
    > "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
    > news:ObT$hW4JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    > : Whata's the downside of this update?
    > :
    > : "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
    > : news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > : > Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I want to
    install
    > : it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install these updates
    in
    > : general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But on the
    other
    > : hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the
    > : inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this patch is
    far
    > : greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine. Keep in mind
    > that
    > : there have been several updates this year considered "important" for
    > Windows
    > : 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune pointed out,
    the
    > : difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so
    > significant
    > : in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine probably *is*
    > : vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be 100% secure all
    the
    > : time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about not having
    this
    > : one patch installed.
    > : >
    > : > And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running WITHOUT
    > : anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I decided I would
    > run
    > : a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what - nothing found
    > other
    > : than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is being
    > : aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the Internet.
    > : >
    > : > Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was, but what I
    do
    > : know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this manner,
    > : without informing the users of the potential caveats, and apparently
    > without
    > : testing in dial-up systems, etc.
    > : >
    > : >
    > : >
    > : > "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    > : news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > : > > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update that has
    as
    > : of now
    > : > > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need this critical
    > : update
    > : > > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to
    > : compromise
    > : > > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch and have not
    > : been
    > : > > updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers will be a
    > : maximum of
    > : > > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is connected to
    > the
    > : > > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE" running because
    I
    > : am
    > : > > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better fix but
    this
    > is
    > : a
    > : > > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe while
    on-line.
    > : If
    > : > > programs are not responding then discover why. People you need this
    > : CRITICAL
    > : > > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run with the
    patch
    > : because
    > : > > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove Ethernet cable,
    USB
    > : cable
    > : > > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if you do not
    do
    > : this
    > : > > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just asking for
    your
    > : system
    > : > > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends although I
    know
    > a
    > : lot
    > : > > about security on computers and weak access points and could
    probably
    > do
    > : it
    > : > > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is with keeping
    > the
    > : > > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers to try and
    > get
    > : one
    > : > > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the
    > : terriorists and
    > : > > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others can help
    you
    > : with
    > : > > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
    > : > >
    > : > > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message
    > news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
    > : > > :
    > : > > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
    > : > > :
    > : > > : http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
    > : > > :
    > : > > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past week)
    > : > > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
    > : > > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the
    background.
    > : > > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such
    > update
    > : > > : or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of
    simply
    > : > > : replacing an existing file).
    > : > > :
    > : > > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is
    critical
    > : > > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply
    > deactivating
    > : > > : it (via msconfig).
    > : > > :
    > : > > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and
    KB891711.EXE?
    > : > > :
    > : > > : Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode
    to
    > : > > : properly install it) ?
    > : > > :
    > : > > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
    > : > > :
    > : > > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
    > : > >
    > : > >
    > :
    >
    >
  24. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    It is just what people are saying. I don't have any proof.

    "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
    news:%23cwdfB5JFHA.1528@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    : Any particular boards?
    :
    : Is this well founded and some one has absolute proof, or just some one
    : saying it must be ...?
    :
    : "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    : news:eNc9wh4JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
    : > Read the discussion boards and you will see that it is causing havoc with
    : > some user's machines and associated software and/or hardware. For some
    of
    : > the users baddies are definately involved but definately not with all the
    : > users.
    : >
    : > "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
    : > news:ObT$hW4JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    : > : Whata's the downside of this update?
    : > :
    : > : "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
    : > : news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    : > : > Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I want to
    : install
    : > : it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install these
    updates
    : in
    : > : general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But on the
    : other
    : > : hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the
    : > : inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this patch is
    : far
    : > : greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine. Keep in mind
    : > that
    : > : there have been several updates this year considered "important" for
    : > Windows
    : > : 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune pointed out,
    : the
    : > : difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so
    : > significant
    : > : in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine probably *is*
    : > : vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be 100% secure all
    : the
    : > : time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about not having
    : this
    : > : one patch installed.
    : > : >
    : > : > And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running WITHOUT
    : > : anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I decided I
    would
    : > run
    : > : a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what - nothing found
    : > other
    : > : than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is
    being
    : > : aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the Internet.
    : > : >
    : > : > Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was, but what I
    : do
    : > : know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this manner,
    : > : without informing the users of the potential caveats, and apparently
    : > without
    : > : testing in dial-up systems, etc.
    : > : >
    : > : >
    : > : >
    : > : > "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    : > : news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    : > : > > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update that has
    : as
    : > : of now
    : > : > > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need this
    critical
    : > : update
    : > : > > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to
    : > : compromise
    : > : > > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch and have
    not
    : > : been
    : > : > > updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers will be a
    : > : maximum of
    : > : > > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is connected
    to
    : > the
    : > : > > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE" running
    because
    : I
    : > : am
    : > : > > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better fix but
    : this
    : > is
    : > : a
    : > : > > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe while
    : on-line.
    : > : If
    : > : > > programs are not responding then discover why. People you need
    this
    : > : CRITICAL
    : > : > > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run with the
    : patch
    : > : because
    : > : > > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove Ethernet cable,
    : USB
    : > : cable
    : > : > > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if you do not
    : do
    : > : this
    : > : > > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just asking for
    : your
    : > : system
    : > : > > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends although I
    : know
    : > a
    : > : lot
    : > : > > about security on computers and weak access points and could
    : probably
    : > do
    : > : it
    : > : > > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is with
    keeping
    : > the
    : > : > > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers to try
    and
    : > get
    : > : one
    : > : > > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the
    : > : terriorists and
    : > : > > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others can help
    : you
    : > : with
    : > : > > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
    : > : > >
    : > : > > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message
    : > news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
    : > : > > :
    : > : > > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
    : > : > > :
    : > : > > : http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
    : > : > > :
    : > : > > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past
    week)
    : > : > > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
    : > : > > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the
    : background.
    : > : > > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such
    : > update
    : > : > > : or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of
    : simply
    : > : > > : replacing an existing file).
    : > : > > :
    : > : > > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is
    : critical
    : > : > > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply
    : > deactivating
    : > : > > : it (via msconfig).
    : > : > > :
    : > : > > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and
    : KB891711.EXE?
    : > : > > :
    : > : > > : Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode
    : to
    : > : > > : properly install it) ?
    : > : > > :
    : > : > > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
    : > : > > :
    : > : > > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
    : > : > >
    : > : > >
    : > :
    : >
    : >
    :
  25. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    Well, we live in an era of 'instant PC Experts'

    the typical'my brother in law-sez, ......., and the secretary at work.....

    roof is needed not rumors.

