Re: To clarify the link for CWShredder Update

From: Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP] (sbradcpa_at_pacbell.net)
Date: 02/27/04

  • Next message: Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]: "Re: To clarify the link for CWShredder Update" 
    Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 08:55:47 -0800

    It's not wormable... but 98's and ME are still vulnerable. But without
    the info on the bulletin.. how do we know this? grrrrrrrrrr.......

    Jim Eshelman wrote:
    > Artwilder wrote:
    >
    >> I was told that the patch 828028 was not regression tested. It
    >>was not fully tested to Microsoft's standards. I was wondering if it
    >>causes problems in user's machines that have installed this patch?
    >>Any information on this? Thanks in advance.
    >
    >
    > Correct. It's in the "not fiully regression tested, call MS if you really
    > need it, don't race to apply it otherwise, besides you very likely don't
    > need it" state.
    >
    > In fact, the file in question isn't even in Win98 Original at all - unless
    > you've installed NetMeeting. It *is* in Win98 SE.
    > 

    -- 
http://www.sbslinks.com/really.htm
  • Next message: Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]: "Re: To clarify the link for CWShredder Update"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: To clarify the link for CWShredder Update
      ... Jim Eshelman wrote: ... > Artwilder wrote: ... >> I was told that the patch 828028 was not regression tested. ... > need it, don't race to apply it otherwise, besides you very likely don't ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsupdate)
    • Re: To clarify the link for CWShredder Update
      ... Jim Eshelman wrote: ... > Artwilder wrote: ... >> I was told that the patch 828028 was not regression tested. ... > need it, don't race to apply it otherwise, besides you very likely don't ...
      (microsoft.public.security)
    • Re: To clarify the link for CWShredder Update
      ... Jim Eshelman wrote: ... > Artwilder wrote: ... >> I was told that the patch 828028 was not regression tested. ... > need it, don't race to apply it otherwise, besides you very likely don't ...
      (microsoft.public.windows.inetexplorer.ie6.browser)
    • [x86_64 MCE] [RFC] mce.c race condition (or: when evil hacks are the only options)
      ... The race requires a large number of machine checks to be occurring in order ... In the normal case, the rest would get cleaned up by the subsequent loop, ... fact is waiting for all CPUs to be done, which could take up to a tick -- or ... I've come up with a patch that does this, ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: Patch for review: resolve a race condition in [sg]etpriority()
      ... Here is a patch which resolves a race condition in etpriority, ... What I did in the attached patch is basically: ... My only reason for favoring the wakeup for complete initialization is that ... while this patch may solve the getprio/setprio race, ...
      (freebsd-arch)