MS04-011 and NTOSKRNL.EXE version

G

Guest

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

Hi,

I'm observing something really odd with the version of ntoskrnl.exe installed by MS04-011 on some of my Win 2K servers and I was hoping someone might be able to shed some light on it. I've done a search on what I am seeing but the only results I've come up with relate to hfnetchk and a checksum problem.

The version of ntoskrnl.exe which ships with MS04-011, according to the security bulletin, is dated 11/03/2004, with a size of 1,726,032 bytes and a version of 5.0.2195.6902

All of my Win2K servers have been patched with MS04-011 and the patch is listed in add and remove programs. The version of ntoskrnl.exe in the System32 directory is as listed above on only some of them. On the rest it has a file date of 26/02/2003, a size of 1,699,904 bytes and the correct version, (5.0.2195.6902). However, on these servers, the correct version, with date, size and version matching the security bulletin is in the DLLCache directory.

The version of ntoskrnl.exe in the KB835732 uninstall directory on all servers is dated 19/06/2003. The filesize is 1,694,976 bytes and the version is 5.0.2195.6717.

The servers with the incorrect version in the System32 directory include all the domain controllers and certain application servers, but so far I haven't been able to identify a common factor between all machines with the incorrect version.

Yesterday, I did some tests to investigate this further.

Firstly, on one affected server I uninstalled the MS04-011 patch. After I'd done this, the ntoskrnl.exe was the 19/06/2003 version. Then I reinstalled the patch and checked the versions. The version in System32 was the 26/02/2004 version and the DLLCache version was 11/03/2004. For some reason the newer version in the DLLCache does not overwrite the older version in the System32 directory. We've had systems with a newer version of the file in the DLLCache directory left for weeks and rebooted multiple times without the System32 version being updated.

Next, I searched on affected (test) system for files named ntoskrnl.exe. I found two copies dated 26/02/2003, one copy in System32 dated 26/02/2004 and one copy in the DLLCache dated 11/03/2004. To see if I could force the overwrite, I renamed the version in the System32 directory, hoping the version from the DLLCache would be copied in. Within a few seconds, the file was replaced, but with the same file, (dated 26/02/2004), that was there before.

I'm totally at a loss as to why MS04-011 would install a different version of ntoskrnl.exe than listed on the bulletin on some machines only and why it would put a newer version in the DLLCache on those machines. I'm also a bit concerned that without the correct version of the ntoskrnl.exe, the machines are not properly security patched.

As I am seeing this behaviour on 10% or so of my servers, I am a mite worried.

Does anyone know why I am observing this? Any ideas or theories?

I'd really appreciate any thoughts.

Thanks,

Emma Holmes
MCSE
Server Security Analyst
 
G

Guest

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

Hi Emma

I'm not sure why that's happening, but I just extracted the update fil (-x
switch) and there is only one copy of the ntoskrnl.exe file, and the date is
11/03/2004 (DDMMYYYY), size 1,726,032 bytes and version 5.0.2195.6902.

Are you aware that Microsoft offers "no-charge" (not sure quite how that
differs from free) support for security patches?

