MS09-054: Cumulative security update for Internet Explorer

And by the way moron, thanks for full-quoting my post. It will insure
that even more people can read and benefit from it.

Just what is your explanation for repeating (in full) instructions and
information that you caution others not to follow?

MEB spewed:

> DO NOT TAKE THE ABOVE ADVISE...
>
> These updates require the NT file system security [and other
> aspects] to work properly and provide the protections intended..

And how exactly do you know that?

What information do you know about those files that tells you that they
can't or don't function perfectly on win-98?

Which of those files requires the "nt file system security" ?

What are the [other aspects] ?

> As usual, this advise fails to address these issues,

As usual, you employ baffling bullshit with nothing to back it up.

> Take particular note of the headings:

> Internet Explorer 6 with Service Pack 1 on all supported
> versions of Windows 2000

I said openly that those files were for win-2k. But it's been
historically shown that IE6 update files for win-2k are frequently
identical to those that were offered for (or have been found to work on)
windows 98.

> You WILL *NOT* be brought up-to-date security-wise by using
> these purported fixes as you would be in any other
> installation/OS using IE6.

And that's what's got you really pissed off.

You just can't stand to hear or be shown how the security status of
windows 98 can be improved upon by using files provided by Micro$haft
itself.

The reader is invited to read the following thread (starting from post
# for more information on this subject:

http://www.msfn.org/board/latest-ms-ie6-security-update-breaks-windows...-t13656

The use of these update files has been endorsed by the win-98 experts at
msfn.org.

Meb will no-doubt full-quote my post and add some bullshit nonsense. He
will not address my request that he answer the specific questions I've
asked here.

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 01:47:36 -0400, MEB <MEB-not-here.DeleteThis@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>98 Guy wrote:
>> It seems that the files that are part of the IE6 update package for
>> win-2k are fully compatible with Windows 98.
>>
>> The kb article is here: support.microsoft.com/kb/974455
>>
>> The download link is here: tinyurl.com/ygjyyc6
>>
>> Previous updates for the files shlwapi.dll and mshtml.dll did not work
>> on win-98, but these new versions seem to work ok.
>>
>> The actual executable or the unpacked install.exe program will not run
>> under win-98. What you need to do is download the above file, unzip it,
>> and copy over the following files:
>>
>> browseui.dll
>> cdfview.dll
>> danim.dll
>> dxtmsft.dll
>> dxtrans.dll
>> iepeers.dll
>> inseng.dll
>> jsproxy.dll
>> mshtml.dll
>> msrating.dll
>> mstime.dll
>> pngfilt.dll
>> shdocvw.dll
>> shlwapi.dll
>> urlmon.dll
>> wininet.dll
>>
>> They can be found in the \rtmgdr folder of the unpacked download file.
>> Some of those are direct-x related, so you might not want to replace
>> your existing file with those.
>>
>> Backup your existing files so you can replace them if necessary.
>> Re-registering these files is not necessary - simple file-replacement is
>> all that is needed.
>>
>> These files will bring the IE6-sp1 component of your win-98 system up to
>> date and equivalent (security-wise) to any win-2k system running IE6.
>
>DO NOT TAKE THE ABOVE ADVISE...
>
> These updates require the NT file system security [and other aspects]
>to work properly and provide the protections intended..
>
> As usual, this advise fails to address these issues, and the *testing
>required* to ensure they not only work as expected, but that installing
>them will not CREATE NEW VULNERABILITIES.
>
> Take particular note of the headings:
>Hotfixes
>Internet Explorer 6 with Service Pack 1 on all supported versions of
>Windows 2000
>
>And the other information provided there, including the linked materials.
>
> You WILL *NOT* be brought up-to-date security-wise by using these
>purported fixes as you would be in any other installation/OS using IE6.


Have you tried it? Don't knock someone advice, until you try it,.