    I've had the update for 4 days and nothing has raised an ugly head yet.

    "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    news:eqDybF5JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
    > It is just what people are saying. I don't have any proof.
    >
    > "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
    > news:%23cwdfB5JFHA.1528@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    > : Any particular boards?
    > :
    > : Is this well founded and some one has absolute proof, or just some one
    > : saying it must be ...?
    > :
    > : "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    > : news:eNc9wh4JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
    > : > Read the discussion boards and you will see that it is causing havoc
    with
    > : > some user's machines and associated software and/or hardware. For
    some
    > of
    > : > the users baddies are definately involved but definately not with all
    the
    > : > users.
    > : >
    > : > "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
    > : > news:ObT$hW4JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    > : > : Whata's the downside of this update?
    > : > :
    > : > : "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
    > : > : news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > : > : > Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I want to
    > : install
    > : > : it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install these
    > updates
    > : in
    > : > : general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But on
    the
    > : other
    > : > : hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the
    > : > : inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this patch
    is
    > : far
    > : > : greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine. Keep in
    mind
    > : > that
    > : > : there have been several updates this year considered "important" for
    > : > Windows
    > : > : 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune pointed
    out,
    > : the
    > : > : difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so
    > : > significant
    > : > : in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine probably *is*
    > : > : vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be 100% secure
    all
    > : the
    > : > : time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about not
    having
    > : this
    > : > : one patch installed.
    > : > : >
    > : > : > And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running
    WITHOUT
    > : > : anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I decided I
    > would
    > : > run
    > : > : a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what - nothing
    found
    > : > other
    > : > : than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is
    > being
    > : > : aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the Internet.
    > : > : >
    > : > : > Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was, but what
    I
    > : do
    > : > : know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this
    manner,
    > : > : without informing the users of the potential caveats, and apparently
    > : > without
    > : > : testing in dial-up systems, etc.
    > : > : >
    > : > : >
    > : > : >
    > : > : > "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    > : > : news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > : > : > > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update that
    has
    > : as
    > : > : of now
    > : > : > > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need this
    > critical
    > : > : update
    > : > : > > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to
    > : > : compromise
    > : > : > > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch and have
    > not
    > : > : been
    > : > : > > updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers will be
    a
    > : > : maximum of
    > : > : > > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is
    connected
    > to
    > : > the
    > : > : > > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE" running
    > because
    > : I
    > : > : am
    > : > : > > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better fix but
    > : this
    > : > is
    > : > : a
    > : > : > > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe while
    > : on-line.
    > : > : If
    > : > : > > programs are not responding then discover why. People you need
    > this
    > : > : CRITICAL
    > : > : > > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run with the
    > : patch
    > : > : because
    > : > : > > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove Ethernet
    cable,
    > : USB
    > : > : cable
    > : > : > > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if you do
    not
    > : do
    > : > : this
    > : > : > > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just asking for
    > : your
    > : > : system
    > : > : > > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends although
    I
    > : know
    > : > a
    > : > : lot
    > : > : > > about security on computers and weak access points and could
    > : probably
    > : > do
    > : > : it
    > : > : > > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is with
    > keeping
    > : > the
    > : > : > > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers to try
    > and
    > : > get
    > : > : one
    > : > : > > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the
    > : > : terriorists and
    > : > : > > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others can
    help
    > : you
    > : > : with
    > : > : > > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
    > : > : > >
    > : > : > > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message
    > : > news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
    > : > : > > :
    > : > : > > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
    > : > : > > :
    > : > : > > :
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
    > : > : > > :
    > : > : > > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past
    > week)
    > : > : > > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
    > : > : > > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the
    > : background.
    > : > : > > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any
    such
    > : > update
    > : > : > > : or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of
    > : simply
    > : > : > > : replacing an existing file).
    > : > : > > :
    > : > : > > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is
    > : critical
    > : > : > > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply
    > : > deactivating
    > : > : > > : it (via msconfig).
    > : > : > > :
    > : > : > > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and
    > : KB891711.EXE?
    > : > : > > :
    > : > : > > : Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe
    mode
    > : to
    > : > : > > : properly install it) ?
    > : > : > > :
    > : > : > > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
    > : > : > > :
    > : > : > > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
    > : > : > >
    > : > : > >
    > : > :
    > : >
    > : >
    > :
    >
    >
  26. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    I love it. 'So I've heard' Not picking on you, don't help spread rumors.

    Maybe it was just started by a Bill Basher.

    "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    news:OuezvB5JFHA.3484@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    > It is indeed a running service.
    >
    > "John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
    > news:O1wAQa4JFHA.2764@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > : SFB - KB3MM wrote:
    > :
    > : > Whata's the downside of this update?
    > :
    > : Run's a service in the background. Or so I've heard.
    > :
    > : John
    >
    >
  27. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    Find yourself a copy of Eudora 3.0.5 (very old). It's text only
    email. If there are pictures included you can choose to view them,
    but no html email. That's all I run. I hate html in my email.
    You can still download it from Eudora, but I am not sure if it can be
    purchased any longer. I bought it many years ago, I upgraded to a
    newer version, and found the newer ones were html ONLY. I went back
    to the old version.


    On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 23:29:02 -0800, "Gary S. Terhune"
    <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote:

    >That hardly answers the question. All that says is that viewing email in
    >HTML format can be risky. I don't see how switching from OE to some
    >other newsreader will change that. If you view email in HTML format, you
    >are much more at risk than if you view it in plain text, period. Not
    >only from the vulnerabilities mentioned in this Security Bulletin, but
    >from a myriad of other vulnerabilities involving HTML rendering. So, the
    >answer is: View email in PlainText only. Fortunately, OE6 and up have
    >this option--to view email in PlainText only. Does your newsreader have
    >that option? And do you use it? If not, you're engaging in risky
    >behavior.
  28. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    I'm not looking for a different email client. I'm simply responding to
    someone who seems to think that using some other email client will
    protect him from malicious code in HTML emails and that it's OE itself
    that is the problem--neither proposition is true.