Cheers

Oli


"Emma Holmes" <Emma Holmes@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1E353FBE-9085-43C0-9319-9A940BFA6EA7@microsoft.com...
> Hi,
>
> I'm observing something really odd with the version of ntoskrnl.exe
> installed by MS04-011 on some of my Win 2K servers and I was hoping
> someone might be able to shed some light on it. I've done a search on what
> I am seeing but the only results I've come up with relate to hfnetchk and
> a checksum problem.
>
> The version of ntoskrnl.exe which ships with MS04-011, according to the
> security bulletin, is dated 11/03/2004, with a size of 1,726,032 bytes and
> a version of 5.0.2195.6902
>
> All of my Win2K servers have been patched with MS04-011 and the patch is
> listed in add and remove programs. The version of ntoskrnl.exe in the
> System32 directory is as listed above on only some of them. On the rest it
> has a file date of 26/02/2003, a size of 1,699,904 bytes and the correct
> version, (5.0.2195.6902). However, on these servers, the correct version,
> with date, size and version matching the security bulletin is in the
> DLLCache directory.
>
> The version of ntoskrnl.exe in the KB835732 uninstall directory on all
> servers is dated 19/06/2003. The filesize is 1,694,976 bytes and the
> version is 5.0.2195.6717.
>
> The servers with the incorrect version in the System32 directory include
> all the domain controllers and certain application servers, but so far I
> haven't been able to identify a common factor between all machines with
> the incorrect version.
>
> Yesterday, I did some tests to investigate this further.
>
> Firstly, on one affected server I uninstalled the MS04-011 patch. After
> I'd done this, the ntoskrnl.exe was the 19/06/2003 version. Then I
> reinstalled the patch and checked the versions. The version in System32
> was the 26/02/2004 version and the DLLCache version was 11/03/2004. For
> some reason the newer version in the DLLCache does not overwrite the older
> version in the System32 directory. We've had systems with a newer version
> of the file in the DLLCache directory left for weeks and rebooted multiple
> times without the System32 version being updated.
>
> Next, I searched on affected (test) system for files named ntoskrnl.exe. I
> found two copies dated 26/02/2003, one copy in System32 dated 26/02/2004
> and one copy in the DLLCache dated 11/03/2004. To see if I could force the
> overwrite, I renamed the version in the System32 directory, hoping the
> version from the DLLCache would be copied in. Within a few seconds, the
> file was replaced, but with the same file, (dated 26/02/2004), that was
> there before.
>
> I'm totally at a loss as to why MS04-011 would install a different version
> of ntoskrnl.exe than listed on the bulletin on some machines only and why
> it would put a newer version in the DLLCache on those machines. I'm also a
> bit concerned that without the correct version of the ntoskrnl.exe, the
> machines are not properly security patched.
>
> As I am seeing this behaviour on 10% or so of my servers, I am a mite
> worried.
>
> Does anyone know why I am observing this? Any ideas or theories?
>
> I'd really appreciate any thoughts.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Emma Holmes
> MCSE
> Server Security Analyst
 
G

Guest

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

Oli,

Thanks for the reply and the information. I didn't know that "no charge" support was available on security patches and, having spent an hour searching the website for details, I am still no wiser about who to contact, but I'll send MS Support an e-mail and see if it gets me anywhere.

I appreciate the response.

Emma

"Oli Restorick [MVP]" wrote:

> Hi Emma
>
> I'm not sure why that's happening, but I just extracted the update fil (-x
> switch) and there is only one copy of the ntoskrnl.exe file, and the date is
> 11/03/2004 (DDMMYYYY), size 1,726,032 bytes and version 5.0.2195.6902.
>
> Are you aware that Microsoft offers "no-charge" (not sure quite how that
> differs from free) support for security patches?
>
> Cheers
>
> Oli
>
>
> "Emma Holmes" <Emma Holmes@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:1E353FBE-9085-43C0-9319-9A940BFA6EA7@microsoft.com...
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm observing something really odd with the version of ntoskrnl.exe
> > installed by MS04-011 on some of my Win 2K servers and I was hoping
> > someone might be able to shed some light on it. I've done a search on what
> > I am seeing but the only results I've come up with relate to hfnetchk and
> > a checksum problem.
> >
> > The version of ntoskrnl.exe which ships with MS04-011, according to the
> > security bulletin, is dated 11/03/2004, with a size of 1,726,032 bytes and
> > a version of 5.0.2195.6902
> >
> > All of my Win2K servers have been patched with MS04-011 and the patch is
> > listed in add and remove programs. The version of ntoskrnl.exe in the
> > System32 directory is as listed above on only some of them. On the rest it
> > has a file date of 26/02/2003, a size of 1,699,904 bytes and the correct
> > version, (5.0.2195.6902). However, on these servers, the correct version,
> > with date, size and version matching the security bulletin is in the
> > DLLCache directory.
> >
> > The version of ntoskrnl.exe in the KB835732 uninstall directory on all
> > servers is dated 19/06/2003. The filesize is 1,694,976 bytes and the
> > version is 5.0.2195.6717.
> >
> > The servers with the incorrect version in the System32 directory include
> > all the domain controllers and certain application servers, but so far I
> > haven't been able to identify a common factor between all machines with
> > the incorrect version.
> >
> > Yesterday, I did some tests to investigate this further.
> >
> > Firstly, on one affected server I uninstalled the MS04-011 patch. After
> > I'd done this, the ntoskrnl.exe was the 19/06/2003 version. Then I
> > reinstalled the patch and checked the versions. The version in System32
> > was the 26/02/2004 version and the DLLCache version was 11/03/2004. For
> > some reason the newer version in the DLLCache does not overwrite the older
> > version in the System32 directory. We've had systems with a newer version
> > of the file in the DLLCache directory left for weeks and rebooted multiple
> > times without the System32 version being updated.
> >
> > Next, I searched on affected (test) system for files named ntoskrnl.exe. I
> > found two copies dated 26/02/2003, one copy in System32 dated 26/02/2004
> > and one copy in the DLLCache dated 11/03/2004. To see if I could force the
> > overwrite, I renamed the version in the System32 directory, hoping the
> > version from the DLLCache would be copied in. Within a few seconds, the
> > file was replaced, but with the same file, (dated 26/02/2004), that was
> > there before.
> >
> > I'm totally at a loss as to why MS04-011 would install a different version
> > of ntoskrnl.exe than listed on the bulletin on some machines only and why
> > it would put a newer version in the DLLCache on those machines. I'm also a
> > bit concerned that without the correct version of the ntoskrnl.exe, the
> > machines are not properly security patched.
> >
> > As I am seeing this behaviour on 10% or so of my servers, I am a mite
> > worried.
> >
> > Does anyone know why I am observing this? Any ideas or theories?
> >
> > I'd really appreciate any thoughts.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Emma Holmes
> > MCSE
> > Server Security Analyst
>
>
>
 
G

Guest

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

Hmmm,

It says quite clearly on the Security bulletin for MS04-011 that "There is no charge for support associated with security updates. However, I've just called Microsoft and opened a call only to be told, "we don't support hotfixes, you need to open a paid support call". I made a bit of a fuss and pointed out the line in the security bulletin and was told my case would be passed to a manager and he'll get back to me. What's the betting I don't get a call?

I honestly don't know how Microsoft have the gall to charge what they do for their software. It's buggy and full of holes and then they expect you to pay through the nose for support to get it working how it should have in the first place!

Utterly fed up with it,

Emma

"Emma Holmes" wrote:

> Oli,
>
> Thanks for the reply and the information. I didn't know that "no charge" support was available on security patches and, having spent an hour searching the website for details, I am still no wiser about who to contact, but I'll send MS Support an e-mail and see if it gets me anywhere.
>
> I appreciate the response.
>
> Emma
>
> "Oli Restorick [MVP]" wrote:
>
> > Hi Emma
> >
> > I'm not sure why that's happening, but I just extracted the update fil (-x
> > switch) and there is only one copy of the ntoskrnl.exe file, and the date is
> > 11/03/2004 (DDMMYYYY), size 1,726,032 bytes and version 5.0.2195.6902.
> >
> > Are you aware that Microsoft offers "no-charge" (not sure quite how that
> > differs from free) support for security patches?
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Oli
> >
> >
> > "Emma Holmes" <Emma Holmes@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:1E353FBE-9085-43C0-9319-9A940BFA6EA7@microsoft.com...
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm observing something really odd with the version of ntoskrnl.exe
> > > installed by MS04-011 on some of my Win 2K servers and I was hoping
> > > someone might be able to shed some light on it. I've done a search on what
> > > I am seeing but the only results I've come up with relate to hfnetchk and
> > > a checksum problem.
> > >
> > > The version of ntoskrnl.exe which ships with MS04-011, according to the
> > > security bulletin, is dated 11/03/2004, with a size of 1,726,032 bytes and
> > > a version of 5.0.2195.6902
> > >
> > > All of my Win2K servers have been patched with MS04-011 and the patch is
> > > listed in add and remove programs. The version of ntoskrnl.exe in the
> > > System32 directory is as listed above on only some of them. On the rest it
> > > has a file date of 26/02/2003, a size of 1,699,904 bytes and the correct
> > > version, (5.0.2195.6902). However, on these servers, the correct version,
> > > with date, size and version matching the security bulletin is in the
> > > DLLCache directory.
> > >
> > > The version of ntoskrnl.exe in the KB835732 uninstall directory on all
> > > servers is dated 19/06/2003. The filesize is 1,694,976 bytes and the
> > > version is 5.0.2195.6717.
> > >
> > > The servers with the incorrect version in the System32 directory include
> > > all the domain controllers and certain application servers, but so far I
> > > haven't been able to identify a common factor between all machines with
> > > the incorrect version.
> > >
> > > Yesterday, I did some tests to investigate this further.
> > >
> > > Firstly, on one affected server I uninstalled the MS04-011 patch. After
> > > I'd done this, the ntoskrnl.exe was the 19/06/2003 version. Then I
> > > reinstalled the patch and checked the versions. The version in System32
> > > was the 26/02/2004 version and the DLLCache version was 11/03/2004. For
> > > some reason the newer version in the DLLCache does not overwrite the older
> > > version in the System32 directory. We've had systems with a newer version
> > > of the file in the DLLCache directory left for weeks and rebooted multiple
> > > times without the System32 version being updated.
> > >
> > > Next, I searched on affected (test) system for files named ntoskrnl.exe. I
> > > found two copies dated 26/02/2003, one copy in System32 dated 26/02/2004
> > > and one copy in the DLLCache dated 11/03/2004. To see if I could force the
> > > overwrite, I renamed the version in the System32 directory, hoping the
> > > version from the DLLCache would be copied in. Within a few seconds, the
> > > file was replaced, but with the same file, (dated 26/02/2004), that was
> > > there before.
> > >
> > > I'm totally at a loss as to why MS04-011 would install a different version
> > > of ntoskrnl.exe than listed on the bulletin on some machines only and why
> > > it would put a newer version in the DLLCache on those machines. I'm also a
> > > bit concerned that without the correct version of the ntoskrnl.exe, the
> > > machines are not properly security patched.
> > >
> > > As I am seeing this behaviour on 10% or so of my servers, I am a mite
> > > worried.
> > >
> > > Does anyone know why I am observing this? Any ideas or theories?
> > >
> > > I'd really appreciate any thoughts.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Emma Holmes
> > > MCSE
> > > Server Security Analyst
> >
> >
> >
 
G

Guest

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

Hi Emma

I'm as surprised as you that they didn't give you support. From what I can
see, your query was directly related to a security update.

Anyway, you've been promised a call from a manager. I'm not as sceptical as
you about your chances of getting a call. This is not IKEA.

