KB867801 Security Update installs(?) every day

G

Guest

Windows 2000 Professional
Internet Explorer 6, Service Pack 1 (Version: 6.0.2800.1106)

For several weeks now, every day when I start up Windows,
Update pipes up with:
Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 (KB867801)
I click on "Install", it goes through the motions, finishes OK.
Next day, same thing again.

Our IT department threw in the towel and doesn't know how to resolve this
issue.

Any suggestions?
 
G

Guest

Thanks for your response.

My urlmon.dll version is: 6.0.2800.1485

KB867801 is not listed in Add/Remove

When I scan for updates, Windows Update says:
"There are no critical updates available at this time."
and the non-critical updates do not list KB867801.

C:\Windows\Windows Update.log does not list KB867801.
 
P

PA Bear

First the good Your response tells me you have the most recent
Cumulative Security Update for IE (MS05-020) installed.

With MS05-020 installed, you shouldn't be prompted to install 867801
(MS04-025, Jul-04).

Long shot: IE Tools > Internet Options > Advanced > Browsing > Automatically
check for Interet Explorer updates (uncheck).
 
R

Robert Aldwinckle

Bill Pfeifer said:
Thanks for your response.

My urlmon.dll version is: 6.0.2800.1485

KB867801 is not listed in Add/Remove


So now you should check the versions of all the other modules that 867801 wants to install.
Very likely one of them has been regressed and that is the reason why 867801 would be
offered. Use the link to MS04-025 that KB867801 gives to find the file information.

Note: since we think that you also have MS05-020 you would actually want to restore
whatever module has been regressed to at least the 890923 level, not the level that
867801 would give you.

Alternatively use the MBSA and its HfNetChk equivalent checker to find out what it thinks
about the situation:

Here is an excerpt from a previous reply about that last option:

<excerpt>
Notice that the Security Bulletin suggests verifying whether the patch
is on or needed by using the MBSA. Have you tried that?
You could use it from the command line and get it to check the actual
versions of the modules involved too.

<example>
D:\Program Files\Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer>mbsacli /hf -v -z
</example>

<TITLE>303215 - Microsoft Network Security Hotfix Checker (Hfnetchk.exe) Tool Is Available</TITLE>
< http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q303215 >


HTH

Robert Aldwinckle
---
 
G

Guest

Robert Aldwinckle said:
So now you should check the versions of all the other modules that 867801 wants to install.
Very likely one of them has been regressed and that is the reason why 867801 would be
offered. Use the link to MS04-025 that KB867801 gives to find the file information.

Did that. Here's what I found:
File MS04-025 Ver. My Version
Browseui.dll 6.0.2800.1400 6.0.2800.1622
Mshtml.dll 6.0.2800.1458 6.0.2800.1498
Shdocvw.dll 6.0.2800.1400 6.0.2800.1622
shlwapi.dll 6.0.2800.1552 6.0.2800.1612
urlmon.dll 6.0.2800.1400 6.0.2800.1485
wininet.dll 6.0.2800.1405 6.0.2800.1496
Note: since we think that you also have MS05-020 you would actually want to restore
whatever module has been regressed to at least the 890923 level, not the level that
867801 would give you.

I looked at MS05-020, and its versions of those 6 files matched the ones I
have.
Alternatively use the MBSA and its HfNetChk equivalent checker to find out what it thinks
about the situation:

Here is an excerpt from a previous reply about that last option:

<excerpt>
Notice that the Security Bulletin suggests verifying whether the patch
is on or needed by using the MBSA. Have you tried that?
You could use it from the command line and get it to check the actual
versions of the modules involved too.

<example>
D:\Program Files\Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer>mbsacli /hf -v -z
</example>


Here's the output of mbsacli:
C:\Program Files\Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer>mbsacli /hf -v -z
Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer
Version 1.2.1 (1.2.4013.0)
(C) Copyright 2002-2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
HFNetChk developed for Microsoft Corporation by Shavlik Technologies, LLC.
(C) Copyright 2002-2004 Shavlik Technologies, LLC. www.shavlik.com


Scanning VAN-D7K5L11
Attempting to get CAB from http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=18922
XML successfully loaded.

Done scanning VAN-D7K5L11
----------------------------
VAN-D7K5L11 (172.30.1.23)
----------------------------

* WINDOWS 2000 PROFESSIONAL SP4

Note MS02-064 327522
Please refer to 306460 for a detailed explanation.

Note MS03-030 819696
Please refer to 306460 for a detailed explanation.

Note MS04-016 839643
Please refer to 306460 for a detailed explanation.