    I use OE6, with PT-Only set. On occasion, idiots who send out HTML email
    in which certain parts can *only* be seen in HTML force me to
    temporarily allow HTML rendering. Major companies like Microsoft and
    Computer Associates seem to be the worst offenders.

    But I'm quite happy with my OE and see no compelling reason to change it
    for any other email or news client.

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS MVP Shell/User
    http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
    http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm

    "Me &" <myself@no-email.com> wrote in message
    news:p7c831h7542gt7ien7k8upvjqqg4se1emd@4ax.com...
    > Find yourself a copy of Eudora 3.0.5 (very old). It's text only
    > email. If there are pictures included you can choose to view them,
    > but no html email. That's all I run. I hate html in my email.
    > You can still download it from Eudora, but I am not sure if it can be
    > purchased any longer. I bought it many years ago, I upgraded to a
    > newer version, and found the newer ones were html ONLY. I went back
    > to the old version.
    >
    >
    > On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 23:29:02 -0800, "Gary S. Terhune"
    > <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote:
    >
    > >That hardly answers the question. All that says is that viewing email
    in
    > >HTML format can be risky. I don't see how switching from OE to some
    > >other newsreader will change that. If you view email in HTML format,
    you
    > >are much more at risk than if you view it in plain text, period. Not
    > >only from the vulnerabilities mentioned in this Security Bulletin,
    but
    > >from a myriad of other vulnerabilities involving HTML rendering. So,
    the
    > >answer is: View email in PlainText only. Fortunately, OE6 and up have
    > >this option--to view email in PlainText only. Does your newsreader
    have
    > >that option? And do you use it? If not, you're engaging in risky
    > >behavior.
    >
  29. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    Okay, I will do and your other post made me see the light so I may start
    using Mozilla Thunderbird instead.

    "John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
    news:OttRYm5JFHA.3596@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
    : Dan wrote:
    :
    : > I just choose to continue to use Outlook Express.
    :
    : Good for you, keep on applying them security patches that run as services.
    :
    : John
  30. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    Great Post, Gary. <Hear, Hear> Also, make sure to block all HTML code in
    e-mail like in Yahoo or Hotmail and I suggest with Yahoo --- e-mail that a
    user always logs in with 128 bit RC4 encryption and limits access to e-mail
    account on a need to know basis.

    "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
    news:OlZ3545JFHA.3992@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    : That hardly answers the question. All that says is that viewing email in
    : HTML format can be risky. I don't see how switching from OE to some
    : other newsreader will change that. If you view email in HTML format, you
    : are much more at risk than if you view it in plain text, period. Not
    : only from the vulnerabilities mentioned in this Security Bulletin, but
    : from a myriad of other vulnerabilities involving HTML rendering. So, the
    : answer is: View email in PlainText only. Fortunately, OE6 and up have
    : this option--to view email in PlainText only. Does your newsreader have
    : that option? And do you use it? If not, you're engaging in risky
    : behavior.
    :
    : --
    : Gary S. Terhune
    : MS MVP Shell/User
    : http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
    : http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
    :
    : "John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
    : news:eeLJ2h5JFHA.3420@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    : > Gary S. Terhune wrote:
    : >
    : > > Why? What does OE have to do with KB891711.EXE?
    : > >
    : verbatim copy of MS05-002 snipped.
    :
  31. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    Keep up the good work, Gary.

    "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
    news:eDZbVu8JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    : I'm not looking for a different email client. I'm simply responding to
    : someone who seems to think that using some other email client will
    : protect him from malicious code in HTML emails and that it's OE itself
    : that is the problem--neither proposition is true.
    :
    : I use OE6, with PT-Only set. On occasion, idiots who send out HTML email
    : in which certain parts can *only* be seen in HTML force me to
    : temporarily allow HTML rendering. Major companies like Microsoft and
    : Computer Associates seem to be the worst offenders.
    :
    : But I'm quite happy with my OE and see no compelling reason to change it
    : for any other email or news client.
    :
    : --
    : Gary S. Terhune
    : MS MVP Shell/User
    : http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
    : http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
    :
    : "Me &" <myself@no-email.com> wrote in message
    : news:p7c831h7542gt7ien7k8upvjqqg4se1emd@4ax.com...
    : > Find yourself a copy of Eudora 3.0.5 (very old). It's text only
    : > email. If there are pictures included you can choose to view them,
    : > but no html email. That's all I run. I hate html in my email.
    : > You can still download it from Eudora, but I am not sure if it can be
    : > purchased any longer. I bought it many years ago, I upgraded to a
    : > newer version, and found the newer ones were html ONLY. I went back
    : > to the old version.
    : >
    : >
    : > On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 23:29:02 -0800, "Gary S. Terhune"
    : > <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote:
    : >
    : > >That hardly answers the question. All that says is that viewing email
    : in
    : > >HTML format can be risky. I don't see how switching from OE to some
    : > >other newsreader will change that. If you view email in HTML format,
    : you
    : > >are much more at risk than if you view it in plain text, period. Not
    : > >only from the vulnerabilities mentioned in this Security Bulletin,
    : but
    : > >from a myriad of other vulnerabilities involving HTML rendering. So,
    : the
    : > >answer is: View email in PlainText only. Fortunately, OE6 and up have
    : > >this option--to view email in PlainText only. Does your newsreader
    : have
    : > >that option? And do you use it? If not, you're engaging in risky
    : > >behavior.
    : >
    :
  32. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    I am Googling for it now to test it if I can get a hold of this old program.

    "Me &" <myself@no-email.com> wrote in message
    news:p7c831h7542gt7ien7k8upvjqqg4se1emd@4ax.com...
    : Find yourself a copy of Eudora 3.0.5 (very old). It's text only
    : email. If there are pictures included you can choose to view them,
    : but no html email. That's all I run. I hate html in my email.
    : You can still download it from Eudora, but I am not sure if it can be
    : purchased any longer. I bought it many years ago, I upgraded to a
    : newer version, and found the newer ones were html ONLY. I went back
    : to the old version.
    :
    :
    : On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 23:29:02 -0800, "Gary S. Terhune"
    : <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote:
    :
    : >That hardly answers the question. All that says is that viewing email in
    : >HTML format can be risky. I don't see how switching from OE to some
    : >other newsreader will change that. If you view email in HTML format, you
    : >are much more at risk than if you view it in plain text, period. Not
    : >only from the vulnerabilities mentioned in this Security Bulletin, but
    : >from a myriad of other vulnerabilities involving HTML rendering. So, the
    : >answer is: View email in PlainText only. Fortunately, OE6 and up have
    : >this option--to view email in PlainText only. Does your newsreader have
    : >that option? And do you use it? If not, you're engaging in risky
    : >behavior.
    :
  33. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    It is not that big a deal but hopefully it will be fully incorporated in a
    future Microsoft update like the other updates are.

