Microsoft Refutes Vulnerability of Patch

By David Worthington | Published March 31, 2005, 6:21 PM

Microsoft has acknowledged that a small number of users who installed a security patch issued in January have experienced technical problems that may degrade system performance or cause unexpected behavior. Despite published reports, however, those who applied the patch are not subject to attacks stemming from the vulnerability.

The patch, KB891711 update corrects an issue with Windows cursor and icon format handling that could lead to remote code execution. KB891711 is a critical update.

A Microsoft spokesperson told BetaNews that the quality control issues associated with the patch were, "No big deal," saying, "Microsoft has received reports of a small subset of Windows 98 and ME users that have experienced problems after installing MS05-002."

"We are currently investigating these customer cases and working to provide a solution. Microsoft continues to encourage users to install this update to be protected from the vulnerability."

Microsoft also stated that reports claiming the patch does not protect users are factually incorrect.

But whether or the number of affected users is a small subset of customers, support newsgroups were abuzz with comments from customers discussing their own tribulations.

"With a company like Microsoft with all of the external testing and customers you would think that they would not have quality control issues," said Andrew Jaquith, senior analyst with Yankee Group, a research and consulting firm.

"This shouldn't happen but it is the nature of the beast. With the myriad of supported devices and pedigree of Windows, etc, it is impossible not to have hiccups from time to time. This points to the importance of thorough beta testing before production."

Comments

View comments by with a score of at least

Only microsoft! I agree how retarted.

Score: 0

|

...I have applied it on a few 98 systems and there are no apparent issues...hey guys! It's Windows 98, the oldest OS with support for critical updates. It supports more hardware and until just last year (when Win2k took the crown--that's right, windows 2000, not XP) more software than any other OS ever. MS is only supporting it because so many people would have gone nuts if they pulled the plug. MS has wanted to end support for 98 completely since June of 2003, and I imagine their programmers are beginning to get tired of supporting that aging OS. I can cut them some slack for this one, but then again if my network had the problem I may think differently...

Score: 0

|

Microsoft doesn't really care if anybody is using their previous software or not. For example, I have several WinCE machines (Jornada 680, Jornada 548) with OS's that they feel they don't need to support any longer. They should be made to support what they create. Just like OEM automobile parts they have to manufacture them and support them for a certain number of years.

Score: 0

|

I had to uninstall this patch a week ago.. I cite multiple crashes, slower system performance and lack of stability as the reasons for the uninstall. Since I uninstalled it, system runs MUCH better

Score: 0

|

I've also experienced problems on the few remaining Windows 98 machines here on my college campus.

We have found that the patch actually creates a "RunService" entry in the registry that runs C:\Windows\System\KB891711\KB891711.exe"... shutting down the program in the task list and then deleting the registry entry in HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunServices "disables" the patch from memory and seems to resolve crashing issues without the need for uninstalling... Also, WindowsUpdate will not attempt to reinstall it this way since it knows the patch is still there.

Score: 0

|

I removed it too-- how moronic to make a patch run as a service...

Score: 0

|

Issues on one of our machines in the office - I was considering wiping the thing until I read this. Quick disable of it in msconfig sorted all the issues!

Beforet that we were experience exception errors every 15 seconds or so, citing a crashed application (which I can only assume was this patch). Crazy thing.

Score: 0

|

It's the US vs. the EU over Oracle+Sun and the meaning of 'open source'

Now that the EU is a virtual country, the US Justice Dept. is taking a stand in favor of its view -- and against the EC's -- that MySQL will survive under Oracle.

Qualcomm: $1.3 billion Samsung licensing deal unrelated to fair trade violations

Samsung has come to a 15-year licensing deal with Qualcomm over 3G and 4G wireless technology.

Firefox turns five: Thanks for giving us a choice

Carmi Levy | Wide Angle Zoom: No longer the phoenix rising from the ashes, Mozilla has carried on more than just Netscape's legacy.

If Microsoft sites lead time online, pigs can fly

How can people spend more time at Microsoft sites, when the measure of success is Windows Live Messenger, which sits on the desktop?

Kindle for PC opens in beta, underwhelms

Amazon has opened the beta of Kindle for PC, a companion to the Kindle, but little else.

European ministers approve watered-down 'neutral net' language

The latest provision in the EU's telecoms regulatory framework would let businesses cancel individuals' Internet access, if they go to court first.

Snow Leopard and Windows 7 still can't crack the netbook problem

Apple has killed Atom support in OS X 10.6.2 and Windows 7 Starter Edition is stripped of "basic" functionality.

Microsoft's Top 3 advances in Exchange Server 2010

The latest round of changes launched today will impact how admins deliver services to e-mail recipients, and how much companies will pay along the way.

Nokia's 'limited number' of recalled chargers exceeds 14 million

Today, the Finnish phone maker has begun a recall of mobile phone chargers that are a shock hazard.

Ubuntu 9.10 upgraders report frustration

For those Wine aficionados out there, beware of the remote possibility that your Linux system could be infected by Windows-seeking malware.

Supreme Court considers patentability of abstract methods today

Can software that executes a formula for a business process qualify for federal patents? An appeals court already said no, and inventors are making their case.