Replies

ROTFLOL!! Couldn’t have said it better myself! NO browser is perfect, they all are just the one(s) one prefers using!! Outrageously funny that MS gets $7500 paid to them by their immediate competitor in the browser arena!

Now, hopefully, Google will fix the hole MS pointed out in Chrome for the benefit of the regular Chrome users.

I use Spybot along with another app, SpywareBlaster. Both “inoculate” the browsers on your machine in overlapping ways using the hosts file and other measures built into the browsers. SpywareBlaster used to be from Javacool Software, but it’s now put out by Brightfort. the change was made about two years ago, if memory serves.

@Cybertooth:

If you have hidden KB4011086, go back into Windows Update and unhide it. That should force Windows Update to do a new scan for it and any replacements that have superseded it, at which time you should see KB4011110 instead of KB4011086. I haven’t installed any updates yet and just ran Windows Update before posting this and it came back with 4011110 instead of 4011086. As a side note, when I did have 4011086 showing up in the list, it was unchecked meaning that either MS knew something was up with it or wanted it to be installed all by itself.

1 user thanked author for this post.

woody

Breaking something people are accustomed to using or doing is a new feature??? ROTFLOL!! At least until I just read the actual article on Computerworld. I guess some folks at Redmond need to go back to school to learn about a key concept Woody mentions in the article…communication. I agree with him that if this reduced functionality had been mentioned in the FIRST place, (and a workaround provided in the bulletin or other location readily accessible by those affected), the affected users would’ve been better prepared for this turn of events after patching.

3 users thanked author for this post.

SueW, Noel Carboni, Elly

@walker: Your problem in not getting the update from August has a NEW reply just a few minutes ago from @MrBrian at the following link:https://www.askwoody.com/forums/topic/error-code-80070308-prevents-kb4034664-update-install/#post-133151

Follow the link to see his answer to you, to help you through your problem.

I haven’t seen many posts from @MrBrian the last few days here on any thread, and I figure it was due to his helping Woody out with getting this site upright and fairly fully functional. Same probably goes for the other MVP’s here as well…haven’t seen too many posts from them due to their helping Woody get this site back up.

1 user thanked author for this post.

walker

Wow, that’s really similar to what @PKCano experienced after test-installing September’s Win 7 roll up patch…IE11 wouldn’t launch because of his icon font size being too large. I wonder if there’s a vulnerability involving font display that’s patched in the same manner by the Office 2010 patches as well as the Win7 monthly rollup?

Either way, I agree with what he said just above…wait for others to be the guinea pigs which will hopefully allow the rest of us to install with a minimum of (or preferably no) hassles.

I seriously doubt MS is lousing up the monthly patches just to get us to move to Win 10…those with Win10 have been having their own sets of issues with miscreant patches. The problem lies in MS’s lack of quality control with the patches the do release, in that they’re not tested thoroughly enough! I am attributing this to their recent rounds of layoffs they’ve had company-wide…fewer folks trying to handle the same workload resulting in a “just get it out the door” mentality. At least it sure seems like it to me, given the problematic nature of most patches for the last year or so! (Oops, I digressed a little too much!)   🙁

1 user thanked author for this post.

Elly

Hi everyone!

I just tried again with both IE11 and Firefox 55.0.3, and got the same results: The MS Update Catalog site loaded just fine in both browser with both set to refuse all cookies and with DOM storage disabled.

The only “gotcha” is that in order to load in IE11, the site just asked me for permission to install a scripting software add-on that made EMET 5.52 give me an ASLR alert when the page finished loading after the script was installed. Without the script being installed, the page was just a blank blue page with no images of any kind nor any search box of any kind. Same behavior with the x64 version of IE11. This is actually an ActiveX control that is installed and digitally signed by MS to help the catalog site run.

The above behavior leads me to believe that our days of seeing the dreaded error code listed in this thread’s title post may soon be a thing of the past. I do now believe MS is tweaking the site to behave well with most browser configurations including Opera and Chrome. I’ll continue testing my browsers to see if the site is indeed being more tolerant and less “flaky” as, I believe, MrBrian put it.

Anyone who is reading this in Google’s Chrome browser have any comments or have you experienced the error code listed in the title post? If so, we’d love to hear from you and hear if you had to take any steps to avoid the error code!

Not in this case, typing in the link without the “www” brings one to the same site and produces the same results. I just tried it in my copy of Firefox 55.0.3 with, like my post yesterday, DOM storage disabled and cookies set to reject all cookies, even those from MS. Upon going to a page in another discussion about a patch that needs a patch for the dual monitor snafu, the catalog came right up, and plainly stated the results reported by MrBrian, that there is no patch in the catalog for that KB number. I’d add more to this reply, but we’d be getting off topic.

Thanks for the explanation so that I and others will hopefully avoid this happening in the future.

Ok, what happened? My reply to Dave was somehow “swallowed up” by the forum software. It was post number 130789, which I edited once to clarify the reply.