Greg

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 01:47:36 -0400, MEB <MEB-not-here.DeleteThis@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>98 Guy wrote:
>> It seems that the files that are part of the IE6 update package for
>> win-2k are fully compatible with Windows 98.
>>
>> The kb article is here: support.microsoft.com/kb/974455
>>
>> The download link is here: tinyurl.com/ygjyyc6
>>
>> Previous updates for the files shlwapi.dll and mshtml.dll did not work
>> on win-98, but these new versions seem to work ok.
>>
>> The actual executable or the unpacked install.exe program will not run
>> under win-98. What you need to do is download the above file, unzip it,
>> and copy over the following files:
>>
>> browseui.dll
>> cdfview.dll
>> danim.dll
>> dxtmsft.dll
>> dxtrans.dll
>> iepeers.dll
>> inseng.dll
>> jsproxy.dll
>> mshtml.dll
>> msrating.dll
>> mstime.dll
>> pngfilt.dll
>> shdocvw.dll
>> shlwapi.dll
>> urlmon.dll
>> wininet.dll
>>
>> They can be found in the \rtmgdr folder of the unpacked download file.
>> Some of those are direct-x related, so you might not want to replace
>> your existing file with those.
>>
>> Backup your existing files so you can replace them if necessary.
>> Re-registering these files is not necessary - simple file-replacement is
>> all that is needed.
>>
>> These files will bring the IE6-sp1 component of your win-98 system up to
>> date and equivalent (security-wise) to any win-2k system running IE6.
>
>DO NOT TAKE THE ABOVE ADVISE...
>
> These updates require the NT file system security [and other aspects]
>to work properly and provide the protections intended..
>
> As usual, this advise fails to address these issues, and the *testing
>required* to ensure they not only work as expected, but that installing
>them will not CREATE NEW VULNERABILITIES.
>
> Take particular note of the headings:
>Hotfixes
>Internet Explorer 6 with Service Pack 1 on all supported versions of
>Windows 2000
>
>And the other information provided there, including the linked materials.
>
> You WILL *NOT* be brought up-to-date security-wise by using these
>purported fixes as you would be in any other installation/OS using IE6.

One more thing.

If the files are written for I.E. 6, I don't see why it wouldn't
work for I.E. 6 in any version of windows that support I.E. 6

Greg

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 11:26:18 -0400, Greg <invalid RemoveThis @invalid.net> wrote:

>On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 01:47:36 -0400, MEB <MEB-not-here RemoveThis @hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>98 Guy wrote:
>>> It seems that the files that are part of the IE6 update package for
>>> win-2k are fully compatible with Windows 98.
>>>
>>> The kb article is here: support.microsoft.com/kb/974455
>>>
>>> The download link is here: tinyurl.com/ygjyyc6
>>>
>>> Previous updates for the files shlwapi.dll and mshtml.dll did not work
>>> on win-98, but these new versions seem to work ok.
>>>
>>> The actual executable or the unpacked install.exe program will not run
>>> under win-98. What you need to do is download the above file, unzip it,
>>> and copy over the following files:
>>>
>>> browseui.dll
>>> cdfview.dll
>>> danim.dll
>>> dxtmsft.dll
>>> dxtrans.dll
>>> iepeers.dll
>>> inseng.dll
>>> jsproxy.dll
>>> mshtml.dll
>>> msrating.dll
>>> mstime.dll
>>> pngfilt.dll
>>> shdocvw.dll
>>> shlwapi.dll
>>> urlmon.dll
>>> wininet.dll
>>>
>>> They can be found in the \rtmgdr folder of the unpacked download file.
>>> Some of those are direct-x related, so you might not want to replace
>>> your existing file with those.
>>>
>>> Backup your existing files so you can replace them if necessary.
>>> Re-registering these files is not necessary - simple file-replacement is
>>> all that is needed.
>>>
>>> These files will bring the IE6-sp1 component of your win-98 system up to
>>> date and equivalent (security-wise) to any win-2k system running IE6.
>>
>>DO NOT TAKE THE ABOVE ADVISE...
>>
>> These updates require the NT file system security [and other aspects]
>>to work properly and provide the protections intended..
>>
>> As usual, this advise fails to address these issues, and the *testing
>>required* to ensure they not only work as expected, but that installing
>>them will not CREATE NEW VULNERABILITIES.
>>
>> Take particular note of the headings:
>>Hotfixes
>>Internet Explorer 6 with Service Pack 1 on all supported versions of
>>Windows 2000
>>
>>And the other information provided there, including the linked materials.
>>
>> You WILL *NOT* be brought up-to-date security-wise by using these
>>purported fixes as you would be in any other installation/OS using IE6.
>
>One more thing.
>
>If the files are written for I.E. 6, I don't see why it wouldn't
>work for I.E. 6 in any version of windows that support I.E. 6
>
>Greg


