FIX for ZoneAlarm & KB951748 issue released

[Phyllis]

That is what I thought, but never know until you ask. Thanks

"Charles Lee" wrote in message
news:%23E$4N8C5IHA.784@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> nope... only for pc's with zone alarm installed.... (like you would
> expect)
>
>
>
> me thinks PA Bear didn't read your previous post properly before
> respnoding....
>
>
> "Phyllis" wrote in message
> news:Or9ZBKC5IHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> So this fix works even if you are not running Zone Alarms?
>>
>
>
>> "PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote in message
>> news:ezKj7394IHA.4988@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> ZA's had the fix for several days now:
>>>
>>> Resolution [was Workaround] for Sudden Loss of Internet Access Problem
>>> (revised multiple times since release on 08 July 2008)
>>> http://download.zonealarm.com/bin/free/pre...ccessIssue.html
>>>
>>> NB: Do NOT use Option #2 if at all possible! The vulnerability
>>> addressed by KB951748 *is* a big deal! See
>>> http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix...net_tues_1.html
>>>
>>> Want to consider other, more highly-rated firewalls?
>>> http://www.matousec.com/projects/firewall-...nge/results.php
>>> --
>>> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
>>> MS MVP-IE, Mail, Security, Windows Desktop Experience - since 2002
>>> AumHa VSOP & Admin http://aumha.net
>>> DTS-L http://dts-l.net/
>>>
>>>
>>> Phyllis wrote:
>>>> After installing the latest updates I was having internet connection
>>>> problems with both my cable and wireless router on a computer that does
>>>> not
>>>> have Zone Alarms installed. I am using Windows Firewall and AVG
>>>> anti-virus.
>>>> All the responses I have read have been like the only ones that are
>>>> having a
>>>> problem with internet connection after the updates are the ones running
>>>> Zonelabs products. My fix was to do a system restore back to before
>>>> the
>>>> updates and marked them not to install again. I'm going to leave it
>>>> that
>>>> way until Microsoft comes up with a fix for their fix.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Unknown" wrote in message
>>>> news:1rQdk.32149$ZE5.13723@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>>>> It has no advantages anyway.
>>>>> "Joan Archer" wrote in message
>>>>> news:u2Apvms4IHA.5012@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> I just got rid of ZA
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Joan Archer
>>>>>> http://www.freewebs.com/crossstitcher
>>>>>> http://lachsoft.com/photogallery
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "MowGreen [MVP]" wrote in message
>>>>>> news:udORZYs4IHA.996@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>> snip>
>>>>>>> Frankly speaking, uninstalling ZA and obtaining a firewall that will
>>>>>>> protect the system and not cause updating issues is possible:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Firewall Challenge
>>>>>>> http://www.matousec.com/projects/firewall-...nge/results.php
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> MowGreen [MVP 2003-2008]
>>>>>>> ===============
>>>>>>> *-343-* FDNY
>>>>>>> Never Forgotten
>>>>>>> ===============
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

 

[Unknown]