Hi Dave!

So sorry for the lack of any kind of reply, got totally swamped at work. At least you were in great hands with @MrBrian helping out with this thread/topic.

I have just tried to get to the catalog site in IE11. Mind you, I have IE11 with Win7 SP1 x64, so your mileage may differ. The exact steps I just used were:

1. Start IE11 from the icon pinned to the taskbar.

2. Go into Internet options within the browser, NOT from the Control Panel.

3. Select the checkbox labeled “Enable DOM Storage from the list under Security on the “Advanced” tab.

4. Double check that my cookie settings were set to override automatic cookie handling, and then checked to make sure first party cookies were set to “Accept” and third party cookies were set to “Block”.

5. Clicked “OK” button at bottom of Internet Options dialog box.

6. Proceeded to MS Update Catalog site by typing it into the address bar, and it came right up. A search for KB4025252 (as a brief test to see if the site would function properly) produced many results to explore and download, should I have wanted to.

Any additional thoughts to help out, MrBrian? It appears my installation of IE might be slightly different in some way from Dave’s.

NOW, to totally blow everyone out of the water, I just tried to get to the MS catalog site by clicking a link from a Google search for the update catalog. This was using Firefox 55.0.3 x32. Clicking the link provided by Google brought up the site, and I was able to perform the search I just mentioned above successfully. HOWEVER, this was with both cookies and DOM storage DISABLED within Firefox. This goes against what I posted in the thread I used to start this topic!! I double checked to see if Firefox was storing ANY cookies from ANY MS domain, and it wasn’t and still isn’t as of this writing.

Perhaps the folks in Redmond have modified the site’s behavior to work better with browsers. But, if they have, then why are MrBrian and you still having to use workarounds to get to the site??

3 users thanked author for this post.

Pepsiboy, BobbyB, MrBrian

For those Windows 7 users who are trying to make all the changes Noel listed in the screenshots above for disabling the Search and Indexing services, please remember that File Explorer in Windows 7 is actually called “Windows Explorer”. THAT’S where you’ll find the entry about turning off the Library Features.

In other words, for Windows 7, the place to look is User Configuration/Administrative Templates/Windows Components/Windows Explorer. Just click once on the Windows Explorer title and you’ll see the settings show up in the right hand pane. You’ll probably find the “Turn off Windows Libraries features…” setting listed about halfway down the list in the right hand pane without having to scroll down at all.

1 user thanked author for this post.

AJNorth

anonymous wrote:

Would disabling the Windows Search service work too? Or are the regedits necessary to stop this?

You don’t need to edit the registry to stop nor to disable the Windows Search service. Simply go into the “Services” tool of the “Administrative Tools” choice from the Control Panel (Win7). To see the Administrative Tools choice, however, you need to be in an administrator-level account or, if you choose to, run “services.msc” from the “Run” dialog box on the Start menu and simply select to run it as an Administrator.

Once you’re in the services snap-in, scroll all the way down to the listing for “Windows Search”. Double clicking on it will bring up its Properties dialog box, showing the page  where you can change the startup type to “Disabled”, as well as stop the service from currently running (click the “Stop” button below the startup type drop-down box) all at once. Just make sure to click OK when you’re done making changes. Now, reboot the computer to make them effective immediately.

A word of warning if you do use the search service or have an application that uses the search service routinely: The steps above completely disable the service and will render the program(s) that use the service either somewhat or completely useless until you apply this month’s patch that fixes the vulnerability. Also, you will have to remember to re-enable the service once the patch is applied, probably, so take note of the startup type before disabling the service so you know what to set it back to after patching.

I hope this helps!

2 users thanked author for this post.

HiFlyer, AJNorth

BrianL wrote:

I guess that I will settle on the minitool. It seems to work. I am being as careful as I can with my limited experience.

@BrianL, please read the last sentence from @PKCano’s first reply to you quoted below:

PKCano wrote:

  Once you understand Windows Update and supercedence, that is the time for Win minitool.

In other words, you may be doing yourself a disservice by using the minitool. Even @PKCano has admitted to stumbling (mis-stepping) by using the minitool instead of the built-in Windows Update.

To quote him in his first reply to you, ” I stumble with it, especially now that MS has made so many changes.”

BrianL wrote:

@ Bob99 & PKCano – I have had a pecular thing happening :I try to install an update that is obsolete or modified, the windows 7 will not except it and gives references to find the exact update no explanation why.

That’s probably because of the supersedence issue that @PKCano has mentioned in his first reply to you. You’re probably trying to install a superseded update, which is also why he strongly suggested using the built-in Windows Update tool instead of the mini tool you’ve been using.

To quote @PKCano’s earlier post, “With the older patches that show up in Windows Update, if they are not needed (have been superceded or replaced), Windows Update Agent will “know” and they simply won’t get installed. Or if they are needed, they will be installed in the proper order.”