hotfix filelist "last time written" stamp being updated by..

[ted]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.group_policy (More info?)

Could someone please explain to me what could be causing a group policy
refresh to rewrite the date/time stamp on the filelist folder of each hotfix
installed on a workstation?
The registry key is in HKLM and the path (see below) is the key.
Name Last Time Written Path
Filelist 11/18/2004 14:46:35 SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Updates\Windows
2000\SP5\KB820888\Filelist

I am sure that it is from some portion of a security policy I applied last
week, but have no idea where to begin looking. The policy is based on an NSA
security template for W2K Pro. I reviewed every configuration before
implementing it so I am familiar with the settings and yet I still am
confused over this result.
Any assistance would be appreciated.

 

[ted]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.group_policy (More info?)

Hey to anyone pondering this..
I believe that I have figured it out. It was simple once I stepped back a
bit, and I was looking too hard for a problem to find. The group policy has
registry permission settings in it. When the policy is refreshed the
permissions get rewritten and the last time written gets updated.
Looking through the registry shows all keys referenced by the policy having
their last time written updated also.
Ted.

"Ted" wrote:

> Could someone please explain to me what could be causing a group policy
> refresh to rewrite the date/time stamp on the filelist folder of each hotfix
> installed on a workstation?
> The registry key is in HKLM and the path (see below) is the key.
> Name Last Time Written Path
> Filelist 11/18/2004 14:46:35 SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Updates\Windows
> 2000\SP5\KB820888\Filelist
>
> I am sure that it is from some portion of a security policy I applied last
> week, but have no idea where to begin looking. The policy is based on an NSA
> security template for W2K Pro. I reviewed every configuration before
> implementing it so I am familiar with the settings and yet I still am
> confused over this result.
> Any assistance would be appreciated.