    "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
    news:OIUiTN5JFHA.2784@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    : I love it. 'So I've heard' Not picking on you, don't help spread rumors.
    :
    : Maybe it was just started by a Bill Basher.
    :
    : "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    : news:OuezvB5JFHA.3484@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    : > It is indeed a running service.
    : >
    : > "John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
    : > news:O1wAQa4JFHA.2764@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    : > : SFB - KB3MM wrote:
    : > :
    : > : > Whata's the downside of this update?
    : > :
    : > : Run's a service in the background. Or so I've heard.
    : > :
    : > : John
    : >
    : >
    :
  34. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.setup (More info?)

    Other users have mentioned it may affect you if you use a dial-up connection
    or have an older video or sound driver or baddies on your system. Do any of
    these apply to you?

    "Sramic" <Sramic@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:11B7C1D1-A450-46F5-935F-0CB1473BCD1A@microsoft.com...
    : Just on a personal experience note here, ever since I installed these
    latest
    : security updates including: "Microsoft Security Bulletin MS05-002
    : Vulnerability in Cursor and Icon Format Handling Could Allow Remote Code
    : Execution (891711)"
    : I have had many blue screens of death to the point of hard rebooting to get
    : out. It seems that this update is causing me nothing but grief (Win98
    : 3.10.2222, AMD K6-2 450MHz). I am removing this one because I cannot use
    my
    : computer with it! Has anyone else experienced this kind of behavior?
    :
    : "Ivan Bútora" wrote:
    :
    : > Look through some of the recent threats in win98.gen_discussion...
    : >
    : > "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
    news:ObT$hW4JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    : > > Whata's the downside of this update?
    : > >
    : > > "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
    : > > news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    : > > > Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I want to
    install
    : > > it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install these
    updates in
    : > > general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But on the
    other
    : > > hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the
    : > > inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this patch is
    far
    : > > greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine. Keep in mind
    that
    : > > there have been several updates this year considered "important" for
    Windows
    : > > 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune pointed out,
    the
    : > > difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so
    significant
    : > > in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine probably *is*
    : > > vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be 100% secure all
    the
    : > > time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about not having
    this
    : > > one patch installed.
    : > > >
    : > > > And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running WITHOUT
    : > > anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I decided I
    would run
    : > > a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what - nothing found
    other
    : > > than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is
    being
    : > > aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the Internet.
    : > > >
    : > > > Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was, but what I
    do
    : > > know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this manner,
    : > > without informing the users of the potential caveats, and apparently
    without
    : > > testing in dial-up systems, etc.
    : > > >
    : > > >
    : > > >
    : > > > "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    : > > news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    : > > > > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update that has
    as
    : > > of now
    : > > > > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need this
    critical
    : > > update
    : > > > > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to
    : > > compromise
    : > > > > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch and have
    not
    : > > been
    : > > > > updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers will be a
    : > > maximum of
    : > > > > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is connected
    to the
    : > > > > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE" running
    because I
    : > > am
    : > > > > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better fix but
    this is
    : > > a
    : > > > > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe while
    on-line.
    : > > If
    : > > > > programs are not responding then discover why. People you need
    this
    : > > CRITICAL
    : > > > > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run with the
    patch
    : > > because
    : > > > > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove Ethernet cable,
    USB
    : > > cable
    : > > > > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if you do not
    do
    : > > this
    : > > > > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just asking for
    your
    : > > system
    : > > > > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends although I
    know a
    : > > lot
    : > > > > about security on computers and weak access points and could
    probably do
    : > > it
    : > > > > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is with
    keeping the
    : > > > > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers to try
    and get
    : > > one
    : > > > > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the
    : > > terriorists and
    : > > > > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others can help
    you
    : > > with
    : > > > > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
    : > > > >
    : > > > > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message
    news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
    : > > > > :
    : > > > > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
    : > > > > :
    : > > > > : http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
    : > > > > :
    : > > > > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past
    week)
    : > > > > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
    : > > > > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the
    background.
    : > > > > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such
    update
    : > > > > : or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of
    simply
    : > > > > : replacing an existing file).
    : > > > > :
    : > > > > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is
    critical
    : > > > > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply
    deactivating
    : > > > > : it (via msconfig).
    : > > > > :
    : > > > > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and
    KB891711.EXE?
    : > > > > :
    : > > > > : Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode
    to
    : > > > > : properly install it) ?
    : > > > > :
    : > > > > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
    : > > > > :
    : > > > > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
    : > > > >
    : > > > >
    : > >
    : >
  35. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    Thanks for letting me know. Do you have a broadband connection and are you
    willing to share any software that you have at this newsgroup with us? You
    do not have to tell us if you do not want to of course.