Regards

Oli


"Emma Holmes" <Emma Holmes@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:40069D9A-5DB4-4067-9BEE-667CF7A9A65A@microsoft.com...
> Hmmm,
>
> It says quite clearly on the Security bulletin for MS04-011 that "There is
> no charge for support associated with security updates. However, I've just
> called Microsoft and opened a call only to be told, "we don't support
> hotfixes, you need to open a paid support call". I made a bit of a fuss
> and pointed out the line in the security bulletin and was told my case
> would be passed to a manager and he'll get back to me. What's the betting
> I don't get a call?
>
> I honestly don't know how Microsoft have the gall to charge what they do
> for their software. It's buggy and full of holes and then they expect you
> to pay through the nose for support to get it working how it should have
> in the first place!
>
> Utterly fed up with it,
>
> Emma
>
> "Emma Holmes" wrote:
>
>> Oli,
>>
>> Thanks for the reply and the information. I didn't know that "no charge"
>> support was available on security patches and, having spent an hour
>> searching the website for details, I am still no wiser about who to
>> contact, but I'll send MS Support an e-mail and see if it gets me
>> anywhere.
>>
>> I appreciate the response.
>>
>> Emma
>>
>> "Oli Restorick [MVP]" wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Emma
>> >
>> > I'm not sure why that's happening, but I just extracted the update fil
>> > (-x
>> > switch) and there is only one copy of the ntoskrnl.exe file, and the
>> > date is
>> > 11/03/2004 (DDMMYYYY), size 1,726,032 bytes and version 5.0.2195.6902.
>> >
>> > Are you aware that Microsoft offers "no-charge" (not sure quite how
>> > that
>> > differs from free) support for security patches?
>> >
>> > Cheers
>> >
>> > Oli
>> >
>> >
>> > "Emma Holmes" <Emma Holmes@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> > news:1E353FBE-9085-43C0-9319-9A940BFA6EA7@microsoft.com...
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > I'm observing something really odd with the version of ntoskrnl.exe
>> > > installed by MS04-011 on some of my Win 2K servers and I was hoping
>> > > someone might be able to shed some light on it. I've done a search on
>> > > what
>> > > I am seeing but the only results I've come up with relate to hfnetchk
>> > > and
>> > > a checksum problem.
>> > >
>> > > The version of ntoskrnl.exe which ships with MS04-011, according to
>> > > the
>> > > security bulletin, is dated 11/03/2004, with a size of 1,726,032
>> > > bytes and
>> > > a version of 5.0.2195.6902
>> > >
>> > > All of my Win2K servers have been patched with MS04-011 and the patch
>> > > is
>> > > listed in add and remove programs. The version of ntoskrnl.exe in the
>> > > System32 directory is as listed above on only some of them. On the
>> > > rest it
>> > > has a file date of 26/02/2003, a size of 1,699,904 bytes and the
>> > > correct
>> > > version, (5.0.2195.6902). However, on these servers, the correct
>> > > version,
>> > > with date, size and version matching the security bulletin is in the
>> > > DLLCache directory.
>> > >
>> > > The version of ntoskrnl.exe in the KB835732 uninstall directory on
>> > > all
>> > > servers is dated 19/06/2003. The filesize is 1,694,976 bytes and the
>> > > version is 5.0.2195.6717.
>> > >
>> > > The servers with the incorrect version in the System32 directory
>> > > include
>> > > all the domain controllers and certain application servers, but so
>> > > far I
>> > > haven't been able to identify a common factor between all machines
>> > > with
>> > > the incorrect version.
>> > >
>> > > Yesterday, I did some tests to investigate this further.
>> > >
>> > > Firstly, on one affected server I uninstalled the MS04-011 patch.
>> > > After
>> > > I'd done this, the ntoskrnl.exe was the 19/06/2003 version. Then I
>> > > reinstalled the patch and checked the versions. The version in
>> > > System32
>> > > was the 26/02/2004 version and the DLLCache version was 11/03/2004.
>> > > For
>> > > some reason the newer version in the DLLCache does not overwrite the
>> > > older
>> > > version in the System32 directory. We've had systems with a newer
>> > > version
>> > > of the file in the DLLCache directory left for weeks and rebooted
>> > > multiple
>> > > times without the System32 version being updated.
>> > >
>> > > Next, I searched on affected (test) system for files named
>> > > ntoskrnl.exe. I
>> > > found two copies dated 26/02/2003, one copy in System32 dated
>> > > 26/02/2004
>> > > and one copy in the DLLCache dated 11/03/2004. To see if I could
>> > > force the
>> > > overwrite, I renamed the version in the System32 directory, hoping
>> > > the
>> > > version from the DLLCache would be copied in. Within a few seconds,
>> > > the
>> > > file was replaced, but with the same file, (dated 26/02/2004), that
>> > > was
>> > > there before.
>> > >
>> > > I'm totally at a loss as to why MS04-011 would install a different
>> > > version
>> > > of ntoskrnl.exe than listed on the bulletin on some machines only and
>> > > why
>> > > it would put a newer version in the DLLCache on those machines. I'm
>> > > also a
>> > > bit concerned that without the correct version of the ntoskrnl.exe,
>> > > the
>> > > machines are not properly security patched.
>> > >
>> > > As I am seeing this behaviour on 10% or so of my servers, I am a mite
>> > > worried.
>> > >
>> > > Does anyone know why I am observing this? Any ideas or theories?
>> > >
>> > > I'd really appreciate any thoughts.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > >
>> > > Emma Holmes
>> > > MCSE
>> > > Server Security Analyst
>> >
>> >
>> >
 
G

Guest

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

Emma

If you're still looking at this thread, could you drop me an e-mail?

