Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19
  1. #1
    5 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,070
    Thanks
    42
    Thanked 132 Times in 86 Posts

    A heaping helping of Windows and Office updates




    PATCH WATCH

    A heaping helping of Windows and Office updates


    By Susan Bradley

    It seems that Microsoft is honoring Thanksgiving with a platter full of security and nonsecurity fixings for both Windows and Office. As with big holiday meals, this batch of updates should not be digested in one sitting. Focus on security updates, for now.

    The full text of this column is posted at windowssecrets.com/patch-watch/a-heaping-helping-of-windows-and-office-updates/ (opens in a new window/tab).

    Columnists typically cannot reply to comments here, but do incorporate the best tips into future columns.
    Last edited by Kathleen Atkins; 2014-11-12 at 16:31.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Kathleen Atkins For This Useful Post:

    PeamWS (2014-11-20)

  3. #2
    New Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Greatly helpful column as usual.

    I have been looking for the resolution of October's hold-and-watch non-security updates, and noticed the master Patch Watch chart seems to end last July. Is there a new way these are posed that I haven't found?

  4. #3
    New Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX USA
    Posts
    14
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    After last night's install of Microsoft's patches and a reboot, Internet Explorer 11 would no longer run on my Windows 7 Pro 64-bit system.

    I installed EMET 5.0 a couple of months back (following a suggestion in a WS article), and had not unexpected frequent crashes of IE since that time. [It was quite solid until installing EMET.] But starting this morning every attempt to start IE resulted in a very quick (before fully running) EMET error announcing an EAF+ Guardpage mitigation (and subsequent closing of IE). I tried turning off various EMET controls from the EMET control panel, but was unable to see any useful change.

    I finally removed EMET entirely (using the control panel "remove software") and no more problems.

    Just a heads up, FWIW...

  5. #4
    New Lounger
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    NJ, USA
    Posts
    9
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    On my Win 8.1 system three other updates showed up:
    2995388 - October Rollup 8.1
    2998174 - Active Camera
    3006178 - MDM Client Update

    The second one I'm not worried about. The third - I really don't know understand enough to know if I need it.
    But the first - the October roll-up - that sounds important enough to where I really need to know if it is as important as it sounds, and whether it is safe to install.

    Can anyone help?

    Thanks.

  6. #5
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    4,748
    Thanks
    171
    Thanked 649 Times in 572 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by jknox View Post
    After last night's install of Microsoft's patches and a reboot, Internet Explorer 11 would no longer run on my Windows 7 Pro 64-bit system.

    I installed EMET 5.0 a couple of months back (following a suggestion in a WS article), and had not unexpected frequent crashes of IE since that time. [It was quite solid until installing EMET.] But starting this morning every attempt to start IE resulted in a very quick (before fully running) EMET error announcing an EAF+ Guardpage mitigation (and subsequent closing of IE). I tried turning off various EMET controls from the EMET control panel, but was unable to see any useful change.

    I finally removed EMET entirely (using the control panel "remove software") and no more problems.

    Just a heads up, FWIW...
    If you are using Internet Explorer 11, either on Windows 7 or Windows 8.1, and have deployed EMET 5.0, it is particularly important to install EMET 5.1 as compatibility issues were discovered with the November Internet Explorer security update and the EAF+ mitigation. Alternatively, you can temporarily disable EAF+ on EMET 5.0. Details on how to disable the EAF+ mitigation are available in the User Guide. In general we recommend upgrading to the latest version of EMET to benefit from all the enhancements.
    EMET 5.1 is available


    Bruce

  7. #6
    2 Star Lounger csmart4125's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    199
    Thanks
    121
    Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts
    pglizard,

    Were you aware there was a Patch Update article the last week of October?

  8. #7
    2 Star Lounger csmart4125's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    199
    Thanks
    121
    Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts

    looking for KB 3008627

    I'm sure I missed it in the current Patch Watch. Where is KB 3008627 mentioned in the current column?

    Thanks.

    Charles


    The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits.
    Albert Einstein

  9. #8
    2 Star Lounger csmart4125's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    199
    Thanks
    121
    Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by csmart4125 View Post
    I'm sure I missed it in the current Patch Watch. Where is KB 3008627 mentioned in the current column?

    Thanks.

    Charles

    Win 7 SP1, Office 2010, 3 gb ram, Intel Core 2 Duo 2.00 MHz


    The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits.
    Albert Einstein
    I found the answer in the Windows portion of the forum. Hurray!! It's discussed under Win 8 and 8.1 in nonsecurity updates.

    If you have Win 7 like me, you may also see this update.

    Charles
    Last edited by csmart4125; 2014-11-23 at 07:18.

  10. #9
    Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    50
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Kb2858725

    Susan's column is always helpful.
    I have a question about KB2858725 which was issued by Microsoft 11/26/2013. In the patch watch column back then (almost a year ago), Susan mentioned that other versions of .NET had patching problems, and she recommended SKIP for this patch.
    Susan's last mention of it was in the Master Patch Watch Chart on July 1, 2014 with the status still listed as SKIP, and it has not been mentioned at all since then.

    I skipped it but it still appears in my list of Optional updates.

    This week, Susan said
    "- What to do: I no longer recommend delaying .NET updates;"

    Now then, I cannot tell if my system needs or uses .NET 4.5.1 anyway; there are no obvious errors in my day-to-day use of this PC running Windows 7 Pro SP1 64-bit, and I have never seen an error message for any version of .NET

    So I am wondering if I should go back and install this old patch KB2858725.
    Any advice from Lounge readers? Thank you.