Note MS05-009 887472
Please refer to 306460 for a detailed explanation.


* INTERNET EXPLORER 6 SP1

Note MS04-028 833987
Please refer to 306460 for a detailed explanation.


* WINDOWS MEDIA PLAYER 9 SERIES GOLD

Information
All necessary hotfixes have been applied.

* MDAC 2.6 GOLD

Warning
The latest service pack for this product is not installed.
Currently Gold is installed. The latest service pack is SP2.


* MICROSOFT VIRTUAL MACHINE (VM) GOLD

Information
All necessary hotfixes have been applied.

* MSXML 2.6 SP2

Information
There are no security updates available for this product.

Warning
The latest service pack for this product is not installed.
Currently SP2 is installed. The latest service pack is SP3.


* MSXML 3.0 SP3

Information
There are no security updates available for this product.

Warning
The latest service pack for this product is not installed.
Currently SP3 is installed. The latest service pack is SP5.



C:\Program Files\Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer>

<TITLE>303215 - Microsoft Network Security Hotfix Checker (Hfnetchk.exe) Tool Is Available</TITLE>
< http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q303215 >

I get:
The Knowledge Base (KB) Article You Requested Is Currently Not Available
 
R

Robert Aldwinckle

....
I looked at MS05-020, and its versions of those 6 files matched the ones I
have.

The only ideas I have now then are:
1. presumably you found those in System32?
2. where all would WU be looking for them? e.g. perhaps in dllcache too?
3. I'm not familiar with your OS but my understanding is that you can't use WUv5?
and I've forgotten all I ever used to know about how WUv4 works. So here is an
idea in the form of a WUv5 analogy. If it is just a repeated *install* that is happening
I would try deleting the downloaded files which are making the install possible.
In XP (e.g. WUv5) you would do that with rd /s %SystemRoot%\SoftwareDistribution\Download
4. I would try monitoring the download/install process with FileMon filtering with:
SoftwareDistribution;Update;CatRoot
Again this is a WUv5 analogy that would have to be adapted to whatever WUv4 uses
instead of the SoftwareDistribution subdirectory. My recollection is that it uses a
huge random number (e.g. GUID) which it sticks in the root directory of the volume with
the largest available freespace. The second two terms in the filter should have the same
effect in WUv4 as they do in WUv5: Update would capture accesses to Windows Upate.log
(i.e., instead of WindowsUpdate.log) and CatRoot would capture accesses to both
CatRoot and CatRoot2.
FWIW I use that monitor to fill in the blanks when looking at my WindowsUpdate.log.
From what I recall Windows Update.log in WUv4 was nothing *but* blanks (<eg>)
so this FileMon idea may be even more useful in WUv4. Oh, you also have iuhist
in WUv4 too, don't you? So I would stick that in the filter too. Etc.
5. If KB867801 is being selected for download as well as having an install attempt made
I would suspect there is a registry check being done which is causing that (assuming you
have clearly ruled out the possibility of a filecheck causing it instead. Notice that we have
only been looking at file version as the criteria; if there is minor corruption in other factors
which could be checked for too--such as timestamp, size or CRC value--they might still
trigger a download based only on a failed file check.) You might be able to detect if a
registry check is the cause by using RegMon. The TechNet Security bulletin gives
a clue for what to use for a filter (e.g. under Registry Key Verification); I think that I would
use Hotfix;867801 in case there is a pattern in checking the other hotfixes which
appears broken in the 867801 case.
6. You could try opening an online support case for this. FWIW my only experience
using it was disappointing. There seems to be very little of a "diagnose, analyse
and tweak" approach to problem solving there, more of "demolish and rebuild"
mindset for "fixing". YMMV.


BTW thanks for pointing out that KB303215 is no longer available.
It looks as if KB320454 contains the same sort of information that
I would have been pointing to.


I can now see why. <EG>


Good luck

Robert
---
 
P

PA Bear

Can you be more specific/clearer, please, Bill?

If you disable IE Tools > Internet Options > Advanced > Browsing >
Automatically check for Interet Explorer updates, are you no longer prompted
to install 867801 (MS04-025)?
 
G

Guest

Today, after starting up, it did not prompt me. That happened a couple of
times before, making me think that the problem was fixed, but then it came
back. The prompt happens only on the first startup of the day, not on
subsequent reboots,

I did disable the update check today. But to say that it worked, I'll have
to wait
at least another day.
 
G

Guest

Nope.

Disabled it yesterday. This morning, when I started the machine, I did not
get a prompt.
But when I came back from lunch, there it was again.
 