Thanks

Oli


"Emma Holmes" <Emma Holmes@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:40069D9A-5DB4-4067-9BEE-667CF7A9A65A@microsoft.com...
> Hmmm,
>
> It says quite clearly on the Security bulletin for MS04-011 that "There is
> no charge for support associated with security updates. However, I've just
> called Microsoft and opened a call only to be told, "we don't support
> hotfixes, you need to open a paid support call". I made a bit of a fuss
> and pointed out the line in the security bulletin and was told my case
> would be passed to a manager and he'll get back to me. What's the betting
> I don't get a call?
>
> I honestly don't know how Microsoft have the gall to charge what they do
> for their software. It's buggy and full of holes and then they expect you
> to pay through the nose for support to get it working how it should have
> in the first place!
>
> Utterly fed up with it,
>
> Emma
>
> "Emma Holmes" wrote:
>
>> Oli,
>>
>> Thanks for the reply and the information. I didn't know that "no charge"
>> support was available on security patches and, having spent an hour
>> searching the website for details, I am still no wiser about who to
>> contact, but I'll send MS Support an e-mail and see if it gets me
>> anywhere.
>>
>> I appreciate the response.
>>
>> Emma
>>
>> "Oli Restorick [MVP]" wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Emma
>> >
>> > I'm not sure why that's happening, but I just extracted the update fil
>> > (-x
>> > switch) and there is only one copy of the ntoskrnl.exe file, and the
>> > date is
>> > 11/03/2004 (DDMMYYYY), size 1,726,032 bytes and version 5.0.2195.6902.
>> >
>> > Are you aware that Microsoft offers "no-charge" (not sure quite how
>> > that
>> > differs from free) support for security patches?
>> >
>> > Cheers
>> >
>> > Oli
>> >
>> >
>> > "Emma Holmes" <Emma Holmes@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> > news:1E353FBE-9085-43C0-9319-9A940BFA6EA7@microsoft.com...
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > I'm observing something really odd with the version of ntoskrnl.exe
>> > > installed by MS04-011 on some of my Win 2K servers and I was hoping
>> > > someone might be able to shed some light on it. I've done a search on
>> > > what
>> > > I am seeing but the only results I've come up with relate to hfnetchk
>> > > and
>> > > a checksum problem.
>> > >
>> > > The version of ntoskrnl.exe which ships with MS04-011, according to
>> > > the
>> > > security bulletin, is dated 11/03/2004, with a size of 1,726,032
>> > > bytes and
>> > > a version of 5.0.2195.6902
>> > >
>> > > All of my Win2K servers have been patched with MS04-011 and the patch
>> > > is
>> > > listed in add and remove programs. The version of ntoskrnl.exe in the
>> > > System32 directory is as listed above on only some of them. On the
>> > > rest it
>> > > has a file date of 26/02/2003, a size of 1,699,904 bytes and the
>> > > correct
>> > > version, (5.0.2195.6902). However, on these servers, the correct
>> > > version,
>> > > with date, size and version matching the security bulletin is in the
>> > > DLLCache directory.
>> > >
>> > > The version of ntoskrnl.exe in the KB835732 uninstall directory on
>> > > all
>> > > servers is dated 19/06/2003. The filesize is 1,694,976 bytes and the
>> > > version is 5.0.2195.6717.
>> > >
>> > > The servers with the incorrect version in the System32 directory
>> > > include
>> > > all the domain controllers and certain application servers, but so
>> > > far I
>> > > haven't been able to identify a common factor between all machines
>> > > with
>> > > the incorrect version.
>> > >
>> > > Yesterday, I did some tests to investigate this further.
>> > >
>> > > Firstly, on one affected server I uninstalled the MS04-011 patch.
>> > > After
>> > > I'd done this, the ntoskrnl.exe was the 19/06/2003 version. Then I
>> > > reinstalled the patch and checked the versions. The version in
>> > > System32
>> > > was the 26/02/2004 version and the DLLCache version was 11/03/2004.
>> > > For
>> > > some reason the newer version in the DLLCache does not overwrite the
>> > > older
>> > > version in the System32 directory. We've had systems with a newer
>> > > version
>> > > of the file in the DLLCache directory left for weeks and rebooted
>> > > multiple
>> > > times without the System32 version being updated.
>> > >
>> > > Next, I searched on affected (test) system for files named
>> > > ntoskrnl.exe. I
>> > > found two copies dated 26/02/2003, one copy in System32 dated
>> > > 26/02/2004
>> > > and one copy in the DLLCache dated 11/03/2004. To see if I could
>> > > force the
>> > > overwrite, I renamed the version in the System32 directory, hoping
>> > > the
>> > > version from the DLLCache would be copied in. Within a few seconds,
>> > > the
>> > > file was replaced, but with the same file, (dated 26/02/2004), that
>> > > was
>> > > there before.
>> > >
>> > > I'm totally at a loss as to why MS04-011 would install a different
>> > > version
>> > > of ntoskrnl.exe than listed on the bulletin on some machines only and
>> > > why
>> > > it would put a newer version in the DLLCache on those machines. I'm
>> > > also a
>> > > bit concerned that without the correct version of the ntoskrnl.exe,
>> > > the
>> > > machines are not properly security patched.
>> > >
>> > > As I am seeing this behaviour on 10% or so of my servers, I am a mite
>> > > worried.
>> > >
>> > > Does anyone know why I am observing this? Any ideas or theories?
>> > >
>> > > I'd really appreciate any thoughts.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > >
>> > > Emma Holmes
>> > > MCSE
>> > > Server Security Analyst
>> >
>> >
>> >
 