Pa Bear obviously didn't read your post. Zone Alarm update will be useless
to you. Are you sure you are configured to use WINDOWS firewall?
"Phyllis" wrote in message
news:Or9ZBKC5IHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> So this fix works even if you are not running Zone Alarms?
>
> "PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote in message
> news:ezKj7394IHA.4988@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> ZA's had the fix for several days now:
>>
>> Resolution [was Workaround] for Sudden Loss of Internet Access Problem
>> (revised multiple times since release on 08 July 2008)
>> http://download.zonealarm.com/bin/free/pre...ccessIssue.html
>>
>> NB: Do NOT use Option #2 if at all possible! The vulnerability addressed
>> by KB951748 *is* a big deal! See
>> http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix...net_tues_1.html
>>
>> Want to consider other, more highly-rated firewalls?
>> http://www.matousec.com/projects/firewall-...nge/results.php
>> --
>> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
>> MS MVP-IE, Mail, Security, Windows Desktop Experience - since 2002
>> AumHa VSOP & Admin http://aumha.net
>> DTS-L http://dts-l.net/
>>
>>
>> Phyllis wrote:
>>> After installing the latest updates I was having internet connection
>>> problems with both my cable and wireless router on a computer that does
>>> not
>>> have Zone Alarms installed. I am using Windows Firewall and AVG
>>> anti-virus.
>>> All the responses I have read have been like the only ones that are
>>> having a
>>> problem with internet connection after the updates are the ones running
>>> Zonelabs products. My fix was to do a system restore back to before the
>>> updates and marked them not to install again. I'm going to leave it
>>> that
>>> way until Microsoft comes up with a fix for their fix.
>>>
>>>
>>> "Unknown" wrote in message
>>> news:1rQdk.32149$ZE5.13723@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>>> It has no advantages anyway.
>>>> "Joan Archer" wrote in message
>>>> news:u2Apvms4IHA.5012@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>>> I just got rid of ZA
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Joan Archer
>>>>> http://www.freewebs.com/crossstitcher
>>>>> http://lachsoft.com/photogallery
>>>>>
>>>>> "MowGreen [MVP]" wrote in message
>>>>> news:udORZYs4IHA.996@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> snip>
>>>>>> Frankly speaking, uninstalling ZA and obtaining a firewall that will
>>>>>> protect the system and not cause updating issues is possible:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Firewall Challenge
>>>>>> http://www.matousec.com/projects/firewall-...nge/results.php
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MowGreen [MVP 2003-2008]
>>>>>> ===============
>>>>>> *-343-* FDNY
>>>>>> Never Forgotten
>>>>>> ===============
>>
>
>

 

[PA Bear [MS MVP]]

No, sorry. It's been a very long week...

Then again, you did post in a thread about ZoneAlarm and KB951748 instead of
beginning your own thread.

What's your Windows version (e.g., WinXP SP3) and IE version, Phyllis? What
other updates did you install this week besides KB951748?
--
~PA Bear


Phyllis wrote:
> So this fix works even if you are not running Zone Alarms?
>
> "PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote in message
> news:ezKj7394IHA.4988@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> ZA's had the fix for several days now:
>>
>> Resolution [was Workaround] for Sudden Loss of Internet Access Problem
>> (revised multiple times since release on 08 July 2008)
>> http://download.zonealarm.com/bin/free/pre...ccessIssue.html
>>
>> NB: Do NOT use Option #2 if at all possible! The vulnerability addressed
>> by KB951748 *is* a big deal! See
>> http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix...net_tues_1.html
>>
>> Want to consider other, more highly-rated firewalls?
>> http://www.matousec.com/projects/firewall-...nge/results.php
>> --
>> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
>> MS MVP-IE, Mail, Security, Windows Desktop Experience - since 2002
>> AumHa VSOP & Admin http://aumha.net
>> DTS-L http://dts-l.net/

 

[flpat4747]

Hi Folks, Help please. Have picked this question only because it is recent
and I hope then people will see my call for help. I would like to pose a
question but everytime I try to use new
it doesn't work it turns red and the drop down list appears. I chose
question but after that nothing happens. I'm trapped. Help I put this message
in one other place in the hopes someone would see it.

"PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote:

> [Crossposted to Windows Update, WinXP General, IE General, Security,
> Security Home Users newsgroups]
>
> Resolution [was Workaround] for Sudden Loss of Internet Access Problem
> http://download.zonealarm.com/bin/free/pre...ccessIssue.html
> (revised multiple times since release on 08 July 2008)
>
> NB: Do NOT use Option #2 if at all possible! The vulnerability addressed by
> KB951748 *is* a big deal! See
> http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix...net_tues_1.html
>
> Want to consider other, more highly-rated firewalls?
> http://www.matousec.com/projects/firewall-...nge/results.php
> --
> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
> MS MVP-IE, Mail, Security, Windows Desktop Experience - since 2002
> AumHa VSOP & Admin http://aumha.net
> DTS-L http://dts-l.net/
>
>

 

[Big_Al]

flpat4747 wrote:
> Hi Folks, Help please. Have picked this question only because it is recent
> and I hope then people will see my call for help. I would like to pose a
> question but everytime I try to use new
> it doesn't work it turns red and the drop down list appears. I chose
> question but after that nothing happens. I'm trapped. Help I put this message
> in one other place in the hopes someone would see it.
>

If you used a reader like Outlook Express or Thunderbird etc, you would
have a much easier time using newsgroups. Web Sevices is a horrible
interface.

