Windows update leaves thousands unable to get online

telegraph ^ | Last Updated: 4:01pm BST 10/07/2008 | By Claudine Beaumont, Digital Channel Editor

[Paleo Conservative]

A software update for the Windows operating system has left hundreds and thousands of computer users unable to access the internet.

The update, known as a "patch", conflicts with another piece of software, the Zone Alarms firewall, that many people use to protect their computers from hackers and viruses.

The patch, codenamed MS08-037, was designed to fix a security loophole in the way Windows handles website addresses. It was discovered that there was a weakness with the operating system that could allow hackers to re-route legitimate web pages to malicious websites instead, and leave internet users open to fraud and viruses.

But the fix proved incompatible with the ZoneAlarm firewall, and within hours of downloading the software update, users were reporting problems with their internet connections. The problem affected thousands of computer users who use the free Zone Alarms firewall to protect their machines.

..........................

ZoneLabs, the company that makes ZoneAlarms, was last night recommending that computer users affected by the technical glitch uninstall the conflicting software update until a more permanent solution could be found. Computer users will be able to identify the rogue patch by its serial number, KB951748.

.......................

[coconutt2000]

I looked in the ZoneAlarm logs and watched it blocking my attempts at hitting the net, so I knew pretty quickly what it was.

:-) You sir are no mundane. Eheh.

[PAR35]

XP has a built-in firewall too, doesn’t it?

It claims to have one, but I recall several sources suggesting 3rd party solutions were better back when I got my XP machine.

[2nd amendment mama]

It didn’t bother Vista - just XP. A bunch of my clients were had problems with this.

[FunkyZero]

"Windows + ZA = Internet works. Windows gets a patch. Internet stops working. "

Thats like saying "My car works fine. I got gas at your staion, now my tire is flat"

Your not getting it.

MS builds everything based on a set of standards and rules that vendors should follow. Not all those calls may be in use relavant to ZA until MS patches something in accordance with their published set of code rules. If the vendor has broken a rule and the patch breaks it, this is not MS fault. MS must follow the guidelines the put out and they do. It is the vendor who modified the IP stack in some way that did not follow the standard, when the patch was applied, it affected the non-standard code and broke it.

Additionally, there are literally MILLIONS of software packages for windows. MS publishes the standards for a reason; they cannot test every application with every patch, it is not possible. They expect the thrid party code developers to follow the standards and they test against standards.

So if your theory was correct, blackice, symantec, tiny, nod32 and every other personal firewall would have also broken.

The truth is, Apparently, those other comapnies did not violate any code rules that were affected by the patch. Zonelabs did.

[FunkyZero]

"BULLCRAP! Microsoft wrote this crap and targeted Zonealarm. It was devised to screw up people using a different firewall. Zonealarm had nothing to do with it. "

Ok, so why didn't they break all the other 500 different crappy software firewalls out there?

Let me guess, they didn't want to attract so much attention, so they will do them all in one at a time over the next year, right?

Geez.

The PC I am using right now has been running XP since the day I got it new and formatted it and put a CLEAN install on it. By doing so, I removed all the OEM loaded garbage and I choose my third party software carefully and avoid junk. That was almost 5 years ago. My PC doesnt crash, run slow or lock up.

Again, its crappy coders like zone labs who don't follow the standards that are the problem.

[B Knotts]

Linux purist checking it. I know of a couple of servers that had problems after the update. However, a reboot fixed it.

[B Knotts]

...checking in.

Beer sometimes interferes with typing ability...

[roadcat]

Computers were more mechanical than electronic back then. In the payroll department, a computer upgrade consisted of changing the size of a wheel on a fanbelt.

Oh, you do go way back! Although I did use punch tapes and cards. I still have some paper punch tape rolls from programs I wrote in the early 70s, for PDP-11's. My Windows PCs will be part of my home computer museum. Things change so quickly now.

[HAL9000]

Some of that vintage hardware is starting to become valuable. As a collector’s item, my thirty-old Apple II is now valued near the original purchase price. (Of course, the value of the dollar ain’t what it used to be.)

[brityank]

However, 99% of all windows issue can be traced back to 3rd party software writers who ignore the standard calls that MS makes available to all developers.

Bullcrap!!

Check this:

Outlook 2007 users angry over Office 2007 HTML-e-mail changes

In a post entitled "Microsoft takes email design back five years," Greiner said the rendering-engine changes messes up background images; provides poor background color support; and lacks support for float or position "completely breaking any CSS (Cascading Style Sheet) based layouts right from the word go."

Quite a lot of the web notes and emails I got were all over the screen, all because of Micro$oft.

[Knitebane]

MS builds everything based on a set of standards and rules that vendors should follow.

Well, sort of. Microsoft publishes rules that vendors should follow. But they don't follow those rules themselves. So, sometimes, they change stuff that wasn't fully documented and stuff breaks.

MS publishes the standards for a reason; they cannot test every application with every patch, it is not possible. They expect the thrid party code developers to follow the standards and they test against standards.

And that's how it usually works. But sometimes they change stuff that they haven't documented and it breaks third-party software.

So if your theory was correct, blackice, symantec, tiny, nod32 and every other personal firewall would have also broken.

No two of those programs will work precisely the same. In theory, if what they did broke ZA but no other firewalls then it's because ZA did something wrong.

Well, sort of wrong, since most low-level Windows utility programmers know that if you only follow Microsoft's incomplete, conflicting and sometimes flat-out wrong documentation, you'll never get your software to work.

And sometimes when the product in question is a competitor to something that Microsoft provides all kinds of things can go wrong with the competitor's software.

If this was a company where that kind of thing had never happened then you might be inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt.

But when it's Microsoft, who have a long and nefarious history of dirty tricks and unethical activity toward anyone that they see as a competitor you tend to assume that Microsoft is just up to their old tricks.

[roadcat]

As a collector’s item, my thirty-old Apple II is now valued near the original purchase price.

More. I have two Apple II's (and a box full of broken motherboards). I recently saw an eBay auction where an early Apple II went for well over $2000. Shocking. I haven't fired up mine for quite a while now. I still have the original box and packing, red book, etc. from January 1978. Of course, I'll never sell mine, too sentimental.