    "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
    news:e57ATN5JFHA.2784@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    : Well, we live in an era of 'instant PC Experts'
    :
    : the typical'my brother in law-sez, ......., and the secretary at work.....
    :
    : roof is needed not rumors.
    :
    : I've had the update for 4 days and nothing has raised an ugly head yet.
    :
    : "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    : news:eqDybF5JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
    : > It is just what people are saying. I don't have any proof.
    : >
    : > "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
    : > news:%23cwdfB5JFHA.1528@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    : > : Any particular boards?
    : > :
    : > : Is this well founded and some one has absolute proof, or just some one
    : > : saying it must be ...?
    : > :
    : > : "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    : > : news:eNc9wh4JFHA.2772@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
    : > : > Read the discussion boards and you will see that it is causing havoc
    : with
    : > : > some user's machines and associated software and/or hardware. For
    : some
    : > of
    : > : > the users baddies are definately involved but definately not with all
    : the
    : > : > users.
    : > : >
    : > : > "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
    : > : > news:ObT$hW4JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    : > : > : Whata's the downside of this update?
    : > : > :
    : > : > : "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
    : > : > : news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    : > : > : > Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I want to
    : > : install
    : > : > : it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install these
    : > updates
    : > : in
    : > : > : general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But on
    : the
    : > : other
    : > : > : hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the
    : > : > : inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this patch
    : is
    : > : far
    : > : > : greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine. Keep in
    : mind
    : > : > that
    : > : > : there have been several updates this year considered "important"
    for
    : > : > Windows
    : > : > : 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune pointed
    : out,
    : > : the
    : > : > : difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so
    : > : > significant
    : > : > : in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine probably
    *is*
    : > : > : vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be 100% secure
    : all
    : > : the
    : > : > : time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about not
    : having
    : > : this
    : > : > : one patch installed.
    : > : > : >
    : > : > : > And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running
    : WITHOUT
    : > : > : anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I decided I
    : > would
    : > : > run
    : > : > : a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what - nothing
    : found
    : > : > other
    : > : > : than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is
    : > being
    : > : > : aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the Internet.
    : > : > : >
    : > : > : > Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was, but
    what
    : I
    : > : do
    : > : > : know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this
    : manner,
    : > : > : without informing the users of the potential caveats, and
    apparently
    : > : > without
    : > : > : testing in dial-up systems, etc.
    : > : > : >
    : > : > : >
    : > : > : >
    : > : > : > "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    : > : > : news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    : > : > : > > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update that
    : has
    : > : as
    : > : > : of now
    : > : > : > > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need this
    : > critical
    : > : > : update
    : > : > : > > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to
    : > : > : compromise
    : > : > : > > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch and
    have
    : > not
    : > : > : been
    : > : > : > > updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers will
    be
    : a
    : > : > : maximum of
    : > : > : > > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is
    : connected
    : > to
    : > : > the
    : > : > : > > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE" running
    : > because
    : > : I
    : > : > : am
    : > : > : > > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better fix
    but
    : > : this
    : > : > is
    : > : > : a
    : > : > : > > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe while
    : > : on-line.
    : > : > : If
    : > : > : > > programs are not responding then discover why. People you need
    : > this
    : > : > : CRITICAL
    : > : > : > > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run with the
    : > : patch
    : > : > : because
    : > : > : > > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove Ethernet
    : cable,
    : > : USB
    : > : > : cable
    : > : > : > > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if you do
    : not
    : > : do
    : > : > : this
    : > : > : > > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just asking
    for
    : > : your
    : > : > : system
    : > : > : > > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends although
    : I
    : > : know
    : > : > a
    : > : > : lot
    : > : > : > > about security on computers and weak access points and could
    : > : probably
    : > : > do
    : > : > : it
    : > : > : > > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is with
    : > keeping
    : > : > the
    : > : > : > > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers to
    try
    : > and
    : > : > get
    : > : > : one
    : > : > : > > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the
    : > : > : terriorists and
    : > : > : > > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others can
    : help
    : > : you
    : > : > : with
    : > : > : > > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
    : > : > : > >
    : > : > : > > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message
    : > : > news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
    : > : > : > > :
    : > : > : > > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
    : > : > : > > :
    : > : > : > > :
    : http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
    : > : > : > > :
    : > : > : > > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past
    : > week)
    : > : > : > > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
    : > : > : > > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the
    : > : background.
    : > : > : > > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any
    : such
    : > : > update
    : > : > : > > : or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of
    : > : simply
    : > : > : > > : replacing an existing file).
    : > : > : > > :
    : > : > : > > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is
    : > : critical
    : > : > : > > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply
    : > : > deactivating
    : > : > : > > : it (via msconfig).
    : > : > : > > :
    : > : > : > > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and
    : > : KB891711.EXE?
    : > : > : > > :
    : > : > : > > : Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe
    : mode
    : > : to
    : > : > : > > : properly install it) ?
    : > : > : > > :
    : > : > : > > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
    : > : > : > > :
    : > : > : > > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
    : > : > : > >
    : > : > : > >
    : > : > :
    : > : >
    : > : >
    : > :
    : >
    : >
    :
  36. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 06:45:27 -0700, "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote:

    >I am Googling for it now to test it if I can get a hold of this old program.

    http://www.oldversion.com/program.php?n=eudora

    I suggest 3.0.6.

    --
    Luke
  37. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    Thanks, Luke what does 3.06 give you that 3.05 does not give you?

    "Luke" <luke@nowhere.com> wrote in message
    news:7tk831td25dlrcfk5idroia9nb6b5rm4ve@4ax.com...
    : On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 06:45:27 -0700, "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote:
    :
    : >I am Googling for it now to test it if I can get a hold of this old
    program.
    :
    : http://www.oldversion.com/program.php?n=eudora
    :
    : I suggest 3.0.6.
    :
    : --
    : Luke
  38. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    In news:eDZbVu8JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl,
    Gary S. Terhune <grystnews@mvps.org> had this to say:

    My reply is at the bottom of your sent message:

    > But I'm quite happy with my OE and see no compelling reason to change
    > it for any other email or news client.

    OE 6 SP1 (IIRC) was where the ability to read all mail in plain text was
    added. Probably one of the greatest features of OE that I've ever come
    across. Reading mail in anything other than plain text these days is insane.
    IOW I agree 110% and use OE almost exclusively unless I'm using XNews on
    someone else's computer.

    Galen
    --
    Signature changed for a moment of silence.
    Rest well Alex and we'll see you on the other side.
  39. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 08:43:54 -0700, "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote:

    >Thanks, Luke what does 3.06 give you that 3.05 does not give you?
    [snip]

    I don't know. Was there a 3.0.5? If there was, my guess is .5 and .6
    would be a minor difference of some sort, maybe a bug fix, not a
    feature change. 3.0.6 is 32 bit, FWIW, and I think the last version
    before Eudora Lite became ad/nagware. I've used Eudora Lite since near
    forever, but can't recall all the changes :-). I currently use 3.0.6,
    but I see no advantage of one plain text e-mail app over another other
    than what interface you like and what you're accustomed to.

    --
    Luke
  40. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    All it says to me is that the patch is to fix OE and if you don't use
    OE you don't need the patch.