Update,

I wouldn't use this files, they are not for I.E. 6
danim.dll
dxtrans.dll

correction (Sorry, I hit the send button to fast)

Update,

I wouldn't use this files, they are not for I.E. 6
danim.dll
dxtrans.dll
dxtmsft.dll

Those are for directx (Read it may or may not work).

Greg wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 01:47:36 -0400, MEB <MEB-not-here.RemoveThis@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> 98 Guy wrote:
>>> It seems that the files that are part of the IE6 update package for
>>> win-2k are fully compatible with Windows 98.
>>>
>>> The kb article is here: support.microsoft.com/kb/974455
>>>
>>> The download link is here: tinyurl.com/ygjyyc6
>>>
>>> Previous updates for the files shlwapi.dll and mshtml.dll did not work
>>> on win-98, but these new versions seem to work ok.
>>>
>>> The actual executable or the unpacked install.exe program will not run
>>> under win-98. What you need to do is download the above file, unzip it,
>>> and copy over the following files:
>>>
>>> browseui.dll
>>> cdfview.dll
>>> danim.dll
>>> dxtmsft.dll
>>> dxtrans.dll
>>> iepeers.dll
>>> inseng.dll
>>> jsproxy.dll
>>> mshtml.dll
>>> msrating.dll
>>> mstime.dll
>>> pngfilt.dll
>>> shdocvw.dll
>>> shlwapi.dll
>>> urlmon.dll
>>> wininet.dll
>>>
>>> They can be found in the \rtmgdr folder of the unpacked download file.
>>> Some of those are direct-x related, so you might not want to replace
>>> your existing file with those.
>>>
>>> Backup your existing files so you can replace them if necessary.
>>> Re-registering these files is not necessary - simple file-replacement is
>>> all that is needed.
>>>
>>> These files will bring the IE6-sp1 component of your win-98 system up to
>>> date and equivalent (security-wise) to any win-2k system running IE6.
>> DO NOT TAKE THE ABOVE ADVISE...
>>
>> These updates require the NT file system security [and other aspects]
>> to work properly and provide the protections intended..
>>
>> As usual, this advise fails to address these issues, and the *testing
>> required* to ensure they not only work as expected, but that installing
>> them will not CREATE NEW VULNERABILITIES.
>>
>> Take particular note of the headings:
>> Hotfixes
>> Internet Explorer 6 with Service Pack 1 on all supported versions of
>> Windows 2000
>>
>> And the other information provided there, including the linked materials.
>>
>> You WILL *NOT* be brought up-to-date security-wise by using these
>> purported fixes as you would be in any other installation/OS using IE6.
>
>
> Have you tried it? Don't knock someone advice, until you try it,.
>
> Greg
>
>

Right!
Spoken by another who has no idea of what is contained within the
various OSs, how they work, security [file permissions and other], and
what is REQUIRED to understand WHY these supposed "you can install the
files so it must provide the protections/fixes" is a load of garbage.

Merely because a file or files installs DOES NOT MEAN it provides
anything to an OS for which it was not designed. It *MAY* contain a fix
[within that file], but that also requires *ALL* the other files and
their fixes to accomplish the goal, e.g., the security issues attempted
to be fixed.
TRY to understand the *WHY* for ALL of those other files YOU WILL NOT
BE USING and which you have *NOT* received since 2006.