G

Guest

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

MS does indeed give free phone support on several Security patches, found out
myself a couple of weeks ago when the same thing happened as Emma is (or was)
experiencing.

The problem on my servers was the use of the Multi Language User Interface.
If uninstalled, the file version is reflected correctly.
Also, you could lookup a tool called filever.exe and use this to
double-check the file-version.

good luck
Daan

"Oli Restorick [MVP]" wrote:

> Emma
>
> If you're still looking at this thread, could you drop me an e-mail?
>
> Thanks
>
> Oli
>
>
> "Emma Holmes" <Emma Holmes@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:40069D9A-5DB4-4067-9BEE-667CF7A9A65A@microsoft.com...
> > Hmmm,
> >
> > It says quite clearly on the Security bulletin for MS04-011 that "There is
> > no charge for support associated with security updates. However, I've just
> > called Microsoft and opened a call only to be told, "we don't support
> > hotfixes, you need to open a paid support call". I made a bit of a fuss
> > and pointed out the line in the security bulletin and was told my case
> > would be passed to a manager and he'll get back to me. What's the betting
> > I don't get a call?
> >
> > I honestly don't know how Microsoft have the gall to charge what they do
> > for their software. It's buggy and full of holes and then they expect you
> > to pay through the nose for support to get it working how it should have
> > in the first place!
> >
> > Utterly fed up with it,
> >
> > Emma
> >
> > "Emma Holmes" wrote:
> >
> >> Oli,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the reply and the information. I didn't know that "no charge"
> >> support was available on security patches and, having spent an hour
> >> searching the website for details, I am still no wiser about who to
> >> contact, but I'll send MS Support an e-mail and see if it gets me
> >> anywhere.
> >>
> >> I appreciate the response.
> >>
> >> Emma
> >>
> >> "Oli Restorick [MVP]" wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi Emma
> >> >
> >> > I'm not sure why that's happening, but I just extracted the update fil
> >> > (-x
> >> > switch) and there is only one copy of the ntoskrnl.exe file, and the
> >> > date is
> >> > 11/03/2004 (DDMMYYYY), size 1,726,032 bytes and version 5.0.2195.6902.
> >> >
> >> > Are you aware that Microsoft offers "no-charge" (not sure quite how
> >> > that
> >> > differs from free) support for security patches?
> >> >
> >> > Cheers
> >> >
> >> > Oli
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Emma Holmes" <Emma Holmes@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:1E353FBE-9085-43C0-9319-9A940BFA6EA7@microsoft.com...
> >> > > Hi,
> >> > >
> >> > > I'm observing something really odd with the version of ntoskrnl.exe
> >> > > installed by MS04-011 on some of my Win 2K servers and I was hoping
> >> > > someone might be able to shed some light on it. I've done a search on
> >> > > what
> >> > > I am seeing but the only results I've come up with relate to hfnetchk
> >> > > and
> >> > > a checksum problem.
> >> > >
> >> > > The version of ntoskrnl.exe which ships with MS04-011, according to
> >> > > the
> >> > > security bulletin, is dated 11/03/2004, with a size of 1,726,032
> >> > > bytes and
> >> > > a version of 5.0.2195.6902
> >> > >
> >> > > All of my Win2K servers have been patched with MS04-011 and the patch
> >> > > is
> >> > > listed in add and remove programs. The version of ntoskrnl.exe in the
> >> > > System32 directory is as listed above on only some of them. On the
> >> > > rest it
> >> > > has a file date of 26/02/2003, a size of 1,699,904 bytes and the
> >> > > correct
> >> > > version, (5.0.2195.6902). However, on these servers, the correct
> >> > > version,
> >> > > with date, size and version matching the security bulletin is in the
> >> > > DLLCache directory.
> >> > >
> >> > > The version of ntoskrnl.exe in the KB835732 uninstall directory on
> >> > > all
> >> > > servers is dated 19/06/2003. The filesize is 1,694,976 bytes and the
> >> > > version is 5.0.2195.6717.
> >> > >
> >> > > The servers with the incorrect version in the System32 directory
> >> > > include
> >> > > all the domain controllers and certain application servers, but so
> >> > > far I
> >> > > haven't been able to identify a common factor between all machines
> >> > > with
> >> > > the incorrect version.
> >> > >
> >> > > Yesterday, I did some tests to investigate this further.
> >> > >
> >> > > Firstly, on one affected server I uninstalled the MS04-011 patch.
> >> > > After
> >> > > I'd done this, the ntoskrnl.exe was the 19/06/2003 version. Then I
> >> > > reinstalled the patch and checked the versions. The version in
> >> > > System32
> >> > > was the 26/02/2004 version and the DLLCache version was 11/03/2004.
> >> > > For
> >> > > some reason the newer version in the DLLCache does not overwrite the
> >> > > older
> >> > > version in the System32 directory. We've had systems with a newer
> >> > > version
> >> > > of the file in the DLLCache directory left for weeks and rebooted
> >> > > multiple
> >> > > times without the System32 version being updated.
> >> > >
> >> > > Next, I searched on affected (test) system for files named
> >> > > ntoskrnl.exe. I
> >> > > found two copies dated 26/02/2003, one copy in System32 dated
> >> > > 26/02/2004
> >> > > and one copy in the DLLCache dated 11/03/2004. To see if I could
> >> > > force the
> >> > > overwrite, I renamed the version in the System32 directory, hoping
> >> > > the
> >> > > version from the DLLCache would be copied in. Within a few seconds,
> >> > > the
> >> > > file was replaced, but with the same file, (dated 26/02/2004), that
> >> > > was
> >> > > there before.
> >> > >
> >> > > I'm totally at a loss as to why MS04-011 would install a different
> >> > > version
> >> > > of ntoskrnl.exe than listed on the bulletin on some machines only and
> >> > > why
> >> > > it would put a newer version in the DLLCache on those machines. I'm
> >> > > also a
> >> > > bit concerned that without the correct version of the ntoskrnl.exe,
> >> > > the
> >> > > machines are not properly security patched.
> >> > >
> >> > > As I am seeing this behaviour on 10% or so of my servers, I am a mite
> >> > > worried.
> >> > >
> >> > > Does anyone know why I am observing this? Any ideas or theories?
> >> > >
> >> > > I'd really appreciate any thoughts.
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks,
> >> > >
> >> > > Emma Holmes
> >> > > MCSE
> >> > > Server Security Analyst
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
>
>
>