SP2 requirements?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Bill has brought this to us :
Most running SP1 do not pass the genuine Microsoft check.
Click to expand...

Hi

Call MS support and they help you.

No-Charge Support
1-866-PCSAFETY
or
1-866-727-2338
This phone number is for virus and other security-related support. It
is available 24 hours a day for the U.S. and Canada.
For phone numbers outside of the U.S. and Canada, select your region.

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=securityhome

You can also download SP2 from MS BUT your system must be clean
before you upgrade to SP2.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...be-3b8e-4f30-8245-9e368d3cdb5a&DisplayLang=en
 
Hello plun,
Bill has brought this to us :

Hi

Call MS support and they help you.

No-Charge Support
1-866-PCSAFETY
or
1-866-727-2338
This phone number is for virus and other security-related support. It
is available 24 hours a day for the U.S. and Canada.
For phone numbers outside of the U.S. and Canada, select your region.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=securityhome

You can also download SP2 from MS BUT your system must be clean before
you upgrade to SP2.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=049c9dbe-3b8e
-4f30-8245-9e368d3cdb5a&DisplayLang=en
Click to expand...

I have SP2, those who don't are generally running unauthorized copies. There
are exceptions of course.
 
Hi

It can be done...........

XP, w2k, can be identified. Major ISPs within my country now identifies
Zoombies and put them to dialup speed until they fix their PCs.
Fix cleaning, Servicepack, antivirus and firewall protection and then
full speed again.

Block Windows 95, 98, Me totally from broadband connections.

Tough but maybe needed !

A lot of users blaming MS for all problemz but most problems are
beacuse of stupid users and ISPs which are doing nothing to block these
Zoombie PCs.
 
Bill Gough explained :
I have SP2, those who don't are generally running unauthorized copies. There
are exceptions of course.
Click to expand...

Hi

Well, we have a lot of users that don´t understand Windowsupdate,
also a lot of users with dialup connections and without knowledge how
to order SP2.

Also a lot of users which don´t know that they can download SP2 and
burn it and then help someone without SP2. And SP2 can then be
installed without any problems with genuine check !

I am more worried about Zoombies and Botnets then about users running
unauthorized copies. If we take the latest explosion with the
Zotob.worm
it was first spread among these botnets.

But maybe its more important to earn some $$$ from a private family PC.
 
Blocking Windows 95, 98, and ME because the user chooses to use those OS's
is what you call dictatorship, not sensible.
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm
plun said:
Hi

It can be done...........

XP, w2k, can be identified. Major ISPs within my country now identifies
Zoombies and put them to dialup speed until they fix their PCs.
Fix cleaning, Servicepack, antivirus and firewall protection and then full
speed again.

Block Windows 95, 98, Me totally from broadband connections.

Tough but maybe needed !

A lot of users blaming MS for all problemz but most problems are
beacuse of stupid users and ISPs which are doing nothing to block these
Zoombie PCs.

--
plun

Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote on 2005-09-04 :
You can't do that, it would automatically mean you should block Windows
2000 also and there is a large installed base of Windows 2000 Server and
Professional clients.
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Andre Da Costa [Extended64] pretended :
Blocking Windows 95, 98, and ME because the user chooses to use those OS's is
what you call dictatorship, not sensible.
Click to expand...

Hi

Users with 95-98-ME could connect with dialup, not broadband.

98-98-ME are outdated and complete unsafe for a user and save us other
from these OS and all security holes.
 
Hi Plun,

Couldn`t help reading your posts with Andre with some
interest. On the one hand I understand Andre`s dictatorial
concerns but on the other I take your point and would be
inclined to agree with you. I believe there is a point
where people sometimes have to be protected from
themselves for their own good. In my country there are
those who feel the government policies and legislation
sometimes borders on the dictatorial for this very reason.
Very interesting subject.

Stu
-----Original Message-----
Andre Da Costa [Extended64] pretended :
Blocking Windows 95, 98, and ME because the user chooses to use those OS's is
what you call dictatorship, not sensible.
Click to expand...

Hi

Users with 95-98-ME could connect with dialup, not broadband.

98-98-ME are outdated and complete unsafe for a user and save us other
from these OS and all security holes.

--
plun


.
Click to expand...
 