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:23:06 -0400, MEB <MEB-not-here.RemoveThis@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Greg wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 01:47:36 -0400, MEB <MEB-not-here.RemoveThis@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 98 Guy wrote:
>>>> It seems that the files that are part of the IE6 update package for
>>>> win-2k are fully compatible with Windows 98.
>>>>
>>>> The kb article is here: support.microsoft.com/kb/974455
>>>>
>>>> The download link is here: tinyurl.com/ygjyyc6
>>>>
>>>> Previous updates for the files shlwapi.dll and mshtml.dll did not work
>>>> on win-98, but these new versions seem to work ok.
>>>>
>>>> The actual executable or the unpacked install.exe program will not run
>>>> under win-98. What you need to do is download the above file, unzip it,
>>>> and copy over the following files:
>>>>
>>>> browseui.dll
>>>> cdfview.dll
>>>> danim.dll
>>>> dxtmsft.dll
>>>> dxtrans.dll
>>>> iepeers.dll
>>>> inseng.dll
>>>> jsproxy.dll
>>>> mshtml.dll
>>>> msrating.dll
>>>> mstime.dll
>>>> pngfilt.dll
>>>> shdocvw.dll
>>>> shlwapi.dll
>>>> urlmon.dll
>>>> wininet.dll
>>>>
>>>> They can be found in the \rtmgdr folder of the unpacked download file.
>>>> Some of those are direct-x related, so you might not want to replace
>>>> your existing file with those.
>>>>
>>>> Backup your existing files so you can replace them if necessary.
>>>> Re-registering these files is not necessary - simple file-replacement is
>>>> all that is needed.
>>>>
>>>> These files will bring the IE6-sp1 component of your win-98 system up to
>>>> date and equivalent (security-wise) to any win-2k system running IE6.
>>> DO NOT TAKE THE ABOVE ADVISE...
>>>
>>> These updates require the NT file system security [and other aspects]
>>> to work properly and provide the protections intended..
>>>
>>> As usual, this advise fails to address these issues, and the *testing
>>> required* to ensure they not only work as expected, but that installing
>>> them will not CREATE NEW VULNERABILITIES.
>>>
>>> Take particular note of the headings:
>>> Hotfixes
>>> Internet Explorer 6 with Service Pack 1 on all supported versions of
>>> Windows 2000
>>>
>>> And the other information provided there, including the linked materials.
>>>
>>> You WILL *NOT* be brought up-to-date security-wise by using these
>>> purported fixes as you would be in any other installation/OS using IE6.
>>
>>
>> Have you tried it? Don't knock someone advice, until you try it,.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>>
>
> Right!
> Spoken by another who has no idea of what is contained within the
>various OSs, how they work, security [file permissions and other], and
>what is REQUIRED to understand WHY these supposed "you can install the
>files so it must provide the protections/fixes" is a load of garbage.
>
> Merely because a file or files installs DOES NOT MEAN it provides
>anything to an OS for which it was not designed. It *MAY* contain a fix
>[within that file], but that also requires *ALL* the other files and
>their fixes to accomplish the goal, e.g., the security issues attempted
>to be fixed.
> TRY to understand the *WHY* for ALL of those other files YOU WILL NOT
>BE USING and which you have *NOT* received since 2006.


I have been using computer since 1980's, yes I am that old. I
know a lot about operating systems on how they work. I really like
windows 98se. I am dual booting between 98se and xp using system
commander 7.5

I read a lot, I may not be a advance user, I would consider
myself an intermediate user. I installed hard drives, Memory,
CD/DVD drives, Pci cards, floppy drives, etc

Except for the directx files in that list.
Let use browseui.dll as an example.

Let assume I.E. 6 was installed on both systems at the same time.

Microsoft needs to patch the browser do to a security hold.
So they patch browseui.dll file. This patch is for windows 2000
or above.

This does not mean the patch wont work on browseui.dll in 98se, it
will and it would be better that the unsecured browseui.dll Even the
msfn forum posters says it ok to do it, just don't use the directx
files.


