Security Update for JView Profiler KB903235

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

I had taken note on 7/19/05 of this critical update, which I was going
to update later on. Today this critical update is no longer at the
Windows Update site. Checked my installed updates, in case I had
updated it but forgot about it, but the update is no longer there.

Below is the note I had written down:

Security Update for JView Profiler (KB903235), 105 kb.
MS05-037
Issued: July 12, 2005
Version: 1.0
JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll)
This update sets the "kill Bit" for JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll).

My question: Is this ciritcal update for Windows 98 SE, and if so,
where can it be updated from?

Thanks to all for your help.
55 answers Last reply
More about security update jview profiler kb903235
  1. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Not sure what's up with the update, I'm checking into that. However, the
    update performs a relatively simple registry hack that you can do yourself.
    Note the following paragraph from MS05-037 (the pertaining Security
    Bulletin):

    ------------------------------------------------------
    Does this update contain any changes to functionality?
    No. Since the JView Profiler COM object was not designed to be accessed
    through Internet Explorer, this update sets the kill bit for the JView
    Profiler (Javaprxy.dll) COM object. To help protect customers who have this
    object installed, this update prevents it from being instantiated in
    Internet Explorer. For more information about kill bits, see Microsoft
    Knowledge Base Article 240797. The class identifier (CLSID) for this object
    is '03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'.
    ------------------------------------------------------

    In short: Open REGEDIT and navigate to HKLM\Software\Internet
    Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility. Look at the CLSID keys under that for a key
    named "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'" If that key doesn't exist,
    create it. In that key, create a new DWORD named "Compatibility Flags", make
    the value 400.

    Should result in a value that looks like this: 0x000000400 (1024)

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS-MVP Shell/User


    "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    news:5ltbg1l8a3i1dra4adsip58cofhobrpslq@4ax.com...
    >I had taken note on 7/19/05 of this critical update, which I was going
    > to update later on. Today this critical update is no longer at the
    > Windows Update site. Checked my installed updates, in case I had
    > updated it but forgot about it, but the update is no longer there.
    >
    > Below is the note I had written down:
    >
    > Security Update for JView Profiler (KB903235), 105 kb.
    > MS05-037
    > Issued: July 12, 2005
    > Version: 1.0
    > JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll)
    > This update sets the "kill Bit" for JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll).
    >
    > My question: Is this ciritcal update for Windows 98 SE, and if so,
    > where can it be updated from?
    >
    > Thanks to all for your help.
    >
    >
  2. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    | In short: Open REGEDIT and navigate to HKLM\Software\Internet
    | Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility.

    HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}
    Compatibility Flags 0x00000400 (1024) <<DWORD Value

    Without "Microsoft", all is lost.


    --
    Thanks or Good Luck,
    There may be humor in this post, and,
    Naturally, you will not sue,
    should things get worse after this,
    PCR
    pcrrcp@netzero.net
    "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
    news:ukeOlKOpFHA.3408@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    | Not sure what's up with the update, I'm checking into that. However,
    the
    | update performs a relatively simple registry hack that you can do
    yourself.
    | Note the following paragraph from MS05-037 (the pertaining Security
    | Bulletin):
    |
    | ------------------------------------------------------
    | Does this update contain any changes to functionality?
    | No. Since the JView Profiler COM object was not designed to be
    accessed
    | through Internet Explorer, this update sets the kill bit for the JView
    | Profiler (Javaprxy.dll) COM object. To help protect customers who have
    this
    | object installed, this update prevents it from being instantiated in
    | Internet Explorer. For more information about kill bits, see Microsoft
    | Knowledge Base Article 240797. The class identifier (CLSID) for this
    object
    | is '03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'.
    | ------------------------------------------------------
    |
    | In short: Open REGEDIT and navigate to HKLM\Software\Internet
    | Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility. Look at the CLSID keys under that for
    a key
    | named "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'" If that key doesn't
    exist,
    | create it. In that key, create a new DWORD named "Compatibility
    Flags", make
    | the value 400.
    |
    | Should result in a value that looks like this: 0x000000400 (1024)
    |
    | --
    | Gary S. Terhune
    | MS-MVP Shell/User
    |
    |
    | "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    | news:5ltbg1l8a3i1dra4adsip58cofhobrpslq@4ax.com...
    | >I had taken note on 7/19/05 of this critical update, which I was
    going
    | > to update later on. Today this critical update is no longer at the
    | > Windows Update site. Checked my installed updates, in case I had
    | > updated it but forgot about it, but the update is no longer there.
    | >
    | > Below is the note I had written down:
    | >
    | > Security Update for JView Profiler (KB903235), 105 kb.
    | > MS05-037
    | > Issued: July 12, 2005
    | > Version: 1.0
    | > JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll)
    | > This update sets the "kill Bit" for JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll).
    | >
    | > My question: Is this ciritcal update for Windows 98 SE, and if so,
    | > where can it be updated from?
    | >
    | > Thanks to all for your help.
    | >
    | >
    |
    |
  3. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Thanks, PCR. Been looking at too much Registry stuff this morning. Eyes
    started getting blurry.

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS-MVP Shell/User

    "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
    news:uMII9SPpFHA.320@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    >| In short: Open REGEDIT and navigate to HKLM\Software\Internet
    > | Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility.
    >
    > HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    > Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}
    > Compatibility Flags 0x00000400 (1024) <<DWORD Value
    >
    > Without "Microsoft", all is lost.
    >
    >
    > --
    > Thanks or Good Luck,
    > There may be humor in this post, and,
    > Naturally, you will not sue,
    > should things get worse after this,
    > PCR
    > pcrrcp@netzero.net
    > "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
    > news:ukeOlKOpFHA.3408@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > | Not sure what's up with the update, I'm checking into that. However,
    > the
    > | update performs a relatively simple registry hack that you can do
    > yourself.
    > | Note the following paragraph from MS05-037 (the pertaining Security
    > | Bulletin):
    > |
    > | ------------------------------------------------------
    > | Does this update contain any changes to functionality?
    > | No. Since the JView Profiler COM object was not designed to be
    > accessed
    > | through Internet Explorer, this update sets the kill bit for the JView
    > | Profiler (Javaprxy.dll) COM object. To help protect customers who have
    > this
    > | object installed, this update prevents it from being instantiated in
    > | Internet Explorer. For more information about kill bits, see Microsoft
    > | Knowledge Base Article 240797. The class identifier (CLSID) for this
    > object
    > | is '03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'.
    > | ------------------------------------------------------
    > |
    > | In short: Open REGEDIT and navigate to HKLM\Software\Internet
    > | Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility. Look at the CLSID keys under that for
    > a key
    > | named "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'" If that key doesn't
    > exist,
    > | create it. In that key, create a new DWORD named "Compatibility
    > Flags", make
    > | the value 400.
    > |
    > | Should result in a value that looks like this: 0x000000400 (1024)
    > |
    > | --
    > | Gary S. Terhune
    > | MS-MVP Shell/User
    > |
    > |
    > | "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    > | news:5ltbg1l8a3i1dra4adsip58cofhobrpslq@4ax.com...
    > | >I had taken note on 7/19/05 of this critical update, which I was
    > going
    > | > to update later on. Today this critical update is no longer at the
    > | > Windows Update site. Checked my installed updates, in case I had
    > | > updated it but forgot about it, but the update is no longer there.
    > | >
    > | > Below is the note I had written down:
    > | >
    > | > Security Update for JView Profiler (KB903235), 105 kb.
    > | > MS05-037
    > | > Issued: July 12, 2005
    > | > Version: 1.0
    > | > JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll)
    > | > This update sets the "kill Bit" for JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll).
    > | >
    > | > My question: Is this ciritcal update for Windows 98 SE, and if so,
    > | > where can it be updated from?
    > | >
    > | > Thanks to all for your help.
    > | >
    > | >
    > |
    > |
    >
    >
  4. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    If you actually have it, it will show up at...

    (1) IE6, Help, About...
    SP1, Q313829, Q328970, Q328389, Q324929, Q810847, Q813951, Q816506,
    Q813489, Q330994, Q818529, Q822925, Q828750, Q824145, Q832894,
    Q837009, Q831167, Q823353, Q867801, Q833989, Q834707, Q889293, Q867282,
    Q891781, Q890923, Q883939, Q903235, & Q896727.

    (2) "Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs"...
    (a) Internet Explorer Q896727
    (was Q883939, Q890923, Q891781, Q889293, Q834707, Q867801,
    Q831167, Q832894, Q824145, Q828750, Q822925, Q818529)
    (b) Internet Explorer Q903235 (was Q883939).

    I took it when offered. Now, I cannot even see it in the Catalog...
    http://v4.windowsupdate.microsoft.com/catalog/en/default.asp
    ....but, go look for yourself.

    Here it is from my WU folder. (I take them into there, although I always
    let the site do it's auto-download/install.)...
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-037.mspx
    ....BUT looks like it says you must get it from the Windows Update site.

    I think this is the Registry key Terhune means to say...

    HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}
    Compatibility Flags 0x00000400 (1024) <<DWORD Value

    ....Do you have it?


