Support for installing .NET Framework Security updates

..NET Framework SP Setup Issues
http://blogs.msdn.com/astebner/archi...23/268934.aspx

The above blog > provides a reference to common setup issues and
workarounds for .NET Framework 1.1 Service
> Pack 1 (SP1) and .NET Framework 1.0 Service Pack 3 (SP3).

It does contain error codes for Windows Update, so at least that's a
start in the right direction.

*** Be sure to read ' How to get help ' ***

Then gather the log files and contact Product Support Services for *NO
CHARGE SUPPORT* in getting July's Security updates for .NET Framework
installed.

From : Microsoft Security Bulletin MS07-040 - Critical
Vulnerabilities in .NET Framework Could Allow Remote Code Execution (931212)
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sec.../MS07-040.mspx

> Support:
> • Customers in the U.S. and Canada can receive technical support from Microsoft Product
> Support Services at 1-866-PCSAFETY. There is no charge for support calls that are
> associated with security updates.
> • International customers can receive support from their local Microsoft subsidiaries.
> There is no charge for support that is associated with security updates. For more
> information about how to contact Microsoft for support issues, visit the International
> Support Web site. http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=21155


MowGreen [MVP 2003-2007]
===============
*-343-* FDNY
Never Forgotten
===============

look in the newsgroup for George's
SOLUTION to the .net "failed to install" update


"MowGreen [MVP]" <> wrote in message
news:...
> .NET Framework SP Setup Issues
> http://blogs.msdn.com/astebner/archi...23/268934.aspx
>
> The above blog > provides a reference to common setup issues and
> workarounds for .NET Framework 1.1 Service
>> Pack 1 (SP1) and .NET Framework 1.0 Service Pack 3 (SP3).
>
> It does contain error codes for Windows Update, so at least that's a start
> in the right direction.
>
> *** Be sure to read ' How to get help ' ***
>
> Then gather the log files and contact Product Support Services for *NO
> CHARGE SUPPORT* in getting July's Security updates for .NET Framework
> installed.
>
> From : Microsoft Security Bulletin MS07-040 - Critical
> Vulnerabilities in .NET Framework Could Allow Remote Code Execution
> (931212)
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sec.../MS07-040.mspx
>
>> Support:
>> • Customers in the U.S. and Canada can receive technical support from
>> Microsoft Product Support Services at 1-866-PCSAFETY. There is no charge
>> for support calls that are associated with security updates.
>> • International customers can receive support from their local Microsoft
>> subsidiaries. There is no charge for support that is associated with
>> security updates. For more information about how to contact Microsoft for
>> support issues, visit the International Support Web site.
>> http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=21155
>
>
> MowGreen [MVP 2003-2007]
> ===============
> *-343-* FDNY
> Never Forgotten
> ===============

It worked for George, but does it work for everyone ?
MS needs a body count on this issue, Michel. Otherwise they'll say it's
just a small percentage of Users who are experiencing this. <w>

FWIW, all of the .NET updates installed just fine on all of my systems.
Perhaps the problem lies in the original installation being faulty due
to interference from antivirus software. This causes subsequent security
updates to fail.
Or, perhaps folks run 'registry cleaners' that delete needed
information|setup files for said updates to install properly.
Quien sabe ?

MowGreen [MVP 2003-2007]
===============
*-343-* FDNY
Never Forgotten
===============



realcestmoi wrote:

> look in the newsgroup for George's
> SOLUTION to the .net "failed to install" update
>
>
> "MowGreen [MVP]" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>
>>.NET Framework SP Setup Issues
>>http://blogs.msdn.com/astebner/archi...23/268934.aspx
>>
>>The above blog > provides a reference to common setup issues and
>>workarounds for .NET Framework 1.1 Service
>>
>>>Pack 1 (SP1) and .NET Framework 1.0 Service Pack 3 (SP3).
>>
>>It does contain error codes for Windows Update, so at least that's a start
>>in the right direction.
>>
>>*** Be sure to read ' How to get help ' ***
>>
>>Then gather the log files and contact Product Support Services for *NO
>>CHARGE SUPPORT* in getting July's Security updates for .NET Framework
>>installed.
>>
>>From : Microsoft Security Bulletin MS07-040 - Critical
>>Vulnerabilities in .NET Framework Could Allow Remote Code Execution
>>(931212)
>>http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sec.../MS07-040.mspx
>>
>>
>>>Support:
>>>• Customers in the U.S. and Canada can receive technical support from
>>>Microsoft Product Support Services at 1-866-PCSAFETY. There is no charge
>>>for support calls that are associated with security updates.
>>>• International customers can receive support from their local Microsoft
>>>subsidiaries. There is no charge for support that is associated with
>>>security updates. For more information about how to contact Microsoft for
>>>support issues, visit the International Support Web site.
>>>http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=21155
>>
>>
>>MowGreen [MVP 2003-2007]
>>===============
>> *-343-* FDNY
>>Never Forgotten
>>===============
>
>
>

In news:%,
MowGreen [MVP] <> wrote:
.........
>
> FWIW, all of the .NET updates installed just fine on all of my
> systems. ......

Same here. But I do admit that every time MS releases a .NET update via
WU/MU we have a massive influx of failed notices in this and related
newsgroups.

I'm starting to think that all .NET updates need to be treated like a
service pack, where they are downloaded and installed offline rather than
being pushed/streamed via WU/MU/AU.