Greg

Greg wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:23:06 -0400, MEB <MEB-not-here.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Greg wrote:
>>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 01:47:36 -0400, MEB <MEB-not-here.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 98 Guy wrote:
>>>>> It seems that the files that are part of the IE6 update package for
>>>>> win-2k are fully compatible with Windows 98.
>>>>>
>>>>> The kb article is here: support.microsoft.com/kb/974455
>>>>>
>>>>> The download link is here: tinyurl.com/ygjyyc6
>>>>>
>>>>> Previous updates for the files shlwapi.dll and mshtml.dll did not work
>>>>> on win-98, but these new versions seem to work ok.
>>>>>
>>>>> The actual executable or the unpacked install.exe program will not run
>>>>> under win-98. What you need to do is download the above file, unzip it,
>>>>> and copy over the following files:
>>>>>
>>>>> browseui.dll
>>>>> cdfview.dll
>>>>> danim.dll
>>>>> dxtmsft.dll
>>>>> dxtrans.dll
>>>>> iepeers.dll
>>>>> inseng.dll
>>>>> jsproxy.dll
>>>>> mshtml.dll
>>>>> msrating.dll
>>>>> mstime.dll
>>>>> pngfilt.dll
>>>>> shdocvw.dll
>>>>> shlwapi.dll
>>>>> urlmon.dll
>>>>> wininet.dll
>>>>>
>>>>> They can be found in the \rtmgdr folder of the unpacked download file.
>>>>> Some of those are direct-x related, so you might not want to replace
>>>>> your existing file with those.
>>>>>
>>>>> Backup your existing files so you can replace them if necessary.
>>>>> Re-registering these files is not necessary - simple file-replacement is
>>>>> all that is needed.
>>>>>
>>>>> These files will bring the IE6-sp1 component of your win-98 system up to
>>>>> date and equivalent (security-wise) to any win-2k system running IE6.
>>>> DO NOT TAKE THE ABOVE ADVISE...
>>>>
>>>> These updates require the NT file system security [and other aspects]
>>>> to work properly and provide the protections intended..
>>>>
>>>> As usual, this advise fails to address these issues, and the *testing
>>>> required* to ensure they not only work as expected, but that installing
>>>> them will not CREATE NEW VULNERABILITIES.
>>>>
>>>> Take particular note of the headings:
>>>> Hotfixes
>>>> Internet Explorer 6 with Service Pack 1 on all supported versions of
>>>> Windows 2000
>>>>
>>>> And the other information provided there, including the linked materials.
>>>>
>>>> You WILL *NOT* be brought up-to-date security-wise by using these
>>>> purported fixes as you would be in any other installation/OS using IE6.
>>>
>>> Have you tried it? Don't knock someone advice, until you try it,.
>>>
>>> Greg
>>>
>>>
>> Right!
>> Spoken by another who has no idea of what is contained within the
>> various OSs, how they work, security [file permissions and other], and
>> what is REQUIRED to understand WHY these supposed "you can install the
>> files so it must provide the protections/fixes" is a load of garbage.
>>
>> Merely because a file or files installs DOES NOT MEAN it provides
>> anything to an OS for which it was not designed. It *MAY* contain a fix
>> [within that file], but that also requires *ALL* the other files and
>> their fixes to accomplish the goal, e.g., the security issues attempted
>> to be fixed.
>> TRY to understand the *WHY* for ALL of those other files YOU WILL NOT
>> BE USING and which you have *NOT* received since 2006.
>
>
> I have been using computer since 1980's, yes I am that old. I
> know a lot about operating systems on how they work. I really like
> windows 98se. I am dual booting between 98se and xp using system
> commander 7.5
>
> I read a lot, I may not be a advance user, I would consider
> myself an intermediate user. I installed hard drives, Memory,
> CD/DVD drives, Pci cards, floppy drives, etc
>
> Except for the directx files in that list.
> Let use browseui.dll as an example.
>
> Let assume I.E. 6 was installed on both systems at the same time.
>
> Microsoft needs to patch the browser do to a security hold.
> So they patch browseui.dll file. This patch is for windows 2000
> or above.
>
> This does not mean the patch wont work on browseui.dll in 98se, it
> will and it would be better that the unsecured browseui.dll Even the
> msfn forum posters says it ok to do it, just don't use the directx
> files.
>
>
> Greg

Greg, you are once again attempting to address it as IF IT RELATES TO A
SINGLE FILE. It does not. There is a relational functioning *between*
*ALL of the files* necessary for the *specific* function, e.g., web
browsing.