    --
    Thanks or Good Luck,
    There may be humor in this post, and,
    Naturally, you will not sue,
    should things get worse after this,
    PCR
    pcrrcp@netzero.net
    "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    news:5ltbg1l8a3i1dra4adsip58cofhobrpslq@4ax.com...
    | I had taken note on 7/19/05 of this critical update, which I was going
    | to update later on. Today this critical update is no longer at the
    | Windows Update site. Checked my installed updates, in case I had
    | updated it but forgot about it, but the update is no longer there.
    |
    | Below is the note I had written down:
    |
    | Security Update for JView Profiler (KB903235), 105 kb.
    | MS05-037
    | Issued: July 12, 2005
    | Version: 1.0
    | JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll)
    | This update sets the "kill Bit" for JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll).
    |
    | My question: Is this ciritcal update for Windows 98 SE, and if so,
    | where can it be updated from?
    |
    | Thanks to all for your help.
    |
    |
  5. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    It looks like to me you can download it here as per:

    System Requirements
    This update applies to Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 (SP1) with the
    following operating systems:
    Windows XP SP1
    Windows 2000 SP4
    Windows 98
    Windows 98SE
    Windows Millennium
    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=2A506C16-01EF-4060-BCF8-6993C55840A9&displaylang=en

    Rick


    Just me wrote:
    > I had taken note on 7/19/05 of this critical update, which I was going
    > to update later on. Today this critical update is no longer at the
    > Windows Update site. Checked my installed updates, in case I had
    > updated it but forgot about it, but the update is no longer there.
    >
    > Below is the note I had written down:
    >
    > Security Update for JView Profiler (KB903235), 105 kb.
    > MS05-037
    > Issued: July 12, 2005
    > Version: 1.0
    > JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll)
    > This update sets the "kill Bit" for JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll).
    >
    > My question: Is this ciritcal update for Windows 98 SE, and if so,
    > where can it be updated from?
    >
    > Thanks to all for your help.
  6. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Ah, the reason why they pulled it as I look through my software install
    tracker history is that this last W98SE - MS05-038 896727 Cumulative
    Security Update for IE6 also sets that:
    HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}
    Compatibility Flags 0x00000400 (1024) <<DWORD Value
    already, along with "48" other ActiveX Compatibility keys too!
    ....anyway, I imagine the new IE supercedes that KB903235 and so is why
    they pulled it.

    Rick


    Rick Chauvin wrote:
    > It looks like to me you can download it here as per:
    >
    > System Requirements
    > This update applies to Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 (SP1) with the
    > following operating systems:
    > Windows XP SP1
    > Windows 2000 SP4
    > Windows 98
    > Windows 98SE
    > Windows Millennium
    >
    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=2A506C16-01EF-4060-BCF8-6993C55840A9&displaylang=en
    >
    > Rick
    >
    >
    >
    > Just me wrote:
    >> I had taken note on 7/19/05 of this critical update, which I was going
    >> to update later on. Today this critical update is no longer at the
    >> Windows Update site. Checked my installed updates, in case I had
    >> updated it but forgot about it, but the update is no longer there.
    >>
    >> Below is the note I had written down:
    >>
    >> Security Update for JView Profiler (KB903235), 105 kb.
    >> MS05-037
    >> Issued: July 12, 2005
    >> Version: 1.0
    >> JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll)
    >> This update sets the "kill Bit" for JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll).
    >>
    >> My question: Is this ciritcal update for Windows 98 SE, and if so,
    >> where can it be updated from?
    >>
    >> Thanks to all for your help.
  7. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    You are welcome. Well, you did say "in short", after all, which I guess
    did cover it.


    --
    Thanks or Good Luck,
    There may be humor in this post, and,
    Naturally, you will not sue,
    should things get worse after this,
    PCR
    pcrrcp@netzero.net
    "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
    news:eBEAklPpFHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    | Thanks, PCR. Been looking at too much Registry stuff this morning.
    Eyes
    | started getting blurry.
    |
    | --
    | Gary S. Terhune
    | MS-MVP Shell/User
    |
    | "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
    | news:uMII9SPpFHA.320@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    ....snip
  8. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Seems like that should explain it. But Just me can't find that CLSID in
    his Registry...
    03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0

    I'm beginning to wonder. What about the following? It doesn't come in
    with the kill bit, does it...?...

    REGEDIT4

    [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    @="JVIEW Profiler"

    [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\InprocSe
    rver32]
    @="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    "ThreadingModel"="Both"


    --
    Thanks or Good Luck,
    There may be humor in this post, and,
    Naturally, you will not sue,
    should things get worse after this,
    PCR
    pcrrcp@netzero.net
    "Rick Chauvin" <justask@nospamz.com> wrote in message
    news:Os$vDNQpFHA.320@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    | Ah, the reason why they pulled it as I look through my software
    install
    | tracker history is that this last W98SE - MS05-038 896727 Cumulative
    | Security Update for IE6 also sets that:
    | HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    | Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}
    | Compatibility Flags 0x00000400 (1024) <<DWORD Value
    | already, along with "48" other ActiveX Compatibility keys too!
    | ...anyway, I imagine the new IE supercedes that KB903235 and so is
    why
    | they pulled it.
    |
    | Rick
    |
    |
    | Rick Chauvin wrote:
    | > It looks like to me you can download it here as per:
    | >
    | > System Requirements
    | > This update applies to Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 (SP1) with
    the
    | > following operating systems:
    | > Windows XP SP1
    | > Windows 2000 SP4
    | > Windows 98
    | > Windows 98SE
    | > Windows Millennium
    | >
    |
    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=2A506C16-01EF-4060-BCF8-6993C55840A9&displaylang=en
    | >
    | > Rick
    | >
    | >
    | >
    | > Just me wrote:
    | >> I had taken note on 7/19/05 of this critical update, which I was
    going
    | >> to update later on. Today this critical update is no longer at the
    | >> Windows Update site. Checked my installed updates, in case I had
    | >> updated it but forgot about it, but the update is no longer there.
    | >>
    | >> Below is the note I had written down:
    | >>
    | >> Security Update for JView Profiler (KB903235), 105 kb.
    | >> MS05-037
    | >> Issued: July 12, 2005
    | >> Version: 1.0
    | >> JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll)
    | >> This update sets the "kill Bit" for JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll).
    | >>
    | >> My question: Is this ciritcal update for Windows 98 SE, and if so,
    | >> where can it be updated from?
    | >>
    | >> Thanks to all for your help.
    |
    |
    |
  9. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    | Seems like that should explain it. But Just me can't find that CLSID
    in
    | his Registry...
    | 03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0

    He may have attached a single quote to the end of that CLSID causing the
    search to fail. In that case, perhaps the MS05-038 896727 Cumulative
    really did give it to him.


    --
    Thanks or Good Luck,
    There may be humor in this post, and,
    Naturally, you will not sue,
    should things get worse after this,
    PCR
    pcrrcp@netzero.net
    "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
    news:uferskRpFHA.1480@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    | Seems like that should explain it. But Just me can't find that CLSID
    in
    | his Registry...
    | 03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0
    |
    | I'm beginning to wonder. What about the following? It doesn't come in
    | with the kill bit, does it...?...
    |
    | REGEDIT4
    |
    | [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    | @="JVIEW Profiler"
    |
    |
    [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\InprocSe
    | rver32]
    | @="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    | "ThreadingModel"="Both"
    |
    |
    | --
    | Thanks or Good Luck,
    | There may be humor in this post, and,
    | Naturally, you will not sue,
    | should things get worse after this,
    | PCR
    | pcrrcp@netzero.net
    | "Rick Chauvin" <justask@nospamz.com> wrote in message
    | news:Os$vDNQpFHA.320@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    | | Ah, the reason why they pulled it as I look through my software
    | install
    | | tracker history is that this last W98SE - MS05-038 896727 Cumulative
    | | Security Update for IE6 also sets that:
    | | HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    | | Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}
    | | Compatibility Flags 0x00000400 (1024) <<DWORD Value
    | | already, along with "48" other ActiveX Compatibility keys too!
    | | ...anyway, I imagine the new IE supercedes that KB903235 and so is
    | why
    | | they pulled it.
    | |
    | | Rick
    | |
    | |
    | | Rick Chauvin wrote:
    | | > It looks like to me you can download it here as per:
    | | >
    | | > System Requirements
    | | > This update applies to Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 (SP1)
    with
    | the
    | | > following operating systems:
    | | > Windows XP SP1
    | | > Windows 2000 SP4
    | | > Windows 98
    | | > Windows 98SE
    | | > Windows Millennium
    | | >
    | |
    |
    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=2A506C16-01EF-4060-BCF8-6993C55840A9&displaylang=en
    | | >
    | | > Rick
    | | >
    | | >
    | | >
    | | > Just me wrote:
    | | >> I had taken note on 7/19/05 of this critical update, which I was
    | going
    | | >> to update later on. Today this critical update is no longer at
    the
    | | >> Windows Update site. Checked my installed updates, in case I had
    | | >> updated it but forgot about it, but the update is no longer
    there.
    | | >>
    | | >> Below is the note I had written down:
    | | >>
    | | >> Security Update for JView Profiler (KB903235), 105 kb.
    | | >> MS05-037
    | | >> Issued: July 12, 2005
    | | >> Version: 1.0
    | | >> JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll)
    | | >> This update sets the "kill Bit" for JView Profiler
    (Javaprxy.dll).
    | | >>
    | | >> My question: Is this ciritcal update for Windows 98 SE, and if
    so,
    | | >> where can it be updated from?
    | | >>
    | | >> Thanks to all for your help.
    | |
    | |
    | |
    |
    |
  10. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Thanks for responding, Gary.

    I'm using Windows 98SE with IE SP2 and now I'm not sure whether it
    applies to me. But a month ago I'm sure I saw the update at the
    Windows Update site as applying to me. I had made a note of it for a
    later update. Today, however, the update was no longer there implying,
    to me, that I may not need it afterall.

    Below is what MS05-037 says under "Affected Components" at
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms05-037.mspx
    It reads in part:

    "Internet Explorer 5.5 Service Pack 2 on Microsoft Windows Millennium
    Edition -- Review the FAQ section of this bulletin for details about
    these operating systems."

    "Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 on Microsoft Windows 98, on
    Microsoft Windows 98 SE or on Microsoft Windows Millennium Edition
    Review the FAQ section of this bulletin for details about these
    operating systems."

    From the above, seems that I may not need the update since I'm using
    Win 98 SE with IE5.5. Am I correct in this?

    I have all of the critical updates except the above and the Security
    Update 891711 (MS05-002), which I've read that this latter may create
    problems.

    Again, thanks for responding.