 

[PA Bear [MS MVP]]

Accessing the MS newsgroups in Outlook Express Newsreader
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertz...groupsetup.mspx

Setting up Outlook Express to access Microsoft newsgroups
http://www.michaelstevenstech.com/outlooke...ssnewreader.htm

Setting up Windows Mail (Vista) to access Microsoft newsgroups
http://www.winhelponline.com/blog/microsof...r-windows-mail/

--
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-IE, Mail, Security, Windows Desktop Experience - since 2002
AumHa VSOP & Admin http://aumha.net
DTS-L http://dts-l.net/

flpat4747 wrote:
> Hi Folks, Help please. Have picked this question only because it is recent
> and I hope then people will see my call for help. I would like to pose a
> question but everytime I try to use new
> it doesn't work it turns red and the drop down list appears. I chose
> question but after that nothing happens. I'm trapped. Help I put this
> message in one other place in the hopes someone would see it.
>
> "PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote:
>
>> [Crossposted to Windows Update, WinXP General, IE General, Security,
>> Security Home Users newsgroups]
>>
>> Resolution [was Workaround] for Sudden Loss of Internet Access Problem
>> http://download.zonealarm.com/bin/free/pre...ccessIssue.html
>> (revised multiple times since release on 08 July 2008)
>>
>> NB: Do NOT use Option #2 if at all possible! The vulnerability addressed
>> by KB951748 *is* a big deal! See
>> http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix...net_tues_1.html
>>
>> Want to consider other, more highly-rated firewalls?
>> http://www.matousec.com/projects/firewall-...nge/results.php
>> --
>> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
>> MS MVP-IE, Mail, Security, Windows Desktop Experience - since 2002
>> AumHa VSOP & Admin http://aumha.net
>> DTS-L http://dts-l.net/

 

[xxexbushpig]

Well it might have been a "dimbulb" (which is a great new word BTW), but it
wasn't as big a dimbulb as the Microsoft person who issued the KB951748
update that screwed up millions of people!

"Nunya Bidnits" wrote:

> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
> > Nunya Bidnits wrote:
> >
> >> OK, I just refreshed the page and now its there. But you can see
> >> from the cut and paste it wasn't there, at least not for a while.
> >> The "date last revised" on that page has not changed, July 9. I may
> >> be crazy but I ain't stupid, when everyone said it was there I tried
> >> that page several times, and
> >> have never navigated to it before today, so it was not in my cache.
> >
> > That page has been revised at least four (4) times since it was first
> > published on 08 July 2008.
>
> Well, some dimbulb revised it at least once without the update links....
> sheesh.
>
> MartyB in KC
>
>

 

[PA Bear [MS MVP]]

So Windows must be compatible with ZA and any other third-party application,
not the other way around?

Get real.


xxexbushpig wrote:
> Well it might have been a "dimbulb" (which is a great new word BTW), but
> it
> wasn't as big a dimbulb as the Microsoft person who issued the KB951748
> update that screwed up millions of people!

 

[V Green]

"PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote in message
news:OF4tAiE5IHA.4344@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> So Windows must be compatible with ZA and any other third-party application,
> not the other way around?

Why not?

ZA WORKED before the update. The update BROKE it.
So it's ZA's problem?

Get real.

>
> Get real.
>
>
> xxexbushpig wrote:
> > Well it might have been a "dimbulb" (which is a great new word BTW), but
> > it
> > wasn't as big a dimbulb as the Microsoft person who issued the KB951748
> > update that screwed up millions of people!
>

 

[Shenan Stanley]

PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
> So Windows must be compatible with ZA and any other third-party
> application, not the other way around?

