Re: How to fix broken security in Windows 2000?
From: Karl Levinson [x y], mvp (levinson_k_at_despammed.com)
Date: 02/08/05
- Next message: siljaline: "Spyware Blaster Update 07/02/05"
- Previous message: Rick Dilley: "Re: How to fix broken security in Windows 2000?"
- In reply to: Shannon Jacobs: "Re: How to fix broken security in Windows 2000?"
- Next in thread: Shannon Jacobs: "Re: How to fix broken security in Windows 2000?"
- Reply: Shannon Jacobs: "Re: How to fix broken security in Windows 2000?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 15:33:02 -0800
"Shannon Jacobs" wrote:
> newsgroups, I had already spent quite a bit of time trying to do it the
> "Microsoft way", and found out that I was apparently wasting my time.
Naturally there's a chance all the various eight steps in the article may
not fix your problem. It's still necessary to try them [again] and report
back what happened.
I don't believe you really tried those steps, or didn't try them the right
way, or tried step 1 on one computer and step 8 on a different computer, or
you got some error message when trying these steps several months ago that we
need to know about. Just saying "tried it, didn't fix my problem" is NOT
enough information. But then you knew that already, because you are an
experienced tech support person.
> make progress by that path, there would need to be some way to establish a
> relationship between a file and the security certificate it requires.
Not correct. There's no such thing as an association between a cert and a
signed file, the association is in the file itself. The article I posted
does tell you about many of the other dependencies that have nothing to do
with certificates or files.
> I really am curious why you (Karl Levinson, mvp) persist in blath^H^H^H^H^H
> commenting about a technical topic you know so little about.
> import all of them? (Actually, I suspect that approach would actually fail
> unless they were imported in the proper order.)
You are again incorrect about how PKI works. If you're going to baselessly
claim that I know nothing about PKI certificates in Windows, you should avoid
making multiple inaccurate statements yourself in the same post.
> relationship between a file and the security certificate it requires. I can
> definitely say that the specific security certificates listed in that
> article (and in several others) are already present and therefore do NOT
> solve the problems on at least one machine.
You should have said that before. So now we know you looked and made sure
all the certificates are there.
> the same time. Still, I do have the impression that the problem is not
> absolutely uniform, but that some machines are missing more certificates
> than others.
Oops. I thought you said all the certificates were there? Which ones are
missing? How do you expect the machines missing certificates to ever work?
Besides, just two days ago you said the problem was "How can missing security
certificates be identified and replaced?"
I still don't believe you've checked to see what certificates are missing,
and the other 7 steps, etc. Ignore all the certificates there. Only look at
the three or so mentioned in the article. Counting total number of certs or
looking at all the other certs is irrelevant.
- Next message: siljaline: "Spyware Blaster Update 07/02/05"
- Previous message: Rick Dilley: "Re: How to fix broken security in Windows 2000?"
- In reply to: Shannon Jacobs: "Re: How to fix broken security in Windows 2000?"
- Next in thread: Shannon Jacobs: "Re: How to fix broken security in Windows 2000?"
- Reply: Shannon Jacobs: "Re: How to fix broken security in Windows 2000?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|