    John




    On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 10:22:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
    <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote:

    >Not sure what's up with the update, I'm checking into that. However, the
    >update performs a relatively simple registry hack that you can do yourself.
    >Note the following paragraph from MS05-037 (the pertaining Security
    >Bulletin):
    >
    >------------------------------------------------------
    >Does this update contain any changes to functionality?
    >No. Since the JView Profiler COM object was not designed to be accessed
    >through Internet Explorer, this update sets the kill bit for the JView
    >Profiler (Javaprxy.dll) COM object. To help protect customers who have this
    >object installed, this update prevents it from being instantiated in
    >Internet Explorer. For more information about kill bits, see Microsoft
    >Knowledge Base Article 240797. The class identifier (CLSID) for this object
    >is '03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'.
    >------------------------------------------------------
    >
    >In short: Open REGEDIT and navigate to HKLM\Software\Internet
    >Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility. Look at the CLSID keys under that for a key
    >named "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'" If that key doesn't exist,
    >create it. In that key, create a new DWORD named "Compatibility Flags", make
    >the value 400.
    >
    >Should result in a value that looks like this: 0x000000400 (1024)
  11. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    I've punted the issue upstairs. We'll see what they say. Regardless of
    whether it applies to your system or not, the patch *should_be* available at
    WU Catalog.

    Your logic is faulty. The patch isn't offered for versions of IE earlier
    than 5.5 because those versions simply aren't supported any longer. Haven't
    been for some time. That does *not* mean that earlier versions aren't
    vulnerable, particularly earlier versions of IE5 (not sure about IE4.) I
    would bet that your IE *is* vulnerable, and in any case, the kill-bit fix I
    suggested won't harm your installation. The Active-X control involved isn't
    supposed to be used in IE, anyway. This issue is a common one--Active-X
    controls that aren't meant to be accessed by IE but manage to be hooked by
    malware into doing so, with all the security issues that suggests. Setting
    the kill-bit is the common solution. Pretty much that entire ActiveX
    Compatibility key of the Registry consists of kill-bits. A similar issue is
    currently top news in security circles regarding MSDDS.DLL (an Office 2000
    file), and the same solution is suggested.

    As for KB891711 (MS05-002), that *did* have problems when it was first
    issued. A replacement patch was issued within a short time and no longer
    causes any problems that I'm aware of. You *should* install KB891711 without
    delay.

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS-MVP Shell/User

    "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    news:29dcg1ditrlneoat46k4tci2d0nol6rupr@4ax.com...
    > Thanks for responding, Gary.
    >
    > I'm using Windows 98SE with IE SP2 and now I'm not sure whether it
    > applies to me. But a month ago I'm sure I saw the update at the
    > Windows Update site as applying to me. I had made a note of it for a
    > later update. Today, however, the update was no longer there implying,
    > to me, that I may not need it afterall.
    >
    > Below is what MS05-037 says under "Affected Components" at
    > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms05-037.mspx
    > It reads in part:
    >
    > "Internet Explorer 5.5 Service Pack 2 on Microsoft Windows Millennium
    > Edition -- Review the FAQ section of this bulletin for details about
    > these operating systems."
    >
    > "Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 on Microsoft Windows 98, on
    > Microsoft Windows 98 SE or on Microsoft Windows Millennium Edition
    > Review the FAQ section of this bulletin for details about these
    > operating systems."
    >
    > From the above, seems that I may not need the update since I'm using
    > Win 98 SE with IE5.5. Am I correct in this?
    >
    > I have all of the critical updates except the above and the Security
    > Update 891711 (MS05-002), which I've read that this latter may create
    > problems.
    >
    > Again, thanks for responding.
    >
    > John
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 10:22:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
    > <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote:
    >
    >>Not sure what's up with the update, I'm checking into that. However, the
    >>update performs a relatively simple registry hack that you can do
    >>yourself.
    >>Note the following paragraph from MS05-037 (the pertaining Security
    >>Bulletin):
    >>
    >>------------------------------------------------------
    >>Does this update contain any changes to functionality?
    >>No. Since the JView Profiler COM object was not designed to be accessed
    >>through Internet Explorer, this update sets the kill bit for the JView
    >>Profiler (Javaprxy.dll) COM object. To help protect customers who have
    >>this
    >>object installed, this update prevents it from being instantiated in
    >>Internet Explorer. For more information about kill bits, see Microsoft
    >>Knowledge Base Article 240797. The class identifier (CLSID) for this
    >>object
    >>is '03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'.
    >>------------------------------------------------------
    >>
    >>In short: Open REGEDIT and navigate to HKLM\Software\Internet
    >>Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility. Look at the CLSID keys under that for a
    >>key
    >>named "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'" If that key doesn't exist,
    >>create it. In that key, create a new DWORD named "Compatibility Flags",
    >>make
    >>the value 400.
    >>
    >>Should result in a value that looks like this: 0x000000400 (1024)
    >
  12. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Sorry, I got the history wrong in your case. Somehow thought you had IE
    5.01. Anyway, the end-point is that you *do* need to set the kill-bit, and
    the patch doesn't seem to be available. So do it manually.

    Did I understand you correctly? Did you previously see this patch listed at
    WU? Because the response from MS is to quote the following paragraph from
    the Security Bulletin:

    "Note Critical security updates for these operating systems may not
    be available at the same time as the other security updates that
    are included with this security bulletin. They will be made available as
    soon as possible following the release. When these security updates are
    available, you will be able to download them only from the Windows
    Update Web site."

    That would indicate that the patch has not yet been posted for Win9x
    systems.

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS-MVP Shell/User


    "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
    news:%23EG1q4PpFHA.708@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    > I've punted the issue upstairs. We'll see what they say. Regardless of
    > whether it applies to your system or not, the patch *should_be* available
    > at WU Catalog.
    >
    > Your logic is faulty. The patch isn't offered for versions of IE earlier
    > than 5.5 because those versions simply aren't supported any longer.
    > Haven't been for some time. That does *not* mean that earlier versions
    > aren't vulnerable, particularly earlier versions of IE5 (not sure about
    > IE4.) I would bet that your IE *is* vulnerable, and in any case, the
    > kill-bit fix I suggested won't harm your installation. The Active-X
    > control involved isn't supposed to be used in IE, anyway. This issue is a
    > common one--Active-X controls that aren't meant to be accessed by IE but
    > manage to be hooked by malware into doing so, with all the security issues
    > that suggests. Setting the kill-bit is the common solution. Pretty much
    > that entire ActiveX Compatibility key of the Registry consists of
    > kill-bits. A similar issue is currently top news in security circles
    > regarding MSDDS.DLL (an Office 2000 file), and the same solution is
    > suggested.
    >
    > As for KB891711 (MS05-002), that *did* have problems when it was first
    > issued. A replacement patch was issued within a short time and no longer
    > causes any problems that I'm aware of. You *should* install KB891711
    > without delay.
    >
    > --
    > Gary S. Terhune
    > MS-MVP Shell/User
    >
    > "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    > news:29dcg1ditrlneoat46k4tci2d0nol6rupr@4ax.com...
    >> Thanks for responding, Gary.
    >>
    >> I'm using Windows 98SE with IE SP2 and now I'm not sure whether it
    >> applies to me. But a month ago I'm sure I saw the update at the
    >> Windows Update site as applying to me. I had made a note of it for a
    >> later update. Today, however, the update was no longer there implying,
    >> to me, that I may not need it afterall.
    >>
    >> Below is what MS05-037 says under "Affected Components" at
    >> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms05-037.mspx
    >> It reads in part:
    >>
    >> "Internet Explorer 5.5 Service Pack 2 on Microsoft Windows Millennium
    >> Edition -- Review the FAQ section of this bulletin for details about
    >> these operating systems."
    >>
    >> "Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 on Microsoft Windows 98, on
    >> Microsoft Windows 98 SE or on Microsoft Windows Millennium Edition
    >> Review the FAQ section of this bulletin for details about these
    >> operating systems."
    >>
    >> From the above, seems that I may not need the update since I'm using
    >> Win 98 SE with IE5.5. Am I correct in this?
    >>
    >> I have all of the critical updates except the above and the Security
    >> Update 891711 (MS05-002), which I've read that this latter may create
    >> problems.
    >>
    >> Again, thanks for responding.
    >>
    >> John
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 10:22:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
    >> <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Not sure what's up with the update, I'm checking into that. However, the
    >>>update performs a relatively simple registry hack that you can do
    >>>yourself.
    >>>Note the following paragraph from MS05-037 (the pertaining Security
    >>>Bulletin):
    >>>
    >>>------------------------------------------------------
    >>>Does this update contain any changes to functionality?
    >>>No. Since the JView Profiler COM object was not designed to be accessed
    >>>through Internet Explorer, this update sets the kill bit for the JView
    >>>Profiler (Javaprxy.dll) COM object. To help protect customers who have
    >>>this
    >>>object installed, this update prevents it from being instantiated in
    >>>Internet Explorer. For more information about kill bits, see Microsoft
    >>>Knowledge Base Article 240797. The class identifier (CLSID) for this
    >>>object
    >>>is '03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'.
    >>>------------------------------------------------------
    >>>
    >>>In short: Open REGEDIT and navigate to HKLM\Software\Internet
    >>>Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility. Look at the CLSID keys under that for a
    >>>key
    >>>named "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'" If that key doesn't exist,
    >>>create it. In that key, create a new DWORD named "Compatibility Flags",
    >>>make
    >>>the value 400.
    >>>
    >>>Should result in a value that looks like this: 0x000000400 (1024)
    >>
    >
    >
  13. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    I saw that myself, but was able to look for Class Identifier
    "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'", which was not there.

    On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 15:32:28 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:

    >| In short: Open REGEDIT and navigate to HKLM\Software\Internet
    >| Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility.
    >
    >HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    >Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}
    >Compatibility Flags 0x00000400 (1024) <<DWORD Value
    >
    >Without "Microsoft", all is lost.
  14. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Good thinking, & that's how I did it too from Terhune's posting & the
    article. Well, we know you didn't get the update, then, which provides
    the kill bit...

    REGEDIT4

    [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    "Compatibility Flags"=dword:00000400

    ...., BUT what about this key & sub-key, do you have it...?...