In this case its IE, NOTE however, IE was *NEVER* properly ported to
work within Win9X, *it was DESIGNED for the NTs* [the transitional
browser Microsoft ALWAYS produces prior to releasing/for a new OS].
Since DAY ONE there have been missing function calls in 9X within IE6
*WHICH ARE NECESSARY FOR FULL SECURITY FUNCTIONING*. One of the KEY
elements is the user environment [usrenv] which INCLUDES the security
hooks to other NT ONLY security functions ONLY available in those
environments. The errors are REPRESSED in 9X, however they DO EXIST.

IF you would care to review some of this forum's OLD history, you would
find lengthy discussions on IE and its files, AND you would find some of
98 Guy's prior attempts [starting in 2006] to apprise of installable W2K
or XP files into 9X for IE AND lengthy discussions of WHY those don't
work properly, AND WHY they provide nothing more than a false sense of
security and MAY install even more dangerous vulnerabilities than exist
in an EOL IE.

IF YOU want to test these, feel free to do so, however, unless you TEST
them with SOFTWARE AND SPECIFIC VULNERABILITIES TESTS you have done
nothing but installed some files which may cause other issues...

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 22:20:15 -0400, MEB <MEB-not-here DeleteThis @hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Greg wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:23:06 -0400, MEB <MEB-not-here DeleteThis @hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Greg wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 01:47:36 -0400, MEB <MEB-not-here DeleteThis @hotmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 98 Guy wrote:
>>>>>> It seems that the files that are part of the IE6 update package for
>>>>>> win-2k are fully compatible with Windows 98.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The kb article is here: support.microsoft.com/kb/974455
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The download link is here: tinyurl.com/ygjyyc6
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Previous updates for the files shlwapi.dll and mshtml.dll did not work
>>>>>> on win-98, but these new versions seem to work ok.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The actual executable or the unpacked install.exe program will not run
>>>>>> under win-98. What you need to do is download the above file, unzip it,
>>>>>> and copy over the following files:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> browseui.dll
>>>>>> cdfview.dll
>>>>>> danim.dll
>>>>>> dxtmsft.dll
>>>>>> dxtrans.dll
>>>>>> iepeers.dll
>>>>>> inseng.dll
>>>>>> jsproxy.dll
>>>>>> mshtml.dll
>>>>>> msrating.dll
>>>>>> mstime.dll
>>>>>> pngfilt.dll
>>>>>> shdocvw.dll
>>>>>> shlwapi.dll
>>>>>> urlmon.dll
>>>>>> wininet.dll
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They can be found in the \rtmgdr folder of the unpacked download file.
>>>>>> Some of those are direct-x related, so you might not want to replace
>>>>>> your existing file with those.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Backup your existing files so you can replace them if necessary.
>>>>>> Re-registering these files is not necessary - simple file-replacement is
>>>>>> all that is needed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These files will bring the IE6-sp1 component of your win-98 system up to
>>>>>> date and equivalent (security-wise) to any win-2k system running IE6.
>>>>> DO NOT TAKE THE ABOVE ADVISE...
>>>>>
>>>>> These updates require the NT file system security [and other aspects]
>>>>> to work properly and provide the protections intended..
>>>>>
>>>>> As usual, this advise fails to address these issues, and the *testing
>>>>> required* to ensure they not only work as expected, but that installing
>>>>> them will not CREATE NEW VULNERABILITIES.
>>>>>
>>>>> Take particular note of the headings:
>>>>> Hotfixes
>>>>> Internet Explorer 6 with Service Pack 1 on all supported versions of
>>>>> Windows 2000
>>>>>
>>>>> And the other information provided there, including the linked materials.
>>>>>
>>>>> You WILL *NOT* be brought up-to-date security-wise by using these
>>>>> purported fixes as you would be in any other installation/OS using IE6.
>>>>