P

PA Bear

And you hadn't re-enabled it?
--
~PA Bear

Bill said:
Nope.

Disabled it yesterday. This morning, when I started the machine, I did
not get a prompt.
But when I came back from lunch, there it was again.
 
P

PA Bear

Then I don't know what's wrong.

Followup to Robert Aldwinckle's reply on 7 Jun-05.

Consider posting about the problem to a Win2K-specific newsgroup.
 
G

Guest

Robert Aldwinckle said:
....

The only ideas I have now then are:
1. presumably you found those in System32?
2. where all would WU be looking for them? e.g. perhaps in dllcache too?

I searched for the files, and they are in both System32 and dllcache. The
versions are the same in those directories.
All of them are also in:
C:\WINNT\$NtUninstallKB867282-IE6SP1-20050127.163319$

Browseui.dll Mshtml.dll Shdocvw.dll wininet.dll are also in:
C:\WINNT\$NtUninstallKB890923-IE6SP1-20050225.103456$
The versions in those 2 directories are all older than the ones in System32
and dllcache.
3. I'm not familiar with your OS but my understanding is that you can't use WUv5?
and I've forgotten all I ever used to know about how WUv4 works. So here is an
idea in the form of a WUv5 analogy. If it is just a repeated *install* that is happening
I would try deleting the downloaded files which are making the install possible.
In XP (e.g. WUv5) you would do that with rd /s %SystemRoot%\SoftwareDistribution\Download

I searched for the folder "SoftwareDistribution" with no result.
4. I would try monitoring the download/install process with FileMon filtering with:
SoftwareDistribution;Update;CatRoot
Again this is a WUv5 analogy that would have to be adapted to whatever WUv4 uses
instead of the SoftwareDistribution subdirectory. My recollection is that it uses a
huge random number (e.g. GUID) which it sticks in the root directory of the volume with
the largest available freespace. The second two terms in the filter should have the same
effect in WUv4 as they do in WUv5: Update would capture accesses to Windows Upate.log
(i.e., instead of WindowsUpdate.log) and CatRoot would capture accesses to both
CatRoot and CatRoot2.
FWIW I use that monitor to fill in the blanks when looking at my WindowsUpdate.log.
From what I recall Windows Update.log in WUv4 was nothing *but* blanks (<eg>)
so this FileMon idea may be even more useful in WUv4. Oh, you also have iuhist
in WUv4 too, don't you? So I would stick that in the filter too. Etc.

Contrary to what I may have come across, I'm actually pretty dumb when it
comes
to the operating system. I did download and run filemon with the filtering
you
suggested, but I don't know how to interpret the result.
5. If KB867801 is being selected for download as well as having an install attempt made
I would suspect there is a registry check being done which is causing that (assuming you
have clearly ruled out the possibility of a filecheck causing it instead. Notice that we have
only been looking at file version as the criteria; if there is minor corruption in other factors
which could be checked for too--such as timestamp, size or CRC value--they might still
trigger a download based only on a failed file check.) You might be able to detect if a
registry check is the cause by using RegMon. The TechNet Security bulletin gives
a clue for what to use for a filter (e.g. under Registry Key Verification); I think that I would
use Hotfix;867801 in case there is a pattern in checking the other hotfixes which
appears broken in the 867801 case.

Pardon my ignorance, but I'm lost here.
 
R

Robert Aldwinckle

Bill Pfeifer said:
I searched for the files, and they are in both System32 and dllcache. The
versions are the same in those directories.
All of them are also in:
C:\WINNT\$NtUninstallKB867282-IE6SP1-20050127.163319$

Browseui.dll Mshtml.dll Shdocvw.dll wininet.dll are also in:
C:\WINNT\$NtUninstallKB890923-IE6SP1-20050225.103456$
The versions in those 2 directories are all older than the ones in System32
and dllcache.


I searched for the folder "SoftwareDistribution" with no result.

Sorry for the confusion. SoftwareDistribution is a WUv5 directory.
I guess this proves my understanding about your OS.
As I wrote, I can't remember where WUv4 downloads to and installs from.
My hazy recollection is that it isn't anywhere as specific so you will either have to
widen the filter, get some better hints from somebody else, or guess and get lucky.
(I would have hoped that the update portion of the FileMon filter would at least snag
an update.exe in operation if there was one of them involved. E.g. I think I mentioned
that the filter I like to use now (for WUv5) is update;SoftwareDistribution which has the
effect of interleaving trace entries of writes to the folder with whatever logging is being
done in WindowsUpdate.log (Windows Update.log in your case.))