    REGEDIT4

    [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    @="JVIEW Profiler"

    [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\InprocSe
    rver32]
    @="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    "ThreadingModel"="Both"


    --
    Thanks or Good Luck,
    There may be humor in this post, and,
    Naturally, you will not sue,
    should things get worse after this,
    PCR
    pcrrcp@netzero.net
    "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    news:mhfcg1pkho59bhcu7lt7cgs7hj4ns6ket8@4ax.com...
    | I saw that myself, but was able to look for Class Identifier
    | "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'", which was not there.
    |
    | On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 15:32:28 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:
    |
    | >| In short: Open REGEDIT and navigate to HKLM\Software\Internet
    | >| Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility.
    | >
    | >HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    | >Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}
    | >Compatibility Flags 0x00000400 (1024) <<DWORD Value
    | >
    | >Without "Microsoft", all is lost.
    |
  15. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    He should have those. Anyone with a Java VM installed would probably have
    them. Those aren't the problem. The Active-X is perfectly safe when used as
    intended. It's when it gets used in IE that problems occur. Thus, we use the
    already-discussed solution to prevent IE, specifically, from using the
    Active-X control.

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS-MVP Shell/User

    "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
    news:%23JDHpURpFHA.1148@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    > ..., BUT what about this key & sub-key, do you have it...?...
    >
    > REGEDIT4
    >
    > [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    > @="JVIEW Profiler"
    >
    > [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\InprocSe
    > rver32]
    > @="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    > "ThreadingModel"="Both"
    >
  16. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    OK, thanks. I was just wondering why that other one wouldn't come up in
    his Registry search. Perhaps it did, & he only meant the kill bit failed
    to show. His wording was over-kill, then...

    "I saw that myself, but was able to look for Class Identifier
    "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'", which was not there."

    OOOPS! Just me, you've got a single quote in there before the second
    double quote! Try that search again without it!


    --
    Thanks or Good Luck,
    There may be humor in this post, and,
    Naturally, you will not sue,
    should things get worse after this,
    PCR
    pcrrcp@netzero.net
    "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
    news:OFWTzcRpFHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    | He should have those. Anyone with a Java VM installed would probably
    have
    | them. Those aren't the problem. The Active-X is perfectly safe when
    used as
    | intended. It's when it gets used in IE that problems occur. Thus, we
    use the
    | already-discussed solution to prevent IE, specifically, from using the
    | Active-X control.
    |
    | --
    | Gary S. Terhune
    | MS-MVP Shell/User
    |
    | "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
    | news:%23JDHpURpFHA.1148@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    | > ..., BUT what about this key & sub-key, do you have it...?...
    | >
    | > REGEDIT4
    | >
    | > [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    | > @="JVIEW Profiler"
    | >
    | >
    [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\InprocSe
    | > rver32]
    | > @="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    | > "ThreadingModel"="Both"
    | >
    |
    |
  17. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Well, it is of course possible that JustMe doesn't have Java VM installed,
    <s>.

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS-MVP Shell/User

    "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
    news:uu3M2qRpFHA.320@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    > OK, thanks. I was just wondering why that other one wouldn't come up in
    > his Registry search. Perhaps it did, & he only meant the kill bit failed
    > to show. His wording was over-kill, then...
    >
    > "I saw that myself, but was able to look for Class Identifier
    > "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'", which was not there."
    >
    > OOOPS! Just me, you've got a single quote in there before the second
    > double quote! Try that search again without it!
    >
    >
    > --
    > Thanks or Good Luck,
    > There may be humor in this post, and,
    > Naturally, you will not sue,
    > should things get worse after this,
    > PCR
    > pcrrcp@netzero.net
    > "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
    > news:OFWTzcRpFHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    > | He should have those. Anyone with a Java VM installed would probably
    > have
    > | them. Those aren't the problem. The Active-X is perfectly safe when
    > used as
    > | intended. It's when it gets used in IE that problems occur. Thus, we
    > use the
    > | already-discussed solution to prevent IE, specifically, from using the
    > | Active-X control.
    > |
    > | --
    > | Gary S. Terhune
    > | MS-MVP Shell/User
    > |
    > | "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
    > | news:%23JDHpURpFHA.1148@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    > | > ..., BUT what about this key & sub-key, do you have it...?...
    > | >
    > | > REGEDIT4
    > | >
    > | > [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    > | > @="JVIEW Profiler"
    > | >
    > | >
    > [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\InprocSe
    > | > rver32]
    > | > @="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    > | > "ThreadingModel"="Both"
    > | >
    > |
    > |
    >
    >
  18. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 15:33:02 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:

    >If you actually have it, it will show up at...
    >
    >(1) IE6, Help, About...
    >SP1, Q313829, Q328970, Q328389, Q324929, Q810847, Q813951, Q816506,
    >Q813489, Q330994, Q818529, Q822925, Q828750, Q824145, Q832894,
    >Q837009, Q831167, Q823353, Q867801, Q833989, Q834707, Q889293, Q867282,
    >Q891781, Q890923, Q883939, Q903235, & Q896727.

    Not there.
    >
    >(2) "Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs"...
    > (a) Internet Explorer Q896727
    > (was Q883939, Q890923, Q891781, Q889293, Q834707, Q867801,
    > Q831167, Q832894, Q824145, Q828750, Q822925, Q818529)
    > (b) Internet Explorer Q903235 (was Q883939).
    >

    Not in Add/Remove either.

    >I took it when offered. Now, I cannot even see it in the Catalog...
    >http://v4.windowsupdate.microsoft.com/catalog/en/default.asp
    >...but, go look for yourself.
    >
    Also, not in Catalog

    >Here it is from my WU folder. (I take them into there, although I always
    >let the site do it's auto-download/install.)...

    My WUpdate folder in C:\ is empty. The one in D: drive got wiped when
    D: drive was replaced a month ago due to problems.

    Is there a file where it shows all my Windows Updates, besided lokking
    in the Catalog? And how do you copy the updates from the Help->About
    Internet Explorer and the Add/Remove listing.

    >http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-037.mspx
    >...BUT looks like it says you must get it from the Windows Update site.
    >
    >I think this is the Registry key Terhune means to say...
    >
    >HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    >Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}
    >Compatibility Flags 0x00000400 (1024) <<DWORD Value
    >
    >...Do you have it?
  19. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    It seems you really don't have it, then. I think Terhune will talk you
    through it or send it to you. Check for that other Registry key, though,
    that I posted elsewhere. It should have come up in your search for...
    "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0".


    --
    Thanks or Good Luck,
    There may be humor in this post, and,
    Naturally, you will not sue,
    should things get worse after this,
    PCR
    pcrrcp@netzero.net
    "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    news:nvfcg11f6u0dvrhrt87tlhp8d7pnutob5v@4ax.com...
    | On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 15:33:02 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:
    |
    | >If you actually have it, it will show up at...
    | >
    | >(1) IE6, Help, About...
    | >SP1, Q313829, Q328970, Q328389, Q324929, Q810847, Q813951, Q816506,
    | >Q813489, Q330994, Q818529, Q822925, Q828750, Q824145, Q832894,
    | >Q837009, Q831167, Q823353, Q867801, Q833989, Q834707, Q889293,
    Q867282,
    | >Q891781, Q890923, Q883939, Q903235, & Q896727.
    |
    | Not there.
    | >
    | >(2) "Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs"...
    | > (a) Internet Explorer Q896727
    | > (was Q883939, Q890923, Q891781, Q889293, Q834707, Q867801,
    | > Q831167, Q832894, Q824145, Q828750, Q822925, Q818529)
    | > (b) Internet Explorer Q903235 (was Q883939).
    | >
    |
    | Not in Add/Remove either.
    |
    | >I took it when offered. Now, I cannot even see it in the Catalog...
    | >http://v4.windowsupdate.microsoft.com/catalog/en/default.asp
    | >...but, go look for yourself.
    | >
    | Also, not in Catalog
    |
    | >Here it is from my WU folder. (I take them into there, although I
    always
    | >let the site do it's auto-download/install.)...
    |
    | My WUpdate folder in C:\ is empty. The one in D: drive got wiped when
    | D: drive was replaced a month ago due to problems.
    |
    | Is there a file where it shows all my Windows Updates, besided lokking
    | in the Catalog? And how do you copy the updates from the Help->About
    | Internet Explorer and the Add/Remove listing.
    |
    | >http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-037.mspx
    | >...BUT looks like it says you must get it from the Windows Update
    site.
    | >
    | >I think this is the Registry key Terhune means to say...
    | >
    | >HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    | >Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}
    | >Compatibility Flags 0x00000400 (1024) <<DWORD Value
    | >
    | >...Do you have it?
    |
  20. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Yea, better check again! I think you put a single quote at the end first
    time...

    "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    news:mhfcg1pkho59bhcu7lt7cgs7hj4ns6ket8@4ax.com...
    | I saw that myself, but was able to look for Class Identifier
    | "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'", which was not there.