    John

    Gary S. Terhune wrote:

    > That hardly answers the question. All that says is that viewing email in
    > HTML format can be risky. I don't see how switching from OE to some
    > other newsreader will change that. If you view email in HTML format, you
    > are much more at risk than if you view it in plain text, period. Not
    > only from the vulnerabilities mentioned in this Security Bulletin, but
    > from a myriad of other vulnerabilities involving HTML rendering. So, the
    > answer is: View email in PlainText only. Fortunately, OE6 and up have
    > this option--to view email in PlainText only. Does your newsreader have
    > that option? And do you use it? If not, you're engaging in risky
    > behavior.
    >
  41. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    Well, then you need to read the bulletin again. OE is only mentioned in
    that it is one vector out of many that might allow HTML-based malicious
    code into your system. Microsoft simply included discussion of other
    mitigating factors in certain scenarios involving MS products, and not
    just OE. Also discussed are IE security and Outlook, a product that
    shares little with OE other than the name and the news client.

    Just because Microsoft didn't discuss other, 3rd-party vectors for the
    malware involved doesn't mean those vectors don't exist. Fact is, *any*
    application that renders HTML may be susceptible to the vulnerability.

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS MVP Shell/User
    http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
    http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm

    "John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
    news:u61yzJ%23JFHA.3596@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
    > All it says to me is that the patch is to fix OE and if you don't use
    > OE you don't need the patch.
    >
    > John
    >
    > Gary S. Terhune wrote:
    >
    > > That hardly answers the question. All that says is that viewing
    email in
    > > HTML format can be risky. I don't see how switching from OE to some
    > > other newsreader will change that. If you view email in HTML format,
    you
    > > are much more at risk than if you view it in plain text, period. Not
    > > only from the vulnerabilities mentioned in this Security Bulletin,
    but
    > > from a myriad of other vulnerabilities involving HTML rendering. So,
    the
    > > answer is: View email in PlainText only. Fortunately, OE6 and up
    have
    > > this option--to view email in PlainText only. Does your newsreader
    have
    > > that option? And do you use it? If not, you're engaging in risky
    > > behavior.
    > >
  42. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.setup (More info?)

    We have two out of our three Win98SE computers at work that are experiencing those
    exact symptoms since installing the update mentioned. Despite some of the claims
    here as to the cause, the machines have no malware; are using the latest updated
    drivers for sound and video (machines are only a couple of years old); are not using
    McAfee or Norton products; and are connected via broadband (RoadRunner) through a
    NetGear router. I removed the update and all is well. I await some clarification
    from MS.

    The WinME computer and all the XP machines in the same network have no problem.
    --
    Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
    ~ In memory of our friend, MVP Alex Nichol ~
    http://aumha.org/alex.htm
    http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


    "Sramic" <Sramic@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:11B7C1D1-A450-46F5-935F-0CB1473BCD1A@microsoft.com...
    > Just on a personal experience note here, ever since I installed these latest
    > security updates including: "Microsoft Security Bulletin MS05-002
    > Vulnerability in Cursor and Icon Format Handling Could Allow Remote Code
    > Execution (891711)"
    > I have had many blue screens of death to the point of hard rebooting to get
    > out. It seems that this update is causing me nothing but grief (Win98
    > 3.10.2222, AMD K6-2 450MHz). I am removing this one because I cannot use my
    > computer with it! Has anyone else experienced this kind of behavior?
    >
    > "Ivan Bútora" wrote:
    >
    > > Look through some of the recent threats in win98.gen_discussion...
    > >
    > > "SFB - KB3MM" <Mickey@MouseHouse.com> wrote in message
    news:ObT$hW4JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    > > > Whata's the downside of this update?
    > > >
    > > > "Ivan Bútora" <xxx@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
    > > > news:udwK9H4JFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > > > > Dan, please. ANY update is optional. It is up to me if I want to install
    > > > it on my machine or not. Yes, I think it's good to install these updates in
    > > > general, and I have installed all of them except KB891711. But on the other
    > > > hand, there are upsides and downsides. In the case of KB891711, the
    > > > inconvenience and trouble that is likely to be caused by this patch is far
    > > > greater than the risk of a hacker exploiting your machine. Keep in mind that
    > > > there have been several updates this year considered "important" for Windows
    > > > 98 that have not been released publicly. As Gary Terhune pointed out, the
    > > > difference between "important" and "critical" is actually not so significant
    > > > in terms of the security threat. So yeah, your machine probably *is*
    > > > vulnerable to something. But that's life, you can't be 100% secure all the
    > > > time. I don't see the point in making such a big fuss about not having this
    > > > one patch installed.
    > > > >
    > > > > And FYI, since September 2004, my computer has been running WITHOUT
    > > > anti-virus protection, anti-spyware, etc. So yesterday I decided I would run
    > > > a SpyBot check just for the hell of it, and guess what - nothing found other
    > > > than a couple of IE cookies. My point: The most important thing is being
    > > > aware of what you're doing with your computer and on the Internet.
    > > > >
    > > > > Frankly, I don't know what your letter to Bill Gates was, but what I do
    > > > know is that MS should be ashamed for releasing a patch in this manner,
    > > > without informing the users of the potential caveats, and apparently without
    > > > testing in dial-up systems, etc.
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > "Dan" <spamyou@user.nec> wrote in message
    > > > news:%23v8mrb0JFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > > > > > According to PC Today, April issue it is a critical update that has as
    > > > of now
    > > > > > not been exploited by hackers. Guys and Gals you need this critical
    > > > update
    > > > > > because I am guessing within 3 weeks someone will find a way to
    > > > compromise
    > > > > > all 98SE and associated 9x machines that need the patch and have not
    > > > been
    > > > > > updated. My best guess is that the time for the hackers will be a
    > > > maximum of
    > > > > > 3 weeks and it may be even faster so if your machine is connected to the
    > > > > > Internet do whatever it takes to keep "KB891711.EXE" running because I
    > > > am
    > > > > > sure down the line Microsoft will be able to do a better fix but this is
    > > > a
    > > > > > temporary solution, hopefully to allow users to be safe while on-line.
    > > > If
    > > > > > programs are not responding then discover why. People you need this
    > > > CRITICAL
    > > > > > PATCH and it is not optional. If Windows will not run with the patch
    > > > because
    > > > > > of BSOD then disconnect from the Internet -- remove Ethernet cable, USB
    > > > cable
    > > > > > or phone cable until the problem is resolved because if you do not do
    > > > this
    > > > > > and have exited this CRITICAL PATCH then you are just asking for your
    > > > system
    > > > > > to be hacked and no it will not be by me or my friends although I know a
    > > > lot
    > > > > > about security on computers and weak access points and could probably do
    > > > it
    > > > > > without too much trouble if I wanted to but my heart is with keeping the
    > > > > > U.S.A and its Allies and businesses and finally consumers to try and get
    > > > one
    > > > > > small leg up on the PEOPLE who hack machines for a hobby, the
    > > > terriorists and
    > > > > > finally the script kiddies. Let me know how I and others can help you
    > > > with
    > > > > > your computer problems. Have a nice day!
    > > > > >
    > > > > > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:42330B5D.1F0A641A@Guy.com...
    > > > > > :
    > > > > > : If you don't know what I'm talking about, look here:
    > > > > > :
    > > > > > : http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx
    > > > > > :
    > > > > > : If you're running Win 98, and have recently (within the past week)
    > > > > > : gone to Windows Updates and updated your computer, you almost
    > > > > > : certainly now have the file "KB891711.EXE" running in the background.
    > > > > > : It is set to run automatically at startup. First time any such update
    > > > > > : or security patch has been configured to operate (instead of simply
    > > > > > : replacing an existing file).
    > > > > > :
    > > > > > : Even though Micro$loth sez that MS05-002 (KB891711.EXE) is critical
    > > > > > : for Win-98, I've read where some (many) people are simply deactivating
    > > > > > : it (via msconfig).
    > > > > > :
    > > > > > : Does anyone really know the truth regarding Win-98 and KB891711.EXE?
    > > > > > :
    > > > > > : Is there anything special about it (like running it in safe mode to
    > > > > > : properly install it) ?
    > > > > > :
    > > > > > : Is it really needed? (for win-98) ?
    > > > > > :
    > > > > > : Is Win-98 really vulnerable to MS05-002 ???
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > >
    > >
  43. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.setup (More info?)