Hmm... speaking of getting lucky. Do you have any extra large partitions?
(I mean partitions or drives which contain more freespace other than the System partition.)
I seem to recall that WUv4 tries to download to and install from the partition
which has the most freespace. If that is a rarely used drive you could use
the drive letter (plus the colon) as a useful filter to see if that is where things
are going. Also, of course, if 867801 creates an install log it may contain
some incidental clues about where the files are coming from, which you could
then incorporate into your filter when you need to understand why the install
is repeating, etc.

Are you unsure of whether the update is just being installed or both downloaded
and installed? Could you use the AU Custom Install to do that? E.g. if you set
AU's option to be "Notify me but don't automatically download or install..."
and you get prompted that there are updates ready to be installed you would know
that the update had already been downloaded and was just waiting to be installed
(from somewhere). Only if that turned out to be the source of your loop would it really
be necessary to identify where the files had been downloaded to (e.g. using FileMon.)

BTW I just remembered some of the quirky things that used to happen to me with WUv4
which could be relevant for your case. I normally downloaded and installed updates
using AU's double prompt method. However, occasionally I did see the same
update offered more than once (i.e. I was prompted to download one I had already
installed, even several days later.). In that case what I found I had to do was redownload
and reinstall the update manually using the WU site instead. That AFAIR always shut up
the extraneous prompt.

When you're downloading and installing using WU AFAIR you don't get a chance to stop
at just the download portion (which is annoying IMO because then I feel I have to be more
careful about what I have open while the download is proceeding, e.g. so what is open
doesn't interfere with what needs to be changed, even though that only really matters,
if it matters at all, when the install phase of an update is occurring.)

Contrary to what I may have come across, I'm actually pretty dumb when it
comes
to the operating system. I did download and run filemon with the filtering
you
suggested, but I don't know how to interpret the result.


You're doing fine. ;)

As I mentioned above, you would have to be lucky if this filter found anything really useful
for WUv4. I would expect at least that the update portion would show you when
writes were being done to Windows Update.log and if you added iuhist you would
see any writes being done to that log too. Since you know the name of the update
you are trying to install you could tack on 867801 too. E.g. if a subdirectory is created
called that you would be able to see all the files being added under it. Etc.

Hmm... I just thought of another approach which might work better in this case
instead of filters since we really don't have any clear ideas of any patterns to use.
FileMon has some checkboxes on the bottom which apparently would allow us to focus
only on writes. You could try using an unlimited filter (e.g. an asterisk) with that.
If there were too many writes to things such as the registry, pagefile, etc. you could
use the Exclude filter to specify those and then see if what was left gave a clearer
picture of what was happening. This idea would be most useful for analysing
the download phase but could also help to some extent with the the install phase too.
(E.g. though you would be able to see where the install was coming from
you would be able to see what it did.)

Pardon my ignorance, but I'm lost here.

Sorry. Ignore my ramble about other possibilities for filecheck and focus on the registry check.
RegMon is another tool from SysInternals which works similar to FileMon.
The filter I suggested for it was Hotfix;867801 based on the information contained in

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms04-025.mspx

(MSN search for
867801
)


Note that you have to expand
[+] Security Update Information
and
[+] Internet Explorer 6 SP1...

to find:

<quote>
You may also be able to verify the files that this security update has installed by reviewing the following registry key:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Active Setup\Installed Components\{2298d453-bcae-4519-bf33-1cbf3faf1524}
</quote>


Oops. Evidently I was looking at the wrong expansion when I suggested the above filter.
So instead of Hotfix you would need to use something from that information. However,
the 867801 portion of the filter might still allow something relevant to turn up. Etc.


Good luck

Robert
---
 
G

Guest

Your reply to an earlier post (below) gave me the idea to just try it their
way.
On friday, I un-installed and re-installed IE6 SP1. This morning, Windows
Update
piped up with a bunch uf updates for that install, but KB867801
was NOT among them.
It's probably too early to tell, but maybe that fixed it. If not, I'll go
through your
suggestions in your last post.

Thank you for being so patient with me.

Bill Pfeifer

(in an earlier post):
 
P

PA Bear

Sure hope you uninstalled any Win2K SPs which you'd installed after your
first install of IE6 SP1 before you uninstalled/reinstalled it, Bill.
 
G

Guest

No, I didn't.
Didn't know I had to do that.
After I re-installed IE6 SP1, Windows Update installed a bunch of updates.
In the WINNT directory, I found these log files from yesterday:

KB890923-IE6SP1-20050225.103456.log
KB867282-IE6SP1-20050127.163319.log
KB891781.log
KB841356.log
KB329115.log
KB823559.log
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top