....Sky

Sky King wrote:

>
>
> In news:%,
> MowGreen [MVP] <> wrote:
> ........
>
>>
>> FWIW, all of the .NET updates installed just fine on all of my
>> systems. ......
>
>
> Same here. But I do admit that every time MS releases a .NET update via
> WU/MU we have a massive influx of failed notices in this and related
> newsgroups.
>
> I'm starting to think that all .NET updates need to be treated like a
> service pack, where they are downloaded and installed offline rather
> than being pushed/streamed via WU/MU/AU.
>
> ...Sky
>


There must be *some* commonality for why there are so many issues
installing these and other .NET updates.
Perhaps I'm naive ? <w>


MowGreen [MVP 2003-2007]
===============
*-343-* FDNY
Never Forgotten
===============

MowGreen [MVP] wrote:
> Sky King wrote:
>>> FWIW, all of the .NET updates installed just fine on all of my
>>> systems. ......
>>
>>
>> Same here. But I do admit that every time MS releases a .NET update via
>> WU/MU we have a massive influx of failed notices in this and related
>> newsgroups.
>>
>> I'm starting to think that all .NET updates need to be treated like a
>> service pack, where they are downloaded and installed offline rather
>> than being pushed/streamed via WU/MU/AU.
>>
> There must be *some* commonality for why there are so many issues
> installing these and other .NET updates.
> Perhaps I'm naive ? <w>

I suspect the Fickle Finger of Fate will end up pointing to real-time
protection by anti-virus, anti-spyware, and/or third-party firewall.
--
~PA Bear

"PA Bear" <> wrote in message
news:...
| MowGreen [MVP] wrote:
| > Sky King wrote:
| >>> FWIW, all of the .NET updates installed just fine on all of my
| >>> systems. ......
| >>
| >>
| >> Same here. But I do admit that every time MS releases a .NET update via
| >> WU/MU we have a massive influx of failed notices in this and related
| >> newsgroups.
| >>
| >> I'm starting to think that all .NET updates need to be treated like a
| >> service pack, where they are downloaded and installed offline rather
| >> than being pushed/streamed via WU/MU/AU.
| >>
| > There must be *some* commonality for why there are so many issues
| > installing these and other .NET updates.
| > Perhaps I'm naive ? <w>
|
| I suspect the Fickle Finger of Fate will end up pointing to real-time
| protection by anti-virus, anti-spyware, and/or third-party firewall.
| --
| ~PA Bear
|

I forgot to turn off all the above, anti-virus, anti-spyware, 3rd party firewall,
WinPatrol, you name it I left it all on.
No problems.
I did note however during installation my security did pop up to ask me to allow
installation and WinPatrol did ask about a service which I allowed at the time because I
knew what was happening. Perhaps some security software, just stops the installation
process altogether without warning.

--
====================================
TaurArian [MS-MVP] 2005-2008 - Australia
====================================
How to make a good post: http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
Defending your machine: http://defendingyourmachine2.blogspot.com/
http://taurarian.mvps.org/index.htm

Emails will not be acknowledged - please post to the newsgroup so all may benefit.

TaurArian [MS-MVP] wrote:
> "PA Bear" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> MowGreen [MVP] wrote:
>>> Sky King wrote:
>>>>> FWIW, all of the .NET updates installed just fine on all of my
>>>>> systems. ......
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Same here. But I do admit that every time MS releases a .NET update
>>>> via
>>>> WU/MU we have a massive influx of failed notices in this and related
>>>> newsgroups.
>>>>
>>>> I'm starting to think that all .NET updates need to be treated like a
>>>> service pack, where they are downloaded and installed offline rather
>>>> than being pushed/streamed via WU/MU/AU.
>>>>
>>> There must be *some* commonality for why there are so many issues
>>> installing these and other .NET updates.
>>> Perhaps I'm naive ? <w>
>>
>> I suspect the Fickle Finger of Fate will end up pointing to real-time
>> protection by anti-virus, anti-spyware, and/or third-party firewall.
>> --
>> ~PA Bear
>>
>
> I forgot to turn off all the above, anti-virus, anti-spyware, 3rd party
> firewall, WinPatrol, you name it I left it all on.
> No problems.
> I did note however during installation my security did pop up to ask me to
> allow installation and WinPatrol did ask about a service which I allowed
> at
> the time because I knew what was happening. Perhaps some security
> software,
> just stops the installation process altogether without warning.

Well, certainly not all AV & anti-spyware apps and/or third-party firewalls,
but...

I've seen threads here and posts elsewhere stating that disabling, e.g.,
CounterSpy and/or ZA allowed the MS07-040 updates to install without a
hitch.
--
~PA Bear

Useless to me. I don't even have .NET 1.0 installed and this damned SP3
update keeps getting shoved in my face. Then it fails with 8007F070,
which isn't mentioned on that site anywhere.

MowGreen [MVP] wrote:

> .NET Framework SP Setup Issues
> http://blogs.msdn.com/astebner/archi...23/268934.aspx

Installed on my system with no problems and I never turn off my AV or ZA
for any update.
Joan


PA Bear wrote:
> MowGreen [MVP] wrote:
>> Sky King wrote:
>>>> FWIW, all of the .NET updates installed just fine on all of my
>>>> systems. ......
>>>
>>>
>>> Same here. But I do admit that every time MS releases a .NET
>>> update via WU/MU we have a massive influx of failed notices in this
>>> and related newsgroups.
>>>
>>> I'm starting to think that all .NET updates need to be treated like
>>> a service pack, where they are downloaded and installed offline
>>> rather than being pushed/streamed via WU/MU/AU.
>>>
>> There must be *some* commonality for why there are so many issues
>> installing these and other .NET updates.
>> Perhaps I'm naive ? <w>
>
> I suspect the Fickle Finger of Fate will end up pointing to real-time
> protection by anti-virus, anti-spyware, and/or third-party firewall.