V Green wrote:
> Why not?
>
> ZA WORKED before the update. The update BROKE it.
> So it's ZA's problem?
>
> Get real.

Yes.

Stay general and tell me how you can logically and reasonably say
otherwise... Leave out any specific names.

The original manufacturer of an original product released a patch/upgrade
for their original product. The original product had been modified in this
case by a third party product. The original manufacturer has no
responsibility to test all the possible third party add-ons/changes you can
perform on their product - because they simply would not have the resources
or time to do so - nor is it probably logistically possible/plausible.
Therefore - if a change (critical) is made to the original product and the
third party product no longer functions as the third party vendor said it
would - it is their responsibility to decide whether or not to make it
right.

I responded like this in another location already - if you have someway to
legitimately change that logic around - I would be glad to read. This is
what I wrote earlier - it's repetative in many ways to what I wrote above -
but perhaps seeing it described in a couple of ways will allow more people
to understand the point... And if there is another side to it - perhaps be
able to explain that point of view.

( begin repost )

No offense meant below - honest question...

You have a (potential) problem with an update for the original product you
purchased because you have modified the original product with the addition
of a third party product that has no relation with the manufacturer of the
original product other than the fact they made their product to fit 'on top
of' that original product - and your complaint is with the original product
manufacturer?

Wouldn't your complaint be better received if made to those who made the
third party product you chose to replace the parts of the original product
when you decided you wanted to modify it?

P.S. - I couldn't care less that the specific complaint is about Microsoft,
Chevrolet, Whirlpool or whomever - that is why I left out names in my actual
query completely.

It doesn't matter who made the original product in question - if you chose
to modify it with some third party product and then some
recall/update/upgrade comes out for the original product - do you honestly
believe the manufacturer of the original product should find out every
modification you *could have made* to their product is and make sure their
upgrade/update for their product works with all of those possibilities? Or
would it be more logical to place the responsibility of maintaining the
third party modification to the makers of said modification?

( end repost )

In the end - I believe one could more easily argue the point that it is the
end-users responsibility more than anyone's - as they are the one who made
the conscience choice to change the original product for 'supposed' more
protection with a third party add-ons and then, when the original product
is changed in some way (by the original manufacturer) and that makes the
original product fail unless the add-on is removed... well - who made the
choice to utilize that product?

But that's a completely different point of view than the one I originally
presented - but one I could see someone taking and being able to defend.

Please - present your point of view and back it up - I would actually like
to hear it because I am finding it difficult to fathom it right now.
Perhaps you have a generalized way of explaining it where I can see your
point of view.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

 

[Phyllis]

Sorry about posting in the wrong place, but I was mainly commenting on the
fact that there were others with what seemed like the same problem that did
not have ZA.

XP SP3, IE 7, and my AVG did an update this week that required restart of my
computer which has never happened before, so it is possible they made some
changes as well. Has anyone complained about that freebie screwing things
up? Seems like everything I have on my computer has been wanting to update
today and I'm getting a little gun shy. Thanks

"PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote in message
news:OmgVyZD5IHA.1196@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> No, sorry. It's been a very long week...
>
> Then again, you did post in a thread about ZoneAlarm and KB951748 instead
> of beginning your own thread.
>
> What's your Windows version (e.g., WinXP SP3) and IE version, Phyllis?
> What other updates did you install this week besides KB951748?
> --
> ~PA Bear
>
>
> Phyllis wrote:
>> So this fix works even if you are not running Zone Alarms?
>>
>> "PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote in message
>> news:ezKj7394IHA.4988@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> ZA's had the fix for several days now:
>>>
>>> Resolution [was Workaround] for Sudden Loss of Internet Access Problem
>>> (revised multiple times since release on 08 July 2008)
>>> http://download.zonealarm.com/bin/free/pre...ccessIssue.html
>>>
>>> NB: Do NOT use Option #2 if at all possible! The vulnerability
>>> addressed
>>> by KB951748 *is* a big deal! See
>>> http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix...net_tues_1.html
>>>
>>> Want to consider other, more highly-rated firewalls?
>>> http://www.matousec.com/projects/firewall-...nge/results.php
>>> --
>>> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
>>> MS MVP-IE, Mail, Security, Windows Desktop Experience - since 2002
>>> AumHa VSOP & Admin http://aumha.net
>>> DTS-L http://dts-l.net/
>

 

[Freddy]

Unfortunately, I hve new problems now. Windows XP is hanging on
"Scanningprocess.exe" for over 2 hours. I can't do anything but shutoff my
machine and reboot in Safe mode. Any other solutions?