    --
    Thanks or Good Luck,
    There may be humor in this post, and,
    Naturally, you will not sue,
    should things get worse after this,
    PCR
    pcrrcp@netzero.net
    "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
    news:ucrNVdRpFHA.1048@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    | It seems you really don't have it, then. I think Terhune will talk you
    | through it or send it to you. Check for that other Registry key,
    though,
    | that I posted elsewhere. It should have come up in your search for...
    | "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0".
    |
    |
    | --
    | Thanks or Good Luck,
    | There may be humor in this post, and,
    | Naturally, you will not sue,
    | should things get worse after this,
    | PCR
    | pcrrcp@netzero.net
    | "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    | news:nvfcg11f6u0dvrhrt87tlhp8d7pnutob5v@4ax.com...
    | | On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 15:33:02 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net>
    wrote:
    | |
    | | >If you actually have it, it will show up at...
    | | >
    | | >(1) IE6, Help, About...
    | | >SP1, Q313829, Q328970, Q328389, Q324929, Q810847, Q813951, Q816506,
    | | >Q813489, Q330994, Q818529, Q822925, Q828750, Q824145, Q832894,
    | | >Q837009, Q831167, Q823353, Q867801, Q833989, Q834707, Q889293,
    | Q867282,
    | | >Q891781, Q890923, Q883939, Q903235, & Q896727.
    | |
    | | Not there.
    | | >
    | | >(2) "Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs"...
    | | > (a) Internet Explorer Q896727
    | | > (was Q883939, Q890923, Q891781, Q889293, Q834707, Q867801,
    | | > Q831167, Q832894, Q824145, Q828750, Q822925, Q818529)
    | | > (b) Internet Explorer Q903235 (was Q883939).
    | | >
    | |
    | | Not in Add/Remove either.
    | |
    | | >I took it when offered. Now, I cannot even see it in the Catalog...
    | | >http://v4.windowsupdate.microsoft.com/catalog/en/default.asp
    | | >...but, go look for yourself.
    | | >
    | | Also, not in Catalog
    | |
    | | >Here it is from my WU folder. (I take them into there, although I
    | always
    | | >let the site do it's auto-download/install.)...
    | |
    | | My WUpdate folder in C:\ is empty. The one in D: drive got wiped
    when
    | | D: drive was replaced a month ago due to problems.
    | |
    | | Is there a file where it shows all my Windows Updates, besided
    lokking
    | | in the Catalog? And how do you copy the updates from the Help->About
    | | Internet Explorer and the Add/Remove listing.
    | |
    | | >http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-037.mspx
    | | >...BUT looks like it says you must get it from the Windows Update
    | site.
    | | >
    | | >I think this is the Registry key Terhune means to say...
    | | >
    | | >HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    | | >Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}
    | | >Compatibility Flags 0x00000400 (1024) <<DWORD Value
    | | >
    | | >...Do you have it?
    | |
    |
    |
  21. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 13:39:59 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
    <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote:

    >I've punted the issue upstairs. We'll see what they say. Regardless of
    >whether it applies to your system or not, the patch *should_be* available at
    >WU Catalog.
    >
    >Your logic is faulty. The patch isn't offered for versions of IE earlier
    >than 5.5 because those versions simply aren't supported any longer. Haven't
    >been for some time. That does *not* mean that earlier versions aren't
    >vulnerable, particularly earlier versions of IE5 (not sure about IE4.) I
    >would bet that your IE *is* vulnerable, and in any case, the kill-bit fix I
    >suggested won't harm your installation. The Active-X control involved isn't
    >supposed to be used in IE, anyway. This issue is a common one--Active-X
    >controls that aren't meant to be accessed by IE but manage to be hooked by
    >malware into doing so, with all the security issues that suggests. Setting
    >the kill-bit is the common solution. Pretty much that entire ActiveX
    >Compatibility key of the Registry consists of kill-bits. A similar issue is
    >currently top news in security circles regarding MSDDS.DLL (an Office 2000
    >file), and the same solution is suggested.
    >
    >As for KB891711 (MS05-002), that *did* have problems when it was first
    >issued. A replacement patch was issued within a short time and no longer
    >causes any problems that I'm aware of. You *should* install KB891711 without
    >delay.


    KB891711 just updated.

    Thanks.

    Now WU shows that I need only the following two:

    Microsoft GDI+ Detection Tool (KB873374)
    Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 (Windows 98, Windows Me)*

    IE SP 1 I don't need as I have IE5.5 SP2. GDI+ Detection Tool I do not
    understand what this is. :)

    Still KB903235 is not in WU or in the Catalog.

    I'm afraid to touch the Registry and would rather do it through WU.
    Perhaps as a last resort I'll do it as you suggested. But, like I
    said, I'm afraid that I'll muck up things here. :) Have spent too much
    money on this old system.

    Again, thanks to all.
  22. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    I'd be glad to send you a REG file to do the job. Email me at
    grystnews@mvps.org

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS-MVP Shell/User

    "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    news:u0jcg1psp1nohkb9iitfvhgbtq2ujqk26l@4ax.com...
    > On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 13:39:59 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
    > <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote:
    >
    >>I've punted the issue upstairs. We'll see what they say. Regardless of
    >>whether it applies to your system or not, the patch *should_be* available
    >>at
    >>WU Catalog.
    >>
    >>Your logic is faulty. The patch isn't offered for versions of IE earlier
    >>than 5.5 because those versions simply aren't supported any longer.
    >>Haven't
    >>been for some time. That does *not* mean that earlier versions aren't
    >>vulnerable, particularly earlier versions of IE5 (not sure about IE4.) I
    >>would bet that your IE *is* vulnerable, and in any case, the kill-bit fix
    >>I
    >>suggested won't harm your installation. The Active-X control involved
    >>isn't
    >>supposed to be used in IE, anyway. This issue is a common one--Active-X
    >>controls that aren't meant to be accessed by IE but manage to be hooked by
    >>malware into doing so, with all the security issues that suggests. Setting
    >>the kill-bit is the common solution. Pretty much that entire ActiveX
    >>Compatibility key of the Registry consists of kill-bits. A similar issue
    >>is
    >>currently top news in security circles regarding MSDDS.DLL (an Office 2000
    >>file), and the same solution is suggested.
    >>
    >>As for KB891711 (MS05-002), that *did* have problems when it was first
    >>issued. A replacement patch was issued within a short time and no longer
    >>causes any problems that I'm aware of. You *should* install KB891711
    >>without
    >>delay.
    >
    >
    > KB891711 just updated.
    >
    > Thanks.
    >
    > Now WU shows that I need only the following two:
    >
    > Microsoft GDI+ Detection Tool (KB873374)
    > Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 (Windows 98, Windows Me)*
    >
    > IE SP 1 I don't need as I have IE5.5 SP2. GDI+ Detection Tool I do not
    > understand what this is. :)
    >
    > Still KB903235 is not in WU or in the Catalog.
    >
    > I'm afraid to touch the Registry and would rather do it through WU.
    > Perhaps as a last resort I'll do it as you suggested. But, like I
    > said, I'm afraid that I'll muck up things here. :) Have spent too much
    > money on this old system.
    >
    > Again, thanks to all.
  23. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:18:48 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
    <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote:

    >Did I understand you correctly? Did you previously see this patch listed at
    >WU?

    Gary, I have a notation in front of me dated 7/19/05. That is a month
    ago today. I usually wait for WU to take me to the Windows Update site
    automatically each month. Oftentime I do not do the updates until I
    read a little more about them in this NG.

    The notation that I have is about KB903235, KB888113 and KB891711.
    I have also written down additional details about each of the three
    KBs. Seems that I could only have gotten this info from the WU site.
    Notice the 7/19/05 date, which corresponds with today's, 8/19/05
    automatic update one month later. I only go to the WU site when
    connected automatically.

    What my note above says is that as of 7/19/05 I hadn't updated the
    above three.

    Today I was again connected to WU automatically upon clicking on the
    IE browser. Went back to my notes and all 3 of the above updates were
    there, except for KB903235. Updated the KB888113 earlier today and,
    upon your advise, just updated the 891711.

    John
  24. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Well, the other possibility is that it was included in a subsequent Roll-up
    update and removed as a stand-alone. Haven't looked into that one.

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS-MVP Shell/User

    "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    news:jfjcg1d7966ntn1k5f9ltuq1smm4h2v695@4ax.com...
    > On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:18:48 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
    > <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote:
    >
    >>Did I understand you correctly? Did you previously see this patch listed
    >>at
    >>WU?
    >
    > Gary, I have a notation in front of me dated 7/19/05. That is a month
    > ago today. I usually wait for WU to take me to the Windows Update site
    > automatically each month. Oftentime I do not do the updates until I
    > read a little more about them in this NG.
    >
    > The notation that I have is about KB903235, KB888113 and KB891711.
    > I have also written down additional details about each of the three
    > KBs. Seems that I could only have gotten this info from the WU site.
    > Notice the 7/19/05 date, which corresponds with today's, 8/19/05
    > automatic update one month later. I only go to the WU site when
    > connected automatically.
    >
    > What my note above says is that as of 7/19/05 I hadn't updated the
    > above three.
    >
    > Today I was again connected to WU automatically upon clicking on the
    > IE browser. Went back to my notes and all 3 of the above updates were
    > there, except for KB903235. Updated the KB888113 earlier today and,
    > upon your advise, just updated the 891711.
    >
    > John
    >
    >
  25. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Did you get my email with my email address?

    On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:58:39 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
    <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote:

    >Well, the other possibility is that it was included in a subsequent Roll-up
    >update and removed as a stand-alone. Haven't looked into that one.
    >
    >--
    >Gary S. Terhune
    >MS-MVP Shell/User
  26. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Yup. Check your inbox.

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS-MVP Shell/User


    "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    news:t2mcg1dsio149jtcm973qatnhg6ick2503@4ax.com...
    > Did you get my email with my email address?
    >
    > On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:58:39 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
    > <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote:
    >
    >>Well, the other possibility is that it was included in a subsequent
    >>Roll-up
    >>update and removed as a stand-alone. Haven't looked into that one.
    >>
    >>--
    >>Gary S. Terhune
    >>MS-MVP Shell/User
    >
  27. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Without wading thru this entire thread, did you check *your* inbox, GAry?
    <w>

    Gary S. Terhune wrote:
    > Yup. Check your inbox.
    >
    >
    > "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    > news:t2mcg1dsio149jtcm973qatnhg6ick2503@4ax.com...
    > > Did you get my email with my email address?
    > >
    > > On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:58:39 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
    > > <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote:
    > >
    > > > Well, the other possibility is that it was included in a subsequent
    > > > Roll-up
    > > > update and removed as a stand-alone. Haven't looked into that one.
    > > >
    > > > --
    > > > Gary S. Terhune
    > > > MS-MVP Shell/User
  28. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Um, yeah... Assuming you're talking about the MS Download you also posted
    elsewhere in this thread, I'm aware of the patch for machines running on
    IE6, but it doesn't apply to this particular thread since the OP is running
    5.5.

    Tell the truth, I'm a bit perplexed. What solution could possibly exist that
    deals with issues like this one (and the new MSDDS alert and all the other
    almost identical issues over the last few years) that is any better than
    simply setting a kill-bit? Why would such a solution be more complicated
    than a simple REG hack that works on every possible version of Windows
    and/or IE. Seems to me that it should be *default* to set the IE Active-X
    Compatibility kill bit for any such control that is not intended to be
    scripted in IE. Why all this extra-complicated dancing around? Do the
    official Patches for these issues actually get rid of the vulnerability in
    the COM object? Or do they just set the kill-bit with more flourish?

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS-MVP Shell/User

    "PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
    news:%23zQWDFTpFHA.1048@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > Without wading thru this entire thread, did you check *your* inbox, GAry?
    > <w>
    >
    > Gary S. Terhune wrote:
    >> Yup. Check your inbox.
    >>
    >>
    >> "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    >> news:t2mcg1dsio149jtcm973qatnhg6ick2503@4ax.com...
    >> > Did you get my email with my email address?
    >> >
    >> > On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:58:39 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
    >> > <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote:
    >> >
    >> > > Well, the other possibility is that it was included in a subsequent
    >> > > Roll-up
    >> > > update and removed as a stand-alone. Haven't looked into that one.
    >> > >
    >> > > --
    >> > > Gary S. Terhune
    >> > > MS-MVP Shell/User
    >
  29. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    *If_and_only_if* IE6 SP1 is installed on the Win98 machine:

    Download details: Security Update for JView Profiler (KB903235):
    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=2a506c16-01ef-4060-bcf8-6993c55840a9&DisplayLang=en
    --
    ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
    MS MVP-Windows (IE/OE, Shell/User, Security), AH-VSOP

    Just me wrote:
    > I had taken note on 7/19/05 of this critical update, which I was going
    > to update later on. Today this critical update is no longer at the
    > Windows Update site. Checked my installed updates, in case I had
    > updated it but forgot about it, but the update is no longer there.
    >
    > Below is the note I had written down:
    >
    > Security Update for JView Profiler (KB903235), 105 kb.
    > MS05-037
    > Issued: July 12, 2005
    > Version: 1.0
    > JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll)
    > This update sets the "kill Bit" for JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll).
    >
    > My question: Is this ciritcal update for Windows 98 SE, and if so,
    > where can it be updated from?
    >
    > Thanks to all for your help.
  30. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 15:09:51 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
    <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote:

    >Yup. Check your inbox.

    Thanks.

    Done.

    John
  31. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    OK, forget it. (Cleared up elsewhere in this thread.)

    --
    Thanks or Good Luck,
    There may be humor in this post, and,
    Naturally, you will not sue,
    should things get worse after this,
    PCR
    pcrrcp@netzero.net
    "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
    news:e$Yvo2RpFHA.1372@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    | Yea, better check again! I think you put a single quote at the end
    first
    | time...
    |
    | "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    | news:mhfcg1pkho59bhcu7lt7cgs7hj4ns6ket8@4ax.com...
    | | I saw that myself, but was able to look for Class Identifier
    | | "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'", which was not there.
  32. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 19:24:34 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:

    >REGEDIT4
    >
    >[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    >Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    >"Compatibility Flags"=dword:00000400
    >
    >..., BUT what about this key & sub-key, do you have it...?...
    >
    >REGEDIT4
    >
    >[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    >@="JVIEW Profiler"

    [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    @="JVIEW Profiler"

    >[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\InprocSe
    >rver32]
    >@="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    >"ThreadingModel"="Both"

    [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\InprocServer32]
    @="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    "ThreadingModel"="Both"

    I think they're the same.

    Sorry for posting them. Could have said YES to both. Just wanted to
    look at them both so I could compare them. Eyesight is beginning to
    fail.
  33. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    They're the same.

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS-MVP Shell/User

    "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    news:q63dg15sctckk7bovlruulj7pboofa46aq@4ax.com...
    > On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 19:24:34 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:
    >
    >>REGEDIT4
    >>
    >>[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    >>Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    >>"Compatibility Flags"=dword:00000400
    >>
    >>..., BUT what about this key & sub-key, do you have it...?...
    >>
    >>REGEDIT4
    >>
    >>[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    >>@="JVIEW Profiler"
    >
    > [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    > @="JVIEW Profiler"
    >
    >>[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\InprocSe
    >>rver32]
    >>@="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    >>"ThreadingModel"="Both"
    >
    > [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\InprocServer32]
    > @="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    > "ThreadingModel"="Both"
    >
    > I think they're the same.
    >
    > Sorry for posting them. Could have said YES to both. Just wanted to
    > look at them both so I could compare them. Eyesight is beginning to
    > fail.
    >
  34. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 20:04:18 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:

    >OK, thanks. I was just wondering why that other one wouldn't come up in
    >his Registry search. Perhaps it did, & he only meant the kill bit failed
    >to show. His wording was over-kill, then...
    >
    >"I saw that myself, but was able to look for Class Identifier
    >"03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'", which was not there."
    >

    Meant that I, too, noticed the missing word "Microsoft" in
    HKLM\Software\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility and was able to
    navigate to the CLSIDs and find out that
    "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0" was not there.

    >OOOPS! Just me, you've got a single quote in there before the second
    >double quote! Try that search again without it!
  35. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Well, OK, I see from this & elsewhere you do have the Java keys, just
    not the kill bit key. Let me see whether you've spoken to Chauvin yet...
    no! Why? He has a site, which Bear has also posted now, where you can
    get KB903235.

    HOWEVER, by Chuavin's tracking, this too will give you that same kill
    bit, & is why KB903235 has been pulled. Go take this instead from
    Windows Update...

    Microsoft Security Bulletin MS05-038
    Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer (896727)
    Issued: August 9, 2005


    --
    Thanks or Good Luck,
    There may be humor in this post, and,
    Naturally, you will not sue,
    should things get worse after this,
    PCR
    pcrrcp@netzero.net
    "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    news:ic3dg15kak3rl6935obsotcj4artcfchvm@4ax.com...
    | On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 20:04:18 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:
    |
    | >OK, thanks. I was just wondering why that other one wouldn't come up
    in
    | >his Registry search. Perhaps it did, & he only meant the kill bit
    failed
    | >to show. His wording was over-kill, then...
    | >
    | >"I saw that myself, but was able to look for Class Identifier
    | >"03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0'", which was not there."
    | >
    |
    | Meant that I, too, noticed the missing word "Microsoft" in
    | HKLM\Software\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility and was able to
    | navigate to the CLSIDs and find out that
    | "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0" was not there.
    |
    | >OOOPS! Just me, you've got a single quote in there before the second
    | >double quote! Try that search again without it!
    |
  36. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    PCR,

    just to clear things up.

    I did not do a search for the key Terhune had given me. Instead, I
    navigated to the CLSIDs, taking into account of the missing
    "Microsoft" and "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0" was NOT the key
    among them.

    Had I searched for the actual key, I would have found the other two in
    HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT.

    On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 01:50:59 GMT, Just me <Justme489@myLink.com>
    wrote:

    >On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 19:24:34 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:
    >
    >>REGEDIT4
    >>
    >>[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    >>Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    >>"Compatibility Flags"=dword:00000400
    >>
    >>..., BUT what about this key & sub-key, do you have it...?...
    >>
    >>REGEDIT4
    >>
    >>[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    >>@="JVIEW Profiler"
    >
    >[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    >@="JVIEW Profiler"
    >
    >>[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\InprocSe
    >>rver32]
    >>@="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    >>"ThreadingModel"="Both"
    >
    >[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\InprocServer32]
    >@="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    >"ThreadingModel"="Both"
    >
    >I think they're the same.
    >
    >Sorry for posting them. Could have said YES to both. Just wanted to
    >look at them both so I could compare them. Eyesight is beginning to
    >fail.
  37. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    OK, then.

    --
    Thanks or Good Luck,
    There may be humor in this post, and,
    Naturally, you will not sue,
    should things get worse after this,
    PCR
    pcrrcp@netzero.net
    "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    news:l94dg15nf5tf3cjfse8j7qt4r60p72so3t@4ax.com...
    | PCR,
    |
    | just to clear things up.
    |
    | I did not do a search for the key Terhune had given me. Instead, I
    | navigated to the CLSIDs, taking into account of the missing
    | "Microsoft" and "03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0" was NOT the key
    | among them.
    |
    | Had I searched for the actual key, I would have found the other two in
    | HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT.
    |
    | On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 01:50:59 GMT, Just me <Justme489@myLink.com>
    | wrote:
    |
    | >On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 19:24:34 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:
    | >
    | >>REGEDIT4
    | >>
    | >>[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    | >>Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    | >>"Compatibility Flags"=dword:00000400
    | >>
    | >>..., BUT what about this key & sub-key, do you have it...?...
    | >>
    | >>REGEDIT4
    | >>
    | >>[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    | >>@="JVIEW Profiler"
    | >
    | >[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    | >@="JVIEW Profiler"
    | >
    |
    >>[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\Inproc
    Se
    | >>rver32]
    | >>@="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    | >>"ThreadingModel"="Both"
    | >
    |
    >[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\InprocS
    erver32]
    | >@="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    | >"ThreadingModel"="Both"
    | >
    | >I think they're the same.
    | >
    | >Sorry for posting them. Could have said YES to both. Just wanted to
    | >look at them both so I could compare them. Eyesight is beginning to
    | >fail.
    |
  38. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    PCR wrote:
    > Seems like that should explain it. But Just me can't find that CLSID in
    > his Registry...
    > 03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0
    >
    > I'm beginning to wonder. What about the following? It doesn't come in
    > with the kill bit, does it...?...
    >
    > REGEDIT4
    >
    > [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    > @="JVIEW Profiler"
    >
    > [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\InprocSe
    > rver32]
    > @="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    > "ThreadingModel"="Both"

    I don't track Root but rather Local of course, but for historical sake, when one first
    installs the Java v3810 is what originally installs that CLSID portion of the key
    "{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}" you're asking about, but v3810
    is what first added this:

    [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\CLASSES\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\InprocServer32]
    @="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    "ThreadingModel"="Both"

    [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\CLASSES\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    @="JVIEW Profiler"

    ...and so then it's only when one installs the MS05-038 896727 Cumulative
    for IE6 (or previous MS05-037 not available now) is when that same CLSID
    portion reference is additionally added elsewhere to ActiveX Compatibility
    which adds this:

    [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    "Compatibility Flags"=dword:00000400

    Rick


    >
    >
    > --
    > Thanks or Good Luck,
    > There may be humor in this post, and,
    > Naturally, you will not sue,
    > should things get worse after this,
    > PCR
    > pcrrcp@netzero.net
    > "Rick Chauvin" <justask@nospamz.com> wrote in message
    > news:Os$vDNQpFHA.320@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    >| Ah, the reason why they pulled it as I look through my software install
    >| tracker history is that this last W98SE - MS05-038 896727 Cumulative
    >| Security Update for IE6 also sets that:
    >| HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    >| Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}
    >| Compatibility Flags 0x00000400
    >| already, along with "48" other ActiveX Compatibility keys too!
    >| ...anyway, I imagine the new IE supercedes that KB903235 and so is why
    >| they pulled it.
    >|
    >| Rick
    >|
    >|
    >| Rick Chauvin wrote:
    >| > It looks like to me you can download it here as per:
    >| >
    >| > System Requirements
    >| > This update applies to Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 (SP1) with
    >| > the following operating systems:
    >| > Windows XP SP1
    >| > Windows 2000 SP4
    >| > Windows 98
    >| > Windows 98SE
    >| > Windows Millennium
    >| >
    >|
    >
    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=2A506C16-01EF-4060-BCF8-6993C55840A9&displaylang=en
    >| >
    >| > Rick
    >| >
    >| >
    >| >
    >| > Just me wrote:
    >| >> I had taken note on 7/19/05 of this critical update, which I was
    >| >> going to update later on. Today this critical update is no longer at
    >| >> the Windows Update site. Checked my installed updates, in case I had
    >| >> updated it but forgot about it, but the update is no longer there.
    >| >>
    >| >> Below is the note I had written down:
    >| >>
    >| >> Security Update for JView Profiler (KB903235), 105 kb.
    >| >> MS05-037
    >| >> Issued: July 12, 2005
    >| >> Version: 1.0
    >| >> JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll)
    >| >> This update sets the "kill Bit" for JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll).
    >| >>
    >| >> My question: Is this ciritcal update for Windows 98 SE, and if so,
    >| >> where can it be updated from?
    >| >>
    >| >> Thanks to all for your help.
  39. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    OK. I was discombobulated by a misunderstanding, thinking he didn't have
    the CLSID at all. Right, as Terhune said, if Java is present, the CLSID
    is there. So, he needs... MS05-038 896727... really, & that should be
    the end of it. OK, thanks.


    --
    Thanks or Good Luck,
    There may be humor in this post, and,
    Naturally, you will not sue,
    should things get worse after this,
    PCR
    pcrrcp@netzero.net
    "Rick Chauvin" <justask@nospamz.com> wrote in message
    news:%2362vCoYpFHA.736@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    | PCR wrote:
    | > Seems like that should explain it. But Just me can't find that CLSID
    in
    | > his Registry...
    | > 03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0
    | >
    | > I'm beginning to wonder. What about the following? It doesn't come
    in
    | > with the kill bit, does it...?...
    | >
    | > REGEDIT4
    | >
    | > [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    | > @="JVIEW Profiler"
    | >
    | >
    [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\InprocSe
    | > rver32]
    | > @="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    | > "ThreadingModel"="Both"
    |
    | I don't track Root but rather Local of course, but for historical
    sake, when one first
    | installs the Java v3810 is what originally installs that CLSID portion
    of the key
    | "{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}" you're asking about, but
    v3810
    | is what first added this:
    |
    |
    [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\CLASSES\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-0060
    08039BF0}\InprocServer32]
    | @="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    | "ThreadingModel"="Both"
    |
    |
    [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\CLASSES\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-0060
    08039BF0}]
    | @="JVIEW Profiler"
    |
    | ..and so then it's only when one installs the MS05-038 896727
    Cumulative
    | for IE6 (or previous MS05-037 not available now) is when that same
    CLSID
    | portion reference is additionally added elsewhere to ActiveX
    Compatibility
    | which adds this:
    |
    | [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    | "Compatibility Flags"=dword:00000400
    |
    | Rick
    |
    |
    | >
    | >
    | > --
    | > Thanks or Good Luck,
    | > There may be humor in this post, and,
    | > Naturally, you will not sue,
    | > should things get worse after this,
    | > PCR
    | > pcrrcp@netzero.net
    | > "Rick Chauvin" <justask@nospamz.com> wrote in message
    | > news:Os$vDNQpFHA.320@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    | >| Ah, the reason why they pulled it as I look through my software
    install
    | >| tracker history is that this last W98SE - MS05-038 896727
    Cumulative
    | >| Security Update for IE6 also sets that:
    | >| HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
    | >| Compatibility\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}
    | >| Compatibility Flags 0x00000400
    | >| already, along with "48" other ActiveX Compatibility keys too!
    | >| ...anyway, I imagine the new IE supercedes that KB903235 and so is
    why
    | >| they pulled it.
    | >|
    | >| Rick
    | >|
    | >|
    | >| Rick Chauvin wrote:
    | >| > It looks like to me you can download it here as per:
    | >| >
    | >| > System Requirements
    | >| > This update applies to Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 (SP1)
    with
    | >| > the following operating systems:
    | >| > Windows XP SP1
    | >| > Windows 2000 SP4
    | >| > Windows 98
    | >| > Windows 98SE
    | >| > Windows Millennium
    | >| >
    | >|
    | >
    |
    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=2A506C16-01EF-4060-BCF8-6993C55840A9&displaylang=en
    | >| >
    | >| > Rick
    | >| >
    | >| >
    | >| >
    | >| > Just me wrote:
    | >| >> I had taken note on 7/19/05 of this critical update, which I was
    | >| >> going to update later on. Today this critical update is no
    longer at
    | >| >> the Windows Update site. Checked my installed updates, in case I
    had
    | >| >> updated it but forgot about it, but the update is no longer
    there.
    | >| >>
    | >| >> Below is the note I had written down:
    | >| >>
    | >| >> Security Update for JView Profiler (KB903235), 105 kb.
    | >| >> MS05-037
    | >| >> Issued: July 12, 2005
    | >| >> Version: 1.0
    | >| >> JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll)
    | >| >> This update sets the "kill Bit" for JView Profiler
    (Javaprxy.dll).
    | >| >>
    | >| >> My question: Is this ciritcal update for Windows 98 SE, and if
    so,
    | >| >> where can it be updated from?
    | >| >>
    | >| >> Thanks to all for your help.
    |
    |
  40. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Quoting from http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS05-038.mspx:


    Security Update Replacement This update replaces the update that is included with Microsoft Security Bulletin MS05-025. That update is also a cumulative update. This update also replaces the update that is included with Microsoft Security Bulletin MS05-037


    This would explain it.


    "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message news:5ltbg1l8a3i1dra4adsip58cofhobrpslq@4ax.com...
    I had taken note on 7/19/05 of this critical update, which I was going
    to update later on. Today this critical update is no longer at the
    Windows Update site. Checked my installed updates, in case I had
    updated it but forgot about it, but the update is no longer there.

    Below is the note I had written down:

    Security Update for JView Profiler (KB903235), 105 kb.
    MS05-037
    Issued: July 12, 2005
    Version: 1.0
    JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll)
    This update sets the "kill Bit" for JView Profiler (Javaprxy.dll).

    My question: Is this ciritcal update for Windows 98 SE, and if so,
    where can it be updated from?

    Thanks to all for your help.
  41. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 00:56:28 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:

    >Well, OK, I see from this & elsewhere you do have the Java keys, just
    >not the kill bit key. Let me see whether you've spoken to Chauvin yet...
    >no! Why? He has a site, which Bear has also posted now, where you can
    >get KB903235.
    >
    >HOWEVER, by Chuavin's tracking, this too will give you that same kill
    >bit, & is why KB903235 has been pulled. Go take this instead from
    >Windows Update...
    >
    >Microsoft Security Bulletin MS05-038
    >Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer (896727)
    >Issued: August 9, 2005

    I'm reading under Affected Components and does not apply to me as I'm
    using Windows 98 SE with IE 5.5 SP2.

    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms05-038.mspx
  42. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    The article does say: "Other versions either no longer include security
    update support or may not be affected". Normally, I let the site
    decide. Was MS05-038 (896727) offered to you at Windows Update? Yes?
    Take it.

    Warning: I do see someone in this NG has begun to complain 896727 is
    causing a problem...
    "Otto Genf" wrote in message
    news:eIoKV8TpFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl
    ....However, it is uninstallable in Add/Remove. And I don't think I've
    seen anyone else with the complaint.

    No? 896727 isn't offered? Well, you did say the other was once offered.
    So, go take KB903235 from the link Chauvin & Bear posted...
    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=2A506C16-01EF-4060-BCF8-6993C55840A9&displaylang=en
    ....or set the kill bit yourself. Either way, I see no problem. Don't let
    the "kill" in "kill bit" worry you.


    --
    Thanks or Good Luck,
    There may be humor in this post, and,
    Naturally, you will not sue,
    should things get worse after this,
    PCR
    pcrrcp@netzero.net
    "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    news:osheg1dstb98qq78970ougvv4vi6n3d3gd@4ax.com...
    | On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 00:56:28 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:
    |
    | >Well, OK, I see from this & elsewhere you do have the Java keys, just
    | >not the kill bit key. Let me see whether you've spoken to Chauvin
    yet...
    | >no! Why? He has a site, which Bear has also posted now, where you can
    | >get KB903235.
    | >
    | >HOWEVER, by Chuavin's tracking, this too will give you that same kill
    | >bit, & is why KB903235 has been pulled. Go take this instead from
    | >Windows Update...
    | >
    | >Microsoft Security Bulletin MS05-038
    | >Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer (896727)
    | >Issued: August 9, 2005
    |
    | I'm reading under Affected Components and does not apply to me as I'm
    | using Windows 98 SE with IE 5.5 SP2.
    |
    | http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms05-038.mspx
  43. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    The roll-up described by this bulletin includes lots of previous patches.
    See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/896727. I would review each of those
    items to see if they apply to your system and, if so, do you have it already
    installed.