    Glad to hear someone else had similar problems. My video card is
    a GeForce 2MX400 with 40.72 vers. Nvidia drivers, there are newer drivers
    but they don't work as well on my system.

    "glee" wrote:

    > We have two out of our three Win98SE computers at work that are experiencing those
    > exact symptoms since installing the update mentioned. Despite some of the claims
    > here as to the cause, the machines have no malware; are using the latest updated
    > drivers for sound and video (machines are only a couple of years old); are not using
    > McAfee or Norton products; and are connected via broadband (RoadRunner) through a
    > NetGear router. I removed the update and all is well. I await some clarification
    > from MS.
    >
    > The WinME computer and all the XP machines in the same network have no problem.
    > --
    > Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
    > ~ In memory of our friend, MVP Alex Nichol ~
    > http://aumha.org/alex.htm
    > http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
  44. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.setup,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    There have been several updates from Micro$loth lately:

    Security Update for Windows 98 (KB891711)
    Security Update for Windows 98 (KB888113)
    Security Update for Windows 98 (KB891781)
    Security Update for Windows 98 (KB890175)
    Cumulative Security Update for IE 6 SP-1 (KB867282)

    The most recent being KB891711 and KB888113, which are (probably)
    getting installed at the same time for most people.

    Both of them are listed as "critical" across the board for all Windows
    platforms, even XP AND Windows Server 2003.

    There seems to be 4 different issues pertaining to KB891711, which
    (apparently) was discovered or made public in late December, 2004.

    CVE references:

    CAN-2004-1049 (LoadImage API of USER32 Lib / code execution)
    CAN-2004-1305 (only a DoS type problem ???)
    CAN-2004-1306 (vulnerability in .HLP file processing)
    CAN-2004-1361 (vulnerability in .HLP file processing)

    It's not clear to me that Microsoft has released patches that address
    items 1306 and 1361. Descriptions of these items indicate that Win-98
    is not affected (or could be an oversight).

    See:
    http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2004-1306
    http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2004-1361

    Item 1049 seems to be the real problem:
    http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2004-1049

    Integer overflow in the LoadImage API of the USER32 Lib for Microsoft
    Windows allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a .bmp,
    ..cur, .ico or .ani file with a large image size field, which leads to
    a buffer overflow, aka the "Cursor and Icon Format Handling
    Vulnerability."

    Seems to me that the vulnerability to this item depends on how your
    browser or e-mail client handles imbedded or attached files of the
    types mentioned. Additionally, the user might have to actually
    "click" or attempt to execute the malformed files in question to
    initiate the vulnerability.

    According to Secunia, there are currently 3 security advisories for
    Win-98se that remain "unpatched" and 1 with a partial fix:

    http://secunia.com/product/13/

    I highly advise all Win-98 users to have a look at that page.

    Item KB888113 seems to be more browser related (see bottom of this
    post). Win-98 is listed specifically as vulnerable.


    Details for KB891711 / MS05-002:
    ---------------------------------------------
    Vulnerability in Cursor and Icon Format Handling Could Allow Remote
    Code Execution

    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-002.mspx

    1) Cursor and Icon Format Handling Vulnerability - CAN-2004-1049
    http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2004-1049

    Integer overflow in the LoadImage API of the USER32 Lib for
    Microsoft Windows allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary
    code via a .bmp, .cur, .ico or .ani file with a large image
    size field, which leads to a buffer overflow, aka the "Cursor
    and Icon Format Handling Vulnerability."

    2) Windows Kernel Vulnerability - CAN-2004-1305
    http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2004-1305

    The vulnerability of Windows 98 to these items is not specifically
    stated in this link:
    http://www.xfocus.net/flashsky/icoExp/index.html

    See also: http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/625856

    Microsoft Windows LoadImage API vulnerable to integer overflow

    Overview

    The Microsoft Windows LoadImage API routine is vulnerable to an
    integer overflow that may allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary
    code on a vulnerable system.

    Description

    The LoadImage API routine is used to load an image from a file on
    Microsoft Windows platforms. The LoadImage API is included part of the
    USER 32 library. A lack of input validation on user supplied input to
    the LoadImage API routine may allow an integer overflow to occur. If a
    remote attacker supplies a specially crafted image file to a
    vulnerable system, that attacker may be able to trigger the integer
    overflow to compromise that system.