>>>> Have you tried it? Don't knock someone advice, until you try it,.
>>>>
>>>> Greg
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Right!
>>> Spoken by another who has no idea of what is contained within the
>>> various OSs, how they work, security [file permissions and other], and
>>> what is REQUIRED to understand WHY these supposed "you can install the
>>> files so it must provide the protections/fixes" is a load of garbage.
>>>
>>> Merely because a file or files installs DOES NOT MEAN it provides
>>> anything to an OS for which it was not designed. It *MAY* contain a fix
>>> [within that file], but that also requires *ALL* the other files and
>>> their fixes to accomplish the goal, e.g., the security issues attempted
>>> to be fixed.
>>> TRY to understand the *WHY* for ALL of those other files YOU WILL NOT
>>> BE USING and which you have *NOT* received since 2006.
>>
>>
>> I have been using computer since 1980's, yes I am that old. I
>> know a lot about operating systems on how they work. I really like
>> windows 98se. I am dual booting between 98se and xp using system
>> commander 7.5
>>
>> I read a lot, I may not be a advance user, I would consider
>> myself an intermediate user. I installed hard drives, Memory,
>> CD/DVD drives, Pci cards, floppy drives, etc
>>
>> Except for the directx files in that list.
>> Let use browseui.dll as an example.
>>
>> Let assume I.E. 6 was installed on both systems at the same time.
>>
>> Microsoft needs to patch the browser do to a security hold.
>> So they patch browseui.dll file. This patch is for windows 2000
>> or above.
>>
>> This does not mean the patch wont work on browseui.dll in 98se, it
>> will and it would be better that the unsecured browseui.dll Even the
>> msfn forum posters says it ok to do it, just don't use the directx
>> files.
>>
>>
>> Greg
>
> Greg, you are once again attempting to address it as IF IT RELATES TO A
>SINGLE FILE. It does not. There is a relational functioning *between*
>*ALL of the files* necessary for the *specific* function, e.g., web
>browsing.
>
> In this case its IE, NOTE however, IE6 was *NEVER* properly ported to
>work within Win9X, *it was DESIGNED for the NTs* [the transitional
>browser Microsoft ALWAYS produces prior to releasing/for a new OS].
> Since DAY ONE there have been missing function calls in 9X within IE6
>*WHICH ARE NECESSARY FOR FULL SECURITY FUNCTIONING*. One of the KEY
>elements is the user environment [usrenv] which INCLUDES the security
>hooks to other NT ONLY security functions ONLY available in those
>environments. The errors are REPRESSED in 9X, however they DO EXIST.
>

If that was really the case, Microsoft would never release an IE 6
version for 98se, ME etc. if it was designed NT. Microsoft even
claimed it was more secure when it was released. Do those security
function exist in windows 98se? Maybe or maybe not. There is some
windows nt function in windows 98se because there are files that have
the same code written to them and visa versa. (In fact a screwed up
install of xp slipstream version I did on emachine a couple years
back, came out looking like windows me and it worked.)

I never said a signal file, I was just using it as an example. I
am referring to the I.E. files 98 guy mentioned. I said read the
MSFN forum. They said it is ok to install and you would have better
security. They did make a comment not to install the direct x files
unless you have net framework installed. (Not sure if it was 1.1 or
2)

Were not talking about upgrading I.E. 6 to I.E. 8 Were talking about
a security update.

If it what you said is true, that IE 6 was never ported properly
ported to work with 9x. If that is the case, using those files
would even give you better security then, not less security.


Greg

"MEB" <MEB-not-here.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:edfg34WUKHA.1092@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
<snip>
> Well, we can see you're the normal Windows user, unable to understand
> even the most basic concepts of the OS you are using...
<snip site spam>

Your over inflated ego and self worth is alive and well.
What's with the "we can see"? Why do you presume that anyone agrees with
you?
Do you lump "normal Windows users" with your "Usenutters" now?

Sunny wrote:
> "MEB" <MEB