 

[PA Bear [MS MVP]]

What other *Windows* updates did you install this week? Exactly what
problems are you experiencing since installing the July 2008 updates?

Did you upgrade from AVG v7.5 to v8.0, and are you now running v8.1.135?
--
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-IE, Mail, Security, Windows Desktop Experience - since 2002
AumHa VSOP & Admin http://aumha.net
DTS-L http://dts-l.net/


Phyllis wrote:
> Sorry about posting in the wrong place, but I was mainly commenting on the
> fact that there were others with what seemed like the same problem that
> did
> not have ZA.
>
> XP SP3, IE 7, and my AVG did an update this week that required restart of
> my
> computer which has never happened before, so it is possible they made some
> changes as well. Has anyone complained about that freebie screwing things
> up? Seems like everything I have on my computer has been wanting to
> update
> today and I'm getting a little gun shy. Thanks
>
>> No, sorry. It's been a very long week...
>>
>> Then again, you did post in a thread about ZoneAlarm and KB951748 instead
>> of beginning your own thread.
>>
>> What's your Windows version (e.g., WinXP SP3) and IE version, Phyllis?
>> What other updates did you install this week besides KB951748?
>> --
>> Phyllis wrote:
>>> So this fix works even if you are not running Zone Alarms?
>>>
>>>> ZA's had the fix for several days now:

 

[PA Bear [MS MVP]]

Please begin a new thread in an appropriate newsgroup about these problems,
Freddy. Thanks.

Freddy wrote:
> Unfortunately, I hve new problems now. Windows XP is hanging on
> "Scanningprocess.exe" for over 2 hours. I can't do anything but shutoff
> my
> machine and reboot in Safe mode. Any other solutions?

 

[mae]

read this and follow the links:
Alliance forms to fix DNS flaw
http://www.securityfocus.com/news/11526

mae

"xxexbushpig" wrote in message
news:A3F3FADE-1D54-48E4-B6AD-14F9AB809EB0@microsoft.com...
| Well it might have been a "dimbulb" (which is a great new word BTW), but
it
| wasn't as big a dimbulb as the Microsoft person who issued the KB951748
| update that screwed up millions of people!
|
| "Nunya Bidnits" wrote:
|
-snip-

 

[Phyllis]

Microsoft Windows Updates this week were KB951748 (Security Update for XP),
KB951978 (Update for Windows XP), KB890830 (Windows Malicious Software
Removal Tool). I have been experiencing problems with my internet
connection all week. Sometimes I can't get it to connect at all, or a
window will come up and say "there is no internet connection available, do I
want to work offline or retry." If I click retry it will connect right up.
Then at other times it will connect to the cable connection with no problem,
but then my wireless connection will not connect, it doesn't even show a
network available. After fooling with it (disable, re-enable, repair) it
will just finally connect up.

I had already upgraded to AVG 8.0 several weeks ago. The update this week
was just a part of daily updates, but required restart of my computer which
it never did before. It says 8.0.138.


"PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote in message
news:e30nuxF5IHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> What other *Windows* updates did you install this week? Exactly what
> problems are you experiencing since installing the July 2008 updates?
>
> Did you upgrade from AVG v7.5 to v8.0, and are you now running v8.1.135?
> --
> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
> MS MVP-IE, Mail, Security, Windows Desktop Experience - since 2002
> AumHa VSOP & Admin http://aumha.net
> DTS-L http://dts-l.net/
>
>
> Phyllis wrote:
>> Sorry about posting in the wrong place, but I was mainly commenting on
>> the
>> fact that there were others with what seemed like the same problem that
>> did
>> not have ZA.
>>
>> XP SP3, IE 7, and my AVG did an update this week that required restart of
>> my
>> computer which has never happened before, so it is possible they made
>> some
>> changes as well. Has anyone complained about that freebie screwing
>> things
>> up? Seems like everything I have on my computer has been wanting to
>> update
>> today and I'm getting a little gun shy. Thanks
>>
>>> No, sorry. It's been a very long week...
>>>
>>> Then again, you did post in a thread about ZoneAlarm and KB951748
>>> instead
>>> of beginning your own thread.
>>>
>>> What's your Windows version (e.g., WinXP SP3) and IE version, Phyllis?
>>> What other updates did you install this week besides KB951748?
>>> --
>>> Phyllis wrote:
>>>> So this fix works even if you are not running Zone Alarms?
>>>>
>>>>> ZA's had the fix for several days now:
>

 

[Sam]

xxexbushpig wrote:
> Well it might have been a "dimbulb" (which is a great new word BTW), but it
> wasn't as big a dimbulb as the Microsoft person who issued the KB951748
> update that screwed up millions of people!

Look, I understand where you are coming from. I have been bitten by this
"bug" too (well, not me personally, but couple of relatives I help with
computer stuff).

Also note that I am no Windows fan boy. So I don't get giddy eyed and
swoon at every new Windows release or update and neither do I
*religiously* defend their "secure OS" or their pricing policies (as
some do there ... *ducks*). I just use it as a tool for whatever I have
to do.

So, in my view this particular update, the KB951748, appears to fix some
DNS vulnerability in Windows. Good. But it also messed up Zone Alarm.
But MS has nothing to do with Zone Alarm and ZA people already gave out
an upgraded version of ZA which solves this. It would have been prudent
of ZA people to have seen this coming and taken corrective measures
earlier. As long as MS gave sufficient prior warning to all the vendors
in the field about this update, I don't think they are to blame.

My 2c.

 

[V Green]

"Shenan Stanley" wrote in message
news:OoOdedF5IHA.1420@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
>
> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
> > So Windows must be compatible with ZA and any other third-party
> > application, not the other way around?
>
> V Green wrote:
> > Why not?
> >
> > ZA WORKED before the update. The update BROKE it.
> > So it's ZA's problem?
> >
> > Get real.
>
> Yes.
>
> Stay general and tell me how you can logically and reasonably say
> otherwise... Leave out any specific names.
>
> The original manufacturer of an original product released a patch/upgrade
> for their original product. The original product had been modified in this
> case by a third party product. The original manufacturer has no
> responsibility to test all the possible third party add-ons/changes you can
> perform on their product - because they simply would not have the resources
> or time to do so - nor is it probably logistically possible/plausible.
> Therefore - if a change (critical) is made to the original product and the
> third party product no longer functions as the third party vendor said it
> would - it is their responsibility to decide whether or not to make it
> right.


Sorry, but no. I don't screw over MY customer base that way.
If you choose to live life doing that sort of stuff, then
we must just agree to disagree.

And good luck with customer loyalty...wait a sec, Windows
is a monopoly. Happy Customers, what are those??? They don't
have a choice (go ahead and argue that if you wish, you KNOW
it's true and I won't respond to it) so what do we care about their "user
experience"?



