Re: MS02-065 : new bug posted today ?
From: B. Goodman (no@spam.org)
Date: 11/22/02
- Next message: B. Goodman: "Re: Q329414 MDAC patch - how do I know it is applied?"
- Previous message: Michel Gallant (MVP): "Re: Using S-MIME (encrypted & signed email)"
- In reply to: Jerry Bryant [MS]: "Re: MS02-065 : new bug posted today ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: B. Goodman <no@spam.org> Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 10:13:25 -0500
In article <enK8E#WkCHA.2692@tkmsftngp08>, jbryant@online.microsoft.com
says...
> Sorry for the incomplete answer. The tool that Slav mentioned is also
> referenced in the following article:
>
> How To: Check for MDAC Version
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;en-us;301202
>
> Another quick way is to search your machine for msdadc.dll and check version
> number which will correspond with your installed version of MDAC.
>
I would like to suggest that MS rework their KB article for this patch
to correct the inaccurate information they have listed regarding the
files that are installed. Specifically, they list the following:
_______________________________________________________________________
The following files are copied to the Program Files\Common Files\System
\msadc folder.
Date Time Version Size File name
--------------------------------------------------------
21-Sep-2002 00:36 2.53.6202.0 856,768 Msadce25.dll
09-Oct-2002 21:16 2.12.5118.0 135,440 Msadco21.dll
21-Sep-2002 00:36 2.53.6202.0 430,080 Msadco25.dll
25-Sep-2002 18:47 2.62.9119.1 147,728 Msadco26.dll
09-Oct-2002 21:16 2.12.5118.0 49,936 Msadcs21.dll
21-Sep-2002 00:36 2.53.6202.0 135,168 Msadcs25.dll
25-Sep-2002 18:47 2.62.9119.1 57,616 Msadcs26.dll
21-Sep-2002 00:36 2.53.6202.0 615,655 Msdaprst25.dll
NOTE: Because of file dependencies, this update may contain additional
files.
_______________________________________________________________________
However, NONE of those files is actually there BY THOSE NAMES. It
appears that the two-digit number refers to the MDAC version already on
the machine, but it does NOT appear in the file name.
So, a machine with MDAC 2.5 will have a files:
21-Sep-2002 00:36 2.53.6202.0 856,768 Msadce.dll
21-Sep-2002 00:36 2.53.6202.0 430,080 Msadco.dll
21-Sep-2002 00:36 2.53.6202.0 135,168 Msadcs.dll
21-Sep-2002 00:36 2.53.6202.0 615,655 Msdaprst.dll
And, a machine with MDAC 2.6 will have files:
25-Sep-2002 18:47 2.62.9119.1 147,728 Msadco.dll
25-Sep-2002 18:47 2.62.9119.1 57,616 Msadcs.dll
Finally, a machine with MDAC 2.1 will have files:
09-Oct-2002 21:16 2.12.5118.0 135,440 Msadco.dll
09-Oct-2002 21:16 2.12.5118.0 49,936 Msadcs.dll
Really, writing these articles isn't easy, but it is important that they
be accurate!
While I'm on this particular topic, could I also criticize the log file
generated, c:\winnt\dahotfix.log. Couldn't this thing be a little more
informative. It appears that the setup routine checks for MDAC 2.1,
2.5, 2.6 in turn. I see things like:
An error occurred while setup was trying to verify the version of
Microsoft Data Access Components current installed on the machine.
Either the version currently installed does not match the version
of this hotfix package, or setup was unable to determine the version
currently installed.
Apparently, on this test machine, MDAC 2.7 is already installed, so I'm
not vulnerable. However, the log never says anything of the kind. It
keeps listing statements like the one above, but at the very end it
states:
Checking state of setup at end of installation.
Setup was successful.
But it appears setup needed to take no action. Why give errors all the
way through and then finish by saying "Setup was successful."
I'm sorry, but if I were one of the biggest, most successful companies
on the planet, and I wanted to chant the "Trustworthy Computing" mantra,
I'd surely be working a LOT harder on the myriad of patches that I
posted to help millions of users correct their security vulnerabilities.
Hey, you guys want to hire me to manage your patches and related
documentation?
- Next message: B. Goodman: "Re: Q329414 MDAC patch - how do I know it is applied?"
- Previous message: Michel Gallant (MVP): "Re: Using S-MIME (encrypted & signed email)"
- In reply to: Jerry Bryant [MS]: "Re: MS02-065 : new bug posted today ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
