Re: Two Versions of SQL Server 2000, Service Pack 3

From: Kimberly L. Tripp (Kimberly@nospam.sqlskills.com)
Date: 01/30/03 

From: "Kimberly L. Tripp" <Kimberly@nospam.sqlskills.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 08:16:19 -0800

David - Can you please run:

SELECT SERVERPROPERTY('ProductLevel')

I suspect that you are running a beta version (that was not publicly
released but instead released through early adopters programs as Microsoft
only released sp3 publicly the second week of Jan 2003). Regardless, the
above two queries should tell you exactly what you are running. The final
build of SQL 2K sp3 for ProductVersion should show 760. If you have anything
lower than 760 you don't have the final version of sp3.

hth,
kt

**** Please reply only on the newsgroups! Include dml/ddl, when possible.
Thanks ****
Kimberly L. Tripp
Principal Mentor, Solid Quality Learning www.SolidQualityLearning.com
President, SYSolutions, Inc. www.SQLSkills.com

"David" <david.mcnamee@sc.ngb.army.mil> wrote in message
news:050601c2c873$8401a610$89f82ecf@TK2MSFTNGXA01...
> MS released SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 3 late last
> year. Our boxes were updated and when queried indicated
> that they had SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 3 installed.
> Many servers were exploited that had that version of
> service pack 3 installed. So now the security personnel
> are telling our entire enterprise NOT to install service
> pack 3, even though I am trying to tell them that the new
> version is okay. Well, as of Jan 27 there is a new re-
> released version of service pack 3, but since it doesn't
> say it is a "new or re-released" version of service pack
> 3, the "security experts" are still assuming it is the
> vulnerable service pack 3. Where can I find it in an
> article or documentation that specifically states that the
> current version of service pack 3 that MS has on its
> download page, is in fact a re-release of service pack 3.
> MS seems to be playing with semantics by saying it is a re-
> release of the security patch. The difference between re-
> releaseing a security patch with a new Q-number, and re-
> releaseing a service pack with the same number is going to
> have negative implications and smells like a cover-up.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Two Versions of SQL Server 2000, Service Pack 3
    ... the released versions of SP3 for SQL Server and MSDE ... > that they had SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 3 installed. ... > are telling our entire enterprise NOT to install service ... > releaseing a service pack with the same number is going to ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.security)
  • Re: Two Versions of SQL Server 2000, Service Pack 3
    ... beta versions installed on your servers. ... > that they had SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 3 installed. ... > are telling our entire enterprise NOT to install service ... > releaseing a service pack with the same number is going to ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.security)
  • Re: Two Versions of SQL Server 2000, Service Pack 3
    ... December that refer to SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 3, ... >> are telling our entire enterprise NOT to install service ... >> releaseing a service pack with the same number is going ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.security)
  • Re: Two Versions of SQL Server 2000, Service Pack 3
    ... SP3 just happens to include this fix and is the ... easiest way to install the fix BUT sp3 also includes numerous other fixes ... > I installed Service pack iii on the 26th. ... >>> releaseing a service pack with the same number is going ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.security)
  • Two Versions of SQL Server 2000, Service Pack 3
    ... that they had SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 3 installed. ... releaseing a security patch with a new Q-number, ... releaseing a service pack with the same number is going to ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.security)