>
> I responded like this in another location already - if you have someway to
> legitimately change that logic around - I would be glad to read. This is
> what I wrote earlier - it's repetative in many ways to what I wrote above -
> but perhaps seeing it described in a couple of ways will allow more people
> to understand the point... And if there is another side to it - perhaps be
> able to explain that point of view.
>
> ( begin repost )
>
> No offense meant below - honest question...
>
> You have a (potential) problem with an update for the original product you
> purchased because you have modified the original product with the addition
> of a third party product that has no relation with the manufacturer of the
> original product other than the fact they made their product to fit 'on top
> of' that original product - and your complaint is with the original product
> manufacturer?
>
> Wouldn't your complaint be better received if made to those who made the
> third party product you chose to replace the parts of the original product
> when you decided you wanted to modify it?
>
> P.S. - I couldn't care less that the specific complaint is about Microsoft,
> Chevrolet, Whirlpool or whomever - that is why I left out names in my actual
> query completely.
>
> It doesn't matter who made the original product in question - if you chose
> to modify it with some third party product and then some
> recall/update/upgrade comes out for the original product - do you honestly
> believe the manufacturer of the original product should find out every
> modification you *could have made* to their product is and make sure their
> upgrade/update for their product works with all of those possibilities? Or
> would it be more logical to place the responsibility of maintaining the
> third party modification to the makers of said modification?
>
> ( end repost )
>
> In the end - I believe one could more easily argue the point that it is the
> end-users responsibility more than anyone's - as they are the one who made
> the conscience choice to change the original product for 'supposed' more
> protection with a third party add-ons and then, when the original product
> is changed in some way (by the original manufacturer) and that makes the
> original product fail unless the add-on is removed... well - who made the
> choice to utilize that product?
>
> But that's a completely different point of view than the one I originally
> presented - but one I could see someone taking and being able to defend.
>
> Please - present your point of view and back it up - I would actually like
> to hear it because I am finding it difficult to fathom it right now.
> Perhaps you have a generalized way of explaining it where I can see your
> point of view.
>
> --
> Shenan Stanley
> MS-MVP
> --
> How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
>

 

[Sam]

[SOLVED] Re: FIX for ZoneAlarm & KB951748 issue released

PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
> [Crossposted to Windows Update, WinXP General, IE General, Security,
> Security Home Users newsgroups]
>
> Resolution [was Workaround] for Sudden Loss of Internet Access Problem
> http://download.zonealarm.com/bin/free/pre...ccessIssue.html
>
> (revised multiple times since release on 08 July 2008)
>
> NB: Do NOT use Option #2 if at all possible! The vulnerability
> addressed by KB951748 *is* a big deal! See
> http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix...net_tues_1.html
>
>
> Want to consider other, more highly-rated firewalls?
> http://www.matousec.com/projects/firewall-...nge/results.php


* Uninstalled the KB951748 update. This got internet working again.
* Upgraded Zone Alarm (was using free version) by downloading the new
version: zlsSetup_70_483_000_en.exe(from the Check Update option of ZA).
* Reinstalled the KB951748 update.
* Got everything working.

All is well again.

Thanks to all the people who suggested this solution.

--
---
Please remove underscores, if any, from my email address to obtain the
correct one. Sorry for the trouble but this is to reduce SPAM.

 

[Big_Al]

Sam wrote:
> xxexbushpig wrote:
>> Well it might have been a "dimbulb" (which is a great new word BTW),
>> but it wasn't as big a dimbulb as the Microsoft person who issued the
>> KB951748 update that screwed up millions of people!
>
> Look, I understand where you are coming from. I have been bitten by this
> "bug" too (well, not me personally, but couple of relatives I help with
> computer stuff).
>
> Also note that I am no Windows fan boy. So I don't get giddy eyed and
> swoon at every new Windows release or update and neither do I
> *religiously* defend their "secure OS" or their pricing policies (as
> some do there ... *ducks*). I just use it as a tool for whatever I have
> to do.
>
> So, in my view this particular update, the KB951748, appears to fix some
> DNS vulnerability in Windows. Good. But it also messed up Zone Alarm.
> But MS has nothing to do with Zone Alarm and ZA people already gave out
> an upgraded version of ZA which solves this. It would have been prudent
> of ZA people to have seen this coming and taken corrective measures
> earlier. As long as MS gave sufficient prior warning to all the vendors
> in the field about this update, I don't think they are to blame.
>
> My 2c.
>
>
>
>

Sam, Read this article:
The DNS bug was found & should have been a co-operative update July 8.
http://securosis.com/2008/07/08/dan-kamins...patch-released/

The article does not say who was notified, but the bug was *not* found
by MS and MS has no responsibility to tell others, as this was all
supposed to be done July 8.

IMHO, ZA missed the boat or was just slow.