cwshredder hosed my system

[BILLEMERY]

ran cwshredder on an xp home machine and now i cant ping by name,
telnet to hosts etc. it's as if no port traffic is allowed. it's
wierd, i can ping addresses by address but not by name. i thought it
was a dns problem till i tried to telnet to the router and it wouldnt
allow that either. get a message that the service provider couldnt be
contacted no matter what port i try to use.
ie telnet address port number.

it's like some kind of bizzare firewall is now in place on my system.
i know cwshredder did this because nothing else has changed.

 

[Durand]

Hi,

Cwshredder checks the hosts file as well as the registry for any
entries related to coolwebsearch. It may have removed some of the
entries in your hosts file, if you know the ip address of what you're
trying to telnet to by name, just add it to your hosts file and save
it. Reboot so that it takes effect immediately.

 

[Kent W. England [MVP]]

Sounds like you need to fix the LSPs. http://www.cexx.org/lspfix.htm

 

[BILLEMERY]

dont think that will solve my problem; but it looks like you have
another kind of problem.

 

[BILLEMERY]

this problem is a little deeper than that unfortunately. here is an
example of the problem. after going to the command prompt i get:

C:\Documents and Settings\Owner>telnet 192.168.1.99 25
Connecting To 192.168.1.99...Could not open connection to the host, on
port 25.
The requested service provider could not be loaded or initialized.


the 192.168.1.99 is our mail server. this is only an example, no
matter what socket app i run besides ping i get the same result and i
cant ping anything by name because the socket app, dns client, wont
run either.

 

[BILLEMERY]

sorry, the system i was on brought up a porn site when i clicked on the link.
ill try this and see.
thanx.

 

[Durand]

Hi again,

Are you saying the dns client service is not set to automatic and
started? Or more precisely, it was set to automatic, but cannot start
due to some error? If you have a personal firewall running on your
computer, is there a rule denying or blocking port 53 tcp/udp in
either direction? When you say you can't ping by name, when you type
ping www.yahoo.com, does it return an ip address and attempt to knock
for an answer from their server but time out all 4 times instead? An
answer to these may help shed a little more light as to what is going
on. On the other hand, you gave an internal address for your mail
server, so I'm guessing you have a network running w2k and active
directory, which means an internal dns server is supposedly running as
well. In that light, your tcp/ip settings for the network card should
be pointing to the internal dns server first and then the ISP's dns
server.

 

[BILLEMERY]

thanx for all your help, what im saying is that no matter what port i
try and use in any winsock application doesnt work.
ie telnet 192.168.1.99 25
was just an example. 192.168.1.99 is our mail server and i telnet to
port 25 on it all the time.

THE WINSOCK is corrupt and , unlike previous versions of windows, i
cant uninstall and reinstall tcp/ip. the netsh int ip reset c:\logfile
is completely useless.

 

[Durand]

Hi again,

Try this site for fixing tcp/ip. Post back and let me know if that
does the job. http://www.petri.co.il/reinstall_tcp_ip_xp.htm

 

[BILLEMERY]

that article is about using the netsh int ip reset command which DOESNT WORK.
microsoft recommends using an "in place upgrade" to fix it.
windows 95 first edition revisited. what a pos.

 

[Durand]

Have you tried the netsh>enter>dump>enter command to see if that does it?

 

[BILLEMERY]

we are wasting time here, there are news postings all over the
internet about this problem in xp. IT DOESNT WORK, there is no way to
fix it except to reinstall. that may be becouse it is more vulerable
to spy ware etc. that´s not the point the point is that it cant be
fixed and if microsofts new servers are based on the same technology,
we have a serious problem. ive been an MCSE for over 10 years now and
i can tell you that xp is a pos and if their new server 2003 is in any
way similar , eg depends on this netsh command, we hava a serious
problem.