    An exploitable integer buffer overflow exists in the LoadImage API of
    the USER32 Lib. This function loads an icon, a cursor or a bitmap and
    then try to proceed the image. If an attacker sends a specially
    crafter bmp, cur, ico or ani file within an HTML page or in an Email,
    it is then possible to run arbitrary code on the affected system.

    According to public reports, many Microsoft Windows are affected.
    However, reports also indicate Windows XP with Service Pack 2 is not
    vulnerable, but we have not confirmed this.

    !^!^!^!^!^!^!^!^!^
    Note that exploits for this vulnerability are publicly available.

    !^!^!^!^!^!^!^!^!

    Impact

    If a remote attacker can persuade a user to access a specially crafted
    image file, the attacker may be able to execute arbitrary code on that
    user's system, possibly with elevated privileges. Potentially any
    operation that displays an image could trigger exploitation; for
    instance, browsing the file system, reading HTML email, or browsing
    websites.

    Solution

    Apply Patch

    Apply a patch as described in Microsoft Security Bulletin MS05-002.
    Please also note that Microsoft is actively deploying the patches for
    this vulnerability via Windows Update.
    ---------------------------------------------


    Details for KB888113 / MS05-015:
    ------------------------------------------------
    Vulnerability in hyperlink object library could allow remote
    code execution
    http://support.microsoft.com/kb/888113
    or
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms05-015.mspx
    also
    http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2005-0057
    and
    http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/820427

    Description
    An unchecked buffer in the Microsoft Object Library is vulnerable to
    attack when malformed hyperlinks are handled. Such handling occurs
    most often when a user clicks on a hyperlink in a browser or in
    HTML-rendered email. The Object Library is a dynamic application
    interface library used by Windows programs to manage hyperlink
    objects. Hyperlink objects are any COM objects (including ActiveX)
    that implement the IHlink interface.

    Impact
    An attacker could execute arbitrary code of their choosing on the
    system running the vulnerable version of Windows. Upon successful
    exploitation, the malicious code would be executed with the privileges
    of the user being attacked.

    Workarounds
    As noted in Microsoft Security Bulletin MS05-015:
    Read e-mail messages in plain text format if you are using Outlook
    2002 or a later version, or Outlook Express 6 SP1 or a later version,
    to help protect yourself from the HTML e-mail attack vector. Note
    that an email-borne attack vector requires a click event on a
    hyperlink to occur.
    ----------------------------------------------

    Interesting that the work-around mentions Outlook 2002. What about
    Outlook 2000?
  45. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
    news:OlZ3545JFHA.3992@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > That hardly answers the question. All that says is that viewing email in
    > HTML format can be risky. I don't see how switching from OE to some
    > other newsreader will change that. If you view email in HTML format, you
    > are much more at risk than if you view it in plain text, period. Not
    > only from the vulnerabilities mentioned in this Security Bulletin, but
    > from a myriad of other vulnerabilities involving HTML rendering. So, the
    > answer is: View email in PlainText only.

    Yes

    Fortunately, OE6 and up have
    > this option--to view email in PlainText only. Does your newsreader have
    > that option? And do you use it? If not, you're engaging in risky
    > behavior.
    >
    > --
    > Gary S. Terhune
    > MS MVP Shell/User
    > http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
    > http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
    >
    > "John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
    > news:eeLJ2h5JFHA.3420@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > > Gary S. Terhune wrote:
    > >
    > > > Why? What does OE have to do with KB891711.EXE?
    > > >
    > verbatim copy of MS05-002 snipped.
    >
  46. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    g'day john john,

    i don't use oe for much is there another program similar that i can
    use instead?

    ta

    len

    snipped
    --
    happy gardening
    'it works for me it could work for you,'

    "in the end ya' gotta do what ya' gotta do" but consider others and the environment
    http://members.optusnet.com.au/~gardenlen1/

    my e/mail addies have spam filters you should know what to delete before you send.
  47. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    Thunderbird (free): http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/

    Pegasus Mail (free): http://www.pmail.com/overviews.htm

    Eudora (not free): http://www.eudora.com/eudoralight/

    Agent (not free): http://www.forteinc.com/agent/index.php


    Many others exist. Search the net for "mail reader".

    My favorite is Thunderbird, can be had "stand alone" or part of the
    Mozilla/Firefox "suite" http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/

    You will never go back to IE and OE once you experience the Mozilla
    applications.

    John


    len gardener wrote:

    > g'day john john,
    >
    > i don't use oe for much is there another program similar that i can
    > use instead?
    >
    > ta
    >
    > len
    >
    > snipped
  48. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update (More info?)

    John, I like Mozilla Firefox better than IE but cannot get used to the
    Mozilla Thunderbird newsgroup as of yet. Maybe I am just too comfortable
    with Outlook Express.

    "John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
    news:udfMu%233JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    : Thunderbird (free): http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/
    :
    : Pegasus Mail (free): http://www.pmail.com/overviews.htm
    :
    : Eudora (not free): http://www.eudora.com/eudoralight/
    :
    : Agent (not free): http://www.forteinc.com/agent/index.php
    :
    :
    : Many others exist. Search the net for "mail reader".
    :
    : My favorite is Thunderbird, can be had "stand alone" or part of the
    : Mozilla/Firefox "suite" http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/
    :
    : You will never go back to IE and OE once you experience the Mozilla
    : applications.
    :
    : John
    :
    :
    :
    : len gardener wrote:
    :
    : > g'day john john,
    : >
    : > i don't use oe for much is there another program similar that i can
    : > use instead?
    : >
    : > ta
    : >
    : > len
    : >
    : > snipped
  49. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.setup,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.win98.internet.windows_update,alt.windows98 (More info?)

    In news:udfMu%233JFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl,
    John John <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> had this to say:

    My reply is at the bottom of your sent message:

    > You will never go back to IE and OE once you experience the Mozilla
    > applications.

    Unless you use Hotmail. In that case you'll want something like Hotmail
    Popper ;)

    Galen
    --
    Signature changed for a moment of silence.
    Rest well Alex and we'll see you on the other side.
Ask a new question

Read More

Windows 98 Microsoft Windows