    The reason it isn't offered for your Win98+IE5.5 is that that platform is no
    longer supported and perhaps one or more of the included patches aren't
    compatible. Many of the items are "hotfix" items, ones that you previously
    had to obtain from MS via telephone call. I think that if you review the
    literature, you'll find that few of them apply to your system. Just find the
    ones that do and make sure that you've either installed the appropriate
    patch or have instituted the appropriate workaround, such as we did with the
    JView Profiler kill bit.

    If you have any questions on the applicability of one or another particular
    fix, just ask. But remember--just because it doesn't specifically list your
    OS and IE version doesn't mean that they aren't affected. It may simply mean
    that they are affected but MS hasn't yet or won't ever issue a specific
    patch. You're left to either upgrade to IE6 or institute a workaround.

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS-MVP Shell/User

    "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    news:osheg1dstb98qq78970ougvv4vi6n3d3gd@4ax.com...
    > On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 00:56:28 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:
    >
    >>Well, OK, I see from this & elsewhere you do have the Java keys, just
    >>not the kill bit key. Let me see whether you've spoken to Chauvin yet...
    >>no! Why? He has a site, which Bear has also posted now, where you can
    >>get KB903235.
    >>
    >>HOWEVER, by Chuavin's tracking, this too will give you that same kill
    >>bit, & is why KB903235 has been pulled. Go take this instead from
    >>Windows Update...
    >>
    >>Microsoft Security Bulletin MS05-038
    >>Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer (896727)
    >>Issued: August 9, 2005
    >
    > I'm reading under Affected Components and does not apply to me as I'm
    > using Windows 98 SE with IE 5.5 SP2.
    >
    > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms05-038.mspx
  44. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
    news:utdkTCapFHA.616@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...

    > Warning: I do see someone in this NG has begun to complain 896727 is
    > causing a problem...
    > "Otto Genf" wrote in message
    > news:eIoKV8TpFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl
    > ...However, it is uninstallable in Add/Remove. And I don't think I've
    > seen anyone else with the complaint.

    From MS05-038: "Caveats: Packages for this security update that were located
    on the Microsoft Download Center have been updated as the initial packages
    were corrupt, causing some Systems Management Server (SMS) and Internet
    Explorer installation failures. New packages are now available and
    Microsoft encourages users to re-download the packages from the links below
    and re-apply. Updates downloaded from Automatic Update, Windows Update,
    Microsoft Update and Windows Server Update Services (WSUS), were not
    affected by this issue."

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS-MVP Shell/User
  45. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 12:02:34 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:

    >The article does say: "Other versions either no longer include security
    >update support or may not be affected". Normally, I let the site
    >decide. Was MS05-038 (896727) offered to you at Windows Update? Yes?
    >Take it.

    So, do I, that is, let WU decide.
    No, MS05-038 is not offered. I've updated ALL critical updates
    offered, except the Microsoft GDI+ Detection Tool (KB873374).

    Thanks, PCR.

    >
    >Warning: I do see someone in this NG has begun to complain 896727 is
    >causing a problem...
    >"Otto Genf" wrote in message
    >news:eIoKV8TpFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl
    >...However, it is uninstallable in Add/Remove. And I don't think I've
    >seen anyone else with the complaint.
    >
    >No? 896727 isn't offered? Well, you did say the other was once offered.
    >So, go take KB903235 from the link Chauvin & Bear posted...
    >http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=2A506C16-01EF-4060-BCF8-6993C55840A9&displaylang=en
    >...or set the kill bit yourself. Either way, I see no problem. Don't let
    >the "kill" in "kill bit" worry you.
  46. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    You are welcome. (That's that, then. Phew.)


    --
    Thanks or Good Luck,
    There may be humor in this post, and,
    Naturally, you will not sue,
    should things get worse after this,
    PCR
    pcrrcp@netzero.net
    "Just me" <Justme489@myLink.com> wrote in message
    news:qfleg1h0kvq390rdpbhks32jqgrs6tel8a@4ax.com...
    | On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 12:02:34 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:
    |
    | >The article does say: "Other versions either no longer include
    security
    | >update support or may not be affected". Normally, I let the site
    | >decide. Was MS05-038 (896727) offered to you at Windows Update? Yes?
    | >Take it.
    |
    | So, do I, that is, let WU decide.
    | No, MS05-038 is not offered. I've updated ALL critical updates
    | offered, except the Microsoft GDI+ Detection Tool (KB873374).
    |
    | Thanks, PCR.
    |
    | >
    | >Warning: I do see someone in this NG has begun to complain 896727 is
    | >causing a problem...
    | >"Otto Genf" wrote in message
    | >news:eIoKV8TpFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl
    | >...However, it is uninstallable in Add/Remove. And I don't think I've
    | >seen anyone else with the complaint.
    | >
    | >No? 896727 isn't offered? Well, you did say the other was once
    offered.
    | >So, go take KB903235 from the link Chauvin & Bear posted...
    |
    >http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=2A506C16-01EF-
    4060-BCF8-6993C55840A9&displaylang=en
    | >...or set the kill bit yourself. Either way, I see no problem. Don't
    let
    | >the "kill" in "kill bit" worry you.
    |
  47. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Just me wrote:
    [...]

    > No, MS05-038 is not offered.

    That's correct 5.5 SP2 is not supported so you won't see it show
    up at WU for you - even though you are still affected with 5.5 SP2.

    And so as long as you have MS Java installed of which if you do you
    can see these keys in your registy: ..yes?

    HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\CLASSES\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}\InprocServer32]
    @="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JAVAPRXY.DLL"
    "ThreadingModel"="Both"

    [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\CLASSES\CLSID\{03D9F3F2-B0E3-11D2-B081-006008039BF0}]
    @="JVIEW Profiler"


    ...then if you don't want to upgrade to IE6 etc, then you have few choices to fix
    it, one is to edit your registry as others suggested - which is extremely simple.
    If you don't want to do it manually then I've attached the info needed to this
    message, and so just save it to your computer, rename it to a reg
    extension then double click or right click to merge it.

    Rick


    begin 666 1.txt
    M4D5'141)5#0-"@T*6TA+15E?3$]#04Q?34%#2$E.15Q3;V9T=V%R95Q-:6-R
    M;W-O9G1<26YT97)N970@17AP;&]R97)<06-T:79E6"!#;VUP871I8FEL:71Y
    M7'LP,T0Y1C-&,BU",$4S+3$Q1#(M0C X,2TP,#8P,#@P,SE"1C!]70T*(D-O
    E;7!A=&EB:6QI='D@1FQA9W,B/61W;W)D.C P,# P-# P#0H-"@``
    `
    end
  48. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    Hmmmm. I'll go see whether you've told him yet. (I certainly don't want
    to intrude, if you did.) He did write: "I've un/re-installed KB896727,
    but that didn't help." However, he doesn't say whether he... was...
    reinstalling the same download or getting a new one.


    --
    Thanks or Good Luck,
    There may be humor in this post, and,
    Naturally, you will not sue,
    should things get worse after this,
    PCR
    pcrrcp@netzero.net
    "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
    news:O6M2YcbpFHA.620@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    | "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
    | news:utdkTCapFHA.616@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    |
    | > Warning: I do see someone in this NG has begun to complain 896727 is
    | > causing a problem...
    | > "Otto Genf" wrote in message
    | > news:eIoKV8TpFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl
    | > ...However, it is uninstallable in Add/Remove. And I don't think
    I've
    | > seen anyone else with the complaint.
    |
    | From MS05-038: "Caveats: Packages for this security update that were
    located
    | on the Microsoft Download Center have been updated as the initial
    packages
    | were corrupt, causing some Systems Management Server (SMS) and
    Internet
    | Explorer installation failures. New packages are now available and
    | Microsoft encourages users to re-download the packages from the links
    below
    | and re-apply. Updates downloaded from Automatic Update, Windows
    Update,
    | Microsoft Update and Windows Server Update Services (WSUS), were not
    | affected by this issue."
    |
    | --
    | Gary S. Terhune
    | MS-MVP Shell/User
    |
    |
    |
  49. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

    I don't recall seeing the post you refer to. Don't worry about me, just pass
    it on.

    --
    Gary S. Terhune
    MS-MVP Shell/User

    "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
    news:OTvpILdpFHA.1044@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > Hmmmm. I'll go see whether you've told him yet. (I certainly don't want
    > to intrude, if you did.) He did write: "I've un/re-installed KB896727,
    > but that didn't help." However, he doesn't say whether he... was...
    > reinstalling the same download or getting a new one.
    >
    >
    > --
    > Thanks or Good Luck,
    > There may be humor in this post, and,
    > Naturally, you will not sue,
    > should things get worse after this,
    > PCR
    > pcrrcp@netzero.net
    > "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in message
    > news:O6M2YcbpFHA.620@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > | "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
    > | news:utdkTCapFHA.616@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > |
    > | > Warning: I do see someone in this NG has begun to complain 896727 is
    > | > causing a problem...
    > | > "Otto Genf" wrote in message
    > | > news:eIoKV8TpFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl
    > | > ...However, it is uninstallable in Add/Remove. And I don't think
    > I've
    > | > seen anyone else with the complaint.
    > |
    > | From MS05-038: "Caveats: Packages for this security update that were
    > located
    > | on the Microsoft Download Center have been updated as the initial
    > packages
    > | were corrupt, causing some Systems Management Server (SMS) and
    > Internet
    > | Explorer installation failures. New packages are now available and
    > | Microsoft encourages users to re-download the packages from the links
    > below
    > | and re-apply. Updates downloaded from Automatic Update, Windows
    > Update,
    > | Microsoft Update and Windows Server Update Services (WSUS), were not
    > | affected by this issue."
    > |
    > | --
    > | Gary S. Terhune
    > | MS-MVP Shell/User
    > |
    > |
    > |
    >
    >
Ask a new question

Read More

Security Windows