  11. #10
    Lounge VIP bobprimak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Hinsdale, IL, USA
    Posts
    2,482
    Thanks
    176
    Thanked 152 Times in 129 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by aczer View Post
    Susan's column is always helpful.
    I have a question about KB2858725 which was issued by Microsoft 11/26/2013. In the patch watch column back then (almost a year ago), Susan mentioned that other versions of .NET had patching problems, and she recommended SKIP for this patch.
    Susan's last mention of it was in the Master Patch Watch Chart on July 1, 2014 with the status still listed as SKIP, and it has not been mentioned at all since then.

    I skipped it but it still appears in my list of Optional updates.

    This week, Susan said
    "- What to do: I no longer recommend delaying .NET updates;"

    Now then, I cannot tell if my system needs or uses .NET 4.5.1 anyway; there are no obvious errors in my day-to-day use of this PC running Windows 7 Pro SP1 64-bit, and I have never seen an error message for any version of .NET

    So I am wondering if I should go back and install this old patch KB2858725.
    Any advice from Lounge readers? Thank you.
    This month's advice about not delaying .NET patches except for Windows XP users seems to be intended to apply to all outstanding (and still offered) .NET patches. This would seem to include the one you are curious about. It is also true that removing .NET Framework entirely from Windows computers doesn't often break anything important. The choice seems to be up to the user.

    I have no issues with my Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 64-bits installation with this .NET version and the patch installed. Your experience may vary.
    -- Bob Primak --

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to bobprimak For This Useful Post:

    aczer (2014-11-16),csmart4125 (2014-11-17)

  13. #11
    2 Star Lounger csmart4125's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    199
    Thanks
    121
    Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts
    aczer,

    A year or two back, Susan said if your system needs a particular version of .NET Framework to run a program, that version of .NET Framework would be installed. My system apparently needed this version, and it did install.

    Earlier this year I had problems with my computer and had to reload all my programs. Currently 4.5.1 is installed, but I have no updates, including this one, prior to 9/23/2014.

    My advice would be to not install .NET 4.5.1 until you need it. If you do install .NET Framework 4.5.1, see which updates are recommended by Microsoft. Only if KB2858725 is recommended by Microsoft, would I install it.

    Charles

    Last edited by csmart4125; 2014-11-16 at 00:46.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to csmart4125 For This Useful Post:

    aczer (2014-11-16)

  15. #12
    Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    50
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Well, I think I am learning something new here. I had assumed that my machine already had installed .NET 4.5.1 and that KB2858725 was a patch to that.

    But now, you guys are getting me to think that KB2858725 IS the installation of .NET 4.5.1. Is that right?

    So I found this MS support page titled "How to determine which versions and service pack levels of the Microsoft .NET Framework are installed"

    Following the instructions there, I looked in my registry at:
    HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\NET Framework Setup\NDP\v4\Client

    to find this:
    dotnetsnip.JPG

    which helps me to conclude that I have .NET 4 patched to version 4.0.30319

    And I will therefore skip KB2858725 until such time as I see a specific application that asks for the higher version number.
    Just out of curiosity, does anyone know of an application that definitely requires .NET 4.5.1 ?

    Thank you!

  16. #13
    2 Star Lounger csmart4125's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    199
    Thanks
    121
    Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts
    aczer,
    My recent look at the internet makes me think you're correct about KB2858725. It appears that this will install .NET Framework 4.5.1. Since this is listed as optional, my advice is to wait before installing it.

    Earlier this year .NET 4.5.1 installed automatically on my lap top, and no mention was made of which program needed it.

    You may want to look at the information at the bottom of this page for information on contacting Windows Secrets. Susan can give you a definitive answer on this (I recommend asking her to respond only when she has time and after Thanksgiving.)

    Please let me know how you concluded ".NET 4 patched to version 4.0.30319."
    You're more knowledgeable about the registry than I am.

    Thanks for keeping Bob and me posted.

    Charles

    There is no past we need long to return to; there is only the eternally new which is formed out of enlarged elements of the past, and our real endeavor must be towards new and better creation.
    Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

  17. #14
    Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Calgary, AB, Canada
    Posts
    54
    Thanks
    51
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Talking Concerning .NET 4.x.n

    Hi Folks,

    For what it is worth, those of us with W 8.1.n have had .NET 4.5.1 for awhile. I upgraded to .NET 4.5.2 a few months back with no issues.

    I have not had any .NET patching issues since MS stopped catering to W XP at it's EOL. Now I don't know if I run anything the specifically that uses this later version but that is another conversation(I think AMD's latest Beta catylist does???).

    How W 7 SP 1 will react to them I do not personally know but I have not come across any reported issues. I don't like W 8.x.n any better than allot of people from the GUI perspective but some of what is under the hood is wonderful, specifically DISM(W 8's System Readiness Tool) and an improve SFC. When I left W 7 I was have excessive patching issues on much including .NET and could do nothing to correct the issues most of the time because the System Readiness Tool is passive and SFC in W 7 is nearly so. Not so in W 8, DISM & SFC are quite active for fixing problems and just keep getting more so right up to W 8.1.2 Pro. Patching has been much, much easier!!!! I can put up with a sticken' GUI for that.....

    Just say'n, for what it is worth,

    Best Regards All,

    Crysta

  18. #15
    Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    50
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Thanks for the additional insights.
    I still think I will get my wife a new laptop for Christmas, with Win 7 installed and NOT Win 8, then we will see how Win 10 looks when it finally appears.

    Win 7 should stay healthy in the corporate world for a few years, I think, and it seems stable enough and secure enough (with the patching and updating that we are all used to by now).

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •