mark

Distinguished
Mar 30, 2004
2,613
0
20,780
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Can anyone help me with a dial-up networking question? I have
recently loaded an OEM-SP2 version of XP on a computer for my son. I
have set it up with one "administrator" account and two limited "user"
accounts. I have checking for, and download, and installed all
available updates on the internet along with loading some other needed
software. The problem is that one of the limited accounts calls for a
dial-up internet connection every time you log it in. The other
accounts do not. I have used the "dial-up connection trouble
shooter". It had me open "msconfig" and diable programs loading at
startup that may be calling for an internet connection. It also had
me switch off the option to update the system clock automatically over
the net. After doing all that, the problem remains. Any ideas?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Hi,

Most likely some sort of spyware on his system:

Modem Automatically Attempts a Dial-Up Connection [Q316530]
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=316530

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
Associate Expert - WindowsXP Expert Zone
www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

"Mark" <scanner1@email.com> wrote in message
news:762261lgcm38lbt3nktt59l9ler6fa4jo3@4ax.com...
> Can anyone help me with a dial-up networking question? I have
> recently loaded an OEM-SP2 version of XP on a computer for my son. I
> have set it up with one "administrator" account and two limited "user"
> accounts. I have checking for, and download, and installed all
> available updates on the internet along with loading some other needed
> software. The problem is that one of the limited accounts calls for a
> dial-up internet connection every time you log it in. The other
> accounts do not. I have used the "dial-up connection trouble
> shooter". It had me open "msconfig" and diable programs loading at
> startup that may be calling for an internet connection. It also had
> me switch off the option to update the system clock automatically over
> the net. After doing all that, the problem remains. Any ideas?
 

mark

Distinguished
Mar 30, 2004
2,613
0
20,780
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

No spyware was detected on the system by Microsoft AntiSpyware Beta 1.
Also, the connection settings are the same as the other two profiles
that don't hook up immediately on login.

On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 09:00:14 -0400, "Rick \"Nutcase\" Rogers"
<rick@mvps.org> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>Most likely some sort of spyware on his system:
>
>Modem Automatically Attempts a Dial-Up Connection [Q316530]
>http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=316530
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Hi,

The MS spyware beta only detects a handful of the known problems. It should
not be relied on yet. Use one of these:

Adaware www.lavasoft.de
Spybot www.safer-networking.org

Also, the connection settings are inconsequential, as they are obviously
being overridden.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
Associate Expert - WindowsXP Expert Zone
www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

"Mark" <scanner1@email.com> wrote in message
news:30m5615uahsmjinlssmjjs6glidg5n6rp7@4ax.com...
> No spyware was detected on the system by Microsoft AntiSpyware Beta 1.
> Also, the connection settings are the same as the other two profiles
> that don't hook up immediately on login.
>
> On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 09:00:14 -0400, "Rick \"Nutcase\" Rogers"
> <rick@mvps.org> wrote:
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>Most likely some sort of spyware on his system:
>>
>>Modem Automatically Attempts a Dial-Up Connection [Q316530]
>>http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=316530
>
 

mark

Distinguished
Mar 30, 2004
2,613
0
20,780
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

After loading Adaware and using it, the system is now bristling with
anti-adware/spyware capability, but the problem remains. I think we
may be going the wrong direction here. I did a search on files
modified by date and looked at those with activity during the
timeframe that profile is logged on and calling for a connection. The
files showing activity are MS system files and "windows software
distribution" files. I have the SP-2 features set to automatically
update (as recommended), but that profile does not have system
administration capabilities. After the connection is complete, no
communication activity is indicated by the connection icon in the task
tray. When open the profile I have set up for system administration,
no connection is called for at login. The same is true of the other
"user" profile. The computer has only recently been set up and the
profiles have little worth saving so far (other than the time taken to
configure, add shortcuts desired, and individual preferences again).
Most of my time until now has been spent adding viewers and other
basic software needed, and opening profiles over and over until all
the update and warning balloons go away and issues like this one are
resloved. I can delete the profile and add it back again. It just
seems strange that the cause of the problem is so illusive.


On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 21:14:02 -0400, "Rick \"Nutcase\" Rogers"
<rick@mvps.org> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>The MS spyware beta only detects a handful of the known problems. It should
>not be relied on yet. Use one of these:
>
>Adaware www.lavasoft.de
>Spybot www.safer-networking.org
>
>Also, the connection settings are inconsequential, as they are obviously
>being overridden.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Hi Mark,

If it's only happening in the one account, then it has to be a something in
the startup routine specific to that account. It's most likely spy/ad ware,
but there are other causes. Have you checked the user-defined startup folder
for odd entries yet?

C:\Documents and Settings\<username>\Start Menu\Programs\Startup

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
Associate Expert - WindowsXP Expert Zone
www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

"Mark" <scanner1@email.com> wrote in message
news:dps76191hrfjc4msoslsudh3ursg5o24sr@4ax.com...
> After loading Adaware and using it, the system is now bristling with
> anti-adware/spyware capability, but the problem remains. I think we
> may be going the wrong direction here. I did a search on files
> modified by date and looked at those with activity during the
> timeframe that profile is logged on and calling for a connection. The
> files showing activity are MS system files and "windows software
> distribution" files. I have the SP-2 features set to automatically
> update (as recommended), but that profile does not have system
> administration capabilities. After the connection is complete, no
> communication activity is indicated by the connection icon in the task
> tray. When open the profile I have set up for system administration,
> no connection is called for at login. The same is true of the other
> "user" profile. The computer has only recently been set up and the
> profiles have little worth saving so far (other than the time taken to
> configure, add shortcuts desired, and individual preferences again).
> Most of my time until now has been spent adding viewers and other
> basic software needed, and opening profiles over and over until all
> the update and warning balloons go away and issues like this one are
> resloved. I can delete the profile and add it back again. It just
> seems strange that the cause of the problem is so illusive.
>
>
> On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 21:14:02 -0400, "Rick \"Nutcase\" Rogers"
> <rick@mvps.org> wrote:
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>The MS spyware beta only detects a handful of the known problems. It
>>should
>>not be relied on yet. Use one of these:
>>
>>Adaware www.lavasoft.de
>>Spybot www.safer-networking.org
>>
>>Also, the connection settings are inconsequential, as they are obviously
>>being overridden.
>