ActiveX patch on Microsoft Update

This patch, isn't this just the EOLAS stuff neatly hidden?

It says that after installing it some ActivX'es won't start until you
press TAB og ENTER. Why should one really install this update then?

If you install it many pages will become less user-friendly, or....
--
Lars-Erik - http://home.chello.no/~larse/ - ICQ 7297605
WinXP, Asus P4PE, 2.53 GHz, Asus V8420 (Ti4200), SB-Live!

cf. http://msmvps.com/blogs/spywaresucks.../01/85089.aspx &
linked pages.

912945 hotfix is an Optional Software Update. It will be included in an
upcoming Cumulative Update for IE.
--
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-Windows (IE/OE, Shell/User, Security), Aumha.org VSOP, DTS-L.org

Lars-Erik Østerud wrote:
> This patch, isn't this just the EOLAS stuff neatly hidden?
>
> It says that after installing it some ActivX'es won't start until you
> press TAB og ENTER. Why should one really install this update then?
>
> If you install it many pages will become less user-friendly, or....

On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 18:16:02 -0500, "PA Bear" <>
wrote:

>cf. http://msmvps.com/blogs/spywaresucks.../01/85089.aspx &
>linked pages.
>
>912945 hotfix is an Optional Software Update. It will be included in an
>upcoming Cumulative Update for IE.

Hi Bear,

I am wondering why should users install an update that removes
functionality and has a host of problems associated with it according
to your link above. Technically speaking if I avoid applying this
patch or applying cumulative IE6 patches that contain this update in
future is there a down side. I personally couldn't care less about
some obscure lawsuit or other and applying normal security patches
(WGA jeeze) is bad enough already without installing patches that
deliberately break things.

That link also points out a host of issues that need addressing first
even if this patch was desirable for anybody else but M$.

I only use Firefox / Opera for browsing anyway and would not touch OE
or Windows Messenger with a 10 foot pole so I don't see why I should
risk applying this patch.

Is this thing going to break the OS if I don't apply it eventually? I
am extremely wary of putting anything from M$ in a PC these days you
never know what its going to "fix".

Tell you what they are going to have to give Vista away with $100
bills inside before I even consider using it I am so fed up with M$
buggering my PCs up on a regular basis.

Wotcha think?

SUSE or Mandriva?

LOL!

Jonah

"jonah" <> schrieb:
> On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 18:16:02 -0500, "PA Bear" <>
> wrote:

>>912945 hotfix is an Optional Software Update. It will be included in an
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>upcoming Cumulative Update for IE.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> I am wondering why should users install an update that removes
> functionality and has a host of problems associated with it according
> to your link above.

HTH,
Freudi

PA Bear:

> cf. http://msmvps.com/blogs/spywaresucks.../01/85089.aspx &
> linked pages.
>
> 912945 hotfix is an Optional Software Update. It will be included in an
> upcoming Cumulative Update for IE.

How do we avoid this then? This will really make surfing bad :-/
--
Lars-Erik - http://home.chello.no/~larse/ - ICQ 7297605
WinXP, Asus P4PE, 2.53 GHz, Asus V8420 (Ti4200), SB-Live!

Lars-Erik Østerud wrote:
> > cf. http://msmvps.com/blogs/spywaresucks.../01/85089.aspx &
> > linked pages.
> >
> > 912945 hotfix is an Optional Software Update. It will be included in an
> > upcoming Cumulative Update for IE.
>
> How do we avoid this then? This will really make surfing bad :-/

You can avoid it by not installing any more Cumulative Updates for IE but I
wouldn't advise doing so!

All webpages using ActiveX Controls will have to take this into account
(which may be one reason why the hotfix hasn't been included in an IE update
yet).