Stu formulated on söndag :
Hi Plun,

Couldn`t help reading your posts with Andre with some
interest. On the one hand I understand Andre`s dictatorial
concerns but on the other I take your point and would be
inclined to agree with you. I believe there is a point
where people sometimes have to be protected from
themselves for their own good. In my country there are
those who feel the government policies and legislation
sometimes borders on the dictatorial for this very reason.
Very interesting subject.

Stu
Click to expand...

Hi Stu

Everyone blaming MS for the situation today and perhaps they was sleepy
about security and the rapid broadband development but we must tell
all users that they must learn more about this magic tool and they
are not allowed to "travel" within Internets highways until their
PC is up-to-date and protected. And that must be up to our ISPs .

And this is not dictatorial, it is survival ! To much nowadays
depends om working networks and PCs and a Windows 95 machine on
broadband connection is a totally unsafe both for the owner and us
other and also a potential Zombie.
 
Yes you are right and `survival` is a much nicer word to
use. There are some nasty persons trying to do some very
unpleasant things to people on the internet. The articles
to be read and postings on these newsgroups bear testimony
to that. If the people won`t educate themselves then there
comes a point where a certian amount of initiative has to
be taken where ever possible. I`m pleased MS has
recognised this and is playing an important role in
improved security of its OS and browsing experience - not
to mention MSAS. Nice job Microsoft!!

Stu
 
Hello Andre Da Costa [Extended64],
Blocking Windows 95, 98, and ME because the user chooses to use those
OS's is what you call dictatorship, not sensible.
Click to expand...

I am sure many dinosaurs would be found useful today as well but time passed
them by and they are just as extinct as the rest of the lot. Windows 95,
98 and ME were DOS kludges that deserve to die quietly. It is better for
all concerned that we march forward rather than hold onto the past in a vain
attempt to please a dying breed of users who refuse to come along.
 
It is no different from a vulnerable XP SP2 machine, if corporate networks
put the necessary safety net inplace, by quarantining machines before they
join a network or ensure that those machines are fully updated I don't see
why you can't run the Windows OS of your choice for as long as you want. In
fact, Windows 9x machines are probably more secure than any machine out
there running the latest OS. Why? because hackers are not targetting that
platform anymore. A Microsoft spokes person recently said, Windows 95 only
represents 1% of the Windows user base, with XP claiming the majority and
Windows 2000 coming in second.

So Plun, the two operating systems that are targetted most of the time are
really Windows 2000 and Windows XP/Server 2003, because they are the latest
and thats what most users are running. But I suspect you might be taking
into account, things such as as Windows 9x machines being a harbour, but
actually its not the root cause, Windows Server really is and Administrator
needs to take appropriate measures to protect such client machines by having
an updated firewall program that works on the OS, running a browser thats
less vulnerable to attack. Anyway, any machine that is running 95 today,
probably is not connected to the Internet. I am running Windows Vista, so I
would say I am more exemplary than all of you here. :-P
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm
chiefboats said:
Hello Andre Da Costa [Extended64],
Blocking Windows 95, 98, and ME because the user chooses to use those
OS's is what you call dictatorship, not sensible.
Click to expand...

I am sure many dinosaurs would be found useful today as well but time
passed them by and they are just as extinct as the rest of the lot.
Windows 95, 98 and ME were DOS kludges that deserve to die quietly. It is
better for all concerned that we march forward rather than hold onto the
past in a vain attempt to please a dying breed of users who refuse to come
along.
Click to expand...
 
Hi Andre

Hackers don´t targetting 95/98 platform ?

Nowadays it´s about Botnets and Zombies used for different
other attacks and 95/98 PCs are really easy to take over nad if
they also have a broadband connection its really bad.

http://www.honeynet.org/index.html

Search for Botnet within page and you have a lot to read. Latest
Zotob worm was initially spread using these botnets.

And for XP is a big joke that so many users not runnning SP2 !

Windows Vista was totally boring after a day or two ;)
Time for Beta 2 ;)

--
plun




Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote :
It is no different from a vulnerable XP SP2 machine, if corporate networks
put the necessary safety net inplace, by quarantining machines before they
join a network or ensure that those machines are fully updated I don't see
why you can't run the Windows OS of your choice for as long as you want. In
fact, Windows 9x machines are probably more secure than any machine out there
running the latest OS. Why? because hackers are not targetting that platform
anymore. A Microsoft spokes person recently said, Windows 95 only represents
1% of the Windows user base, with XP claiming the majority and Windows 2000
coming in second.

So Plun, the two operating systems that are targetted most of the time are
really Windows 2000 and Windows XP/Server 2003, because they are the latest
and thats what most users are running. But I suspect you might be taking into
account, things such as as Windows 9x machines being a harbour, but actually
its not the root cause, Windows Server really is and Administrator needs to
take appropriate measures to protect such client machines by having an
updated firewall program that works on the OS, running a browser thats less
vulnerable to attack. Anyway, any machine that is running 95 today, probably
is not connected to the Internet. I am running Windows Vista, so I would say
I am more exemplary than all of you here. :-P
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm
chiefboats said:
Hello Andre Da Costa [Extended64],
Blocking Windows 95, 98, and ME because the user chooses to use those
OS's is what you call dictatorship, not sensible.
Click to expand...

I am sure many dinosaurs would be found useful today as well but time
passed them by and they are just as extinct as the rest of the lot. Windows
95, 98 and ME were DOS kludges that deserve to die quietly. It is better
for all concerned that we march forward rather than hold onto the past in a
vain attempt to please a dying breed of users who refuse to come along.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Ok, I will read it later, but I definitely agree with you about Vista, I
need an update fix, badly.
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm
plun said:
Hi Andre

Hackers don´t targetting 95/98 platform ?

Nowadays it´s about Botnets and Zombies used for different
other attacks and 95/98 PCs are really easy to take over nad if
they also have a broadband connection its really bad.

http://www.honeynet.org/index.html

Search for Botnet within page and you have a lot to read. Latest
Zotob worm was initially spread using these botnets.

And for XP is a big joke that so many users not runnning SP2 !

Windows Vista was totally boring after a day or two ;)
Time for Beta 2 ;)

--
plun




Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote :
It is no different from a vulnerable XP SP2 machine, if corporate
networks put the necessary safety net inplace, by quarantining machines
before they join a network or ensure that those machines are fully
updated I don't see why you can't run the Windows OS of your choice for
as long as you want. In fact, Windows 9x machines are probably more
secure than any machine out there running the latest OS. Why? because
hackers are not targetting that platform anymore. A Microsoft spokes
person recently said, Windows 95 only represents 1% of the Windows user
base, with XP claiming the majority and Windows 2000 coming in second.

So Plun, the two operating systems that are targetted most of the time
are really Windows 2000 and Windows XP/Server 2003, because they are the
latest and thats what most users are running. But I suspect you might be
taking into account, things such as as Windows 9x machines being a
harbour, but actually its not the root cause, Windows Server really is
and Administrator needs to take appropriate measures to protect such
client machines by having an updated firewall program that works on the
OS, running a browser thats less vulnerable to attack. Anyway, any
machine that is running 95 today, probably is not connected to the
Internet. I am running Windows Vista, so I would say I am more exemplary
than all of you here. :-P
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm
chiefboats said:
Hello Andre Da Costa [Extended64],

Blocking Windows 95, 98, and ME because the user chooses to use those
OS's is what you call dictatorship, not sensible.


I am sure many dinosaurs would be found useful today as well but time
passed them by and they are just as extinct as the rest of the lot.
Windows 95, 98 and ME were DOS kludges that deserve to die quietly. It
is better for all concerned that we march forward rather than hold onto
the past in a vain attempt to please a dying breed of users who refuse
to come along.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
chiefboats said:
I am sure many dinosaurs would be found useful today as well but time
passed them by and they are just as extinct as the rest of the lot.
Windows 95, 98 and ME were DOS kludges that deserve to die quietly. It is
better for all concerned that we march forward rather than hold onto the
past in a vain attempt to please a dying breed of users who refuse to come
along.
Click to expand...
==============================
Has it ever occurred to you that maybe not everyone can afford to replace
their PCs? Some people, living from paycheck to paycheck have more
important things on their minds than replacing a perfectly good W95 or 98
machine.

FS~
 
Hello ~ Free Spirit ~,
==============================
Has it ever occurred to you that maybe not everyone can afford to
replace
their PCs? Some people, living from paycheck to paycheck have more
important things on their minds than replacing a perfectly good W95 or
98
machine.
FS~
Click to expand...

Never said a thing about forcing nor asking anyone to give up or replace
their machine, I just believe you must draw the line somewhere and that is
where I'd do it. Win 95 and 98 machines are certainly still useful but there
is no market in them for todays software.
 
Back
Top