See the link (and links on the page) for a better understanding of the why's
& wherefore's of this. It's the result of a legal settlement between MS and
EOLAS.
--
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-Windows (IE/OE, Shell/User, Security), Aumha.org VSOP, DTS-L.org

> Technically speaking if I avoid applying this
> patch or applying cumulative IE6 patches that contain this update in
> future is there a down side.

An upcoming Cumulative Update for IE will include the 912945 hotfix. All
further Cumulative Updates for IE will include it, too. NOT keeping IE
fully patched shouldn't even be considered IMO.

> I only use Firefox / Opera for browsing anyway and would not touch OE
> or Windows Messenger with a 10 foot pole so I don't see why I should
> risk applying this patch.

IE is very much a part of Windows. Even if you don't use IE or OE, you
should keep the machine fully patched for safety's sake.
--
~PA Bear

jonah wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 18:16:02 -0500, "PA Bear" <>
> wrote:
>
> > cf. http://msmvps.com/blogs/spywaresucks.../01/85089.aspx &
> > linked pages.
> >
> > 912945 hotfix is an Optional Software Update. It will be included in an
> > upcoming Cumulative Update for IE.
>
> Hi Bear,
>
> I am wondering why should users install an update that removes
> functionality and has a host of problems associated with it according
> to your link above. Technically speaking if I avoid applying this
> patch or applying cumulative IE6 patches that contain this update in
> future is there a down side. I personally couldn't care less about
> some obscure lawsuit or other and applying normal security patches
> (WGA jeeze) is bad enough already without installing patches that
> deliberately break things.
>
> That link also points out a host of issues that need addressing first
> even if this patch was desirable for anybody else but M$.
>
> I only use Firefox / Opera for browsing anyway and would not touch OE
> or Windows Messenger with a 10 foot pole so I don't see why I should
> risk applying this patch.
>
> Is this thing going to break the OS if I don't apply it eventually? I
> am extremely wary of putting anything from M$ in a PC these days you
> never know what its going to "fix".
>
> Tell you what they are going to have to give Vista away with $100
> bills inside before I even consider using it I am so fed up with M$
> buggering my PCs up on a regular basis.
>
> Wotcha think?
>
> SUSE or Mandriva?
>
> LOL!
>
> Jonah

PA Bear:

> All webpages using ActiveX Controls will have to take this into account
> (which may be one reason why the hotfix hasn't been included in an IE update
> yet).

ActiveX'es is one thing. BUt I seemed to read something about this
affecting linking to other documents as well (as a clickable link that
opens a .PDF or a Word-document or something). That would be a worse
problem. How do you avoid that (or will this not affect links to a
..PDF document within the same area).
--
Lars-Erik - http://home.chello.no/~larse/ - ICQ 7297605
WinXP, Asus P4PE, 2.53 GHz, Asus V8420 (Ti4200), SB-Live!

Have you read the info at the links I posted earlier in this thread? Good,
then you know as much as I do. <wink>
--
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-Windows (IE/OE, Shell/User, Security), Aumha.org VSOP, DTS-L.org

Lars-Erik Østerud wrote:
> PA Bear:
>
> > All webpages using ActiveX Controls will have to take this into account
> > (which may be one reason why the hotfix hasn't been included in an IE
> > update yet).
>
> ActiveX'es is one thing. BUt I seemed to read something about this
> affecting linking to other documents as well (as a clickable link that
> opens a .PDF or a Word-document or something). That would be a worse
> problem. How do you avoid that (or will this not affect links to a
> .PDF document within the same area).

"Lars-Erik Østerud" <.@.> schrieb:
> PA Bear:
>
>> All webpages using ActiveX Controls will have to take this into account
>> (which may be one reason why the hotfix hasn't been included in an IE update
>> yet).
>
> ActiveX'es is one thing. BUt I seemed to read something about this
> affecting linking to other documents as well (as a clickable link that
> opens a .PDF or a Word-document or something).

http://blogs.msdn.com/jvast/archive/...14/551699.aspx may enlight you
further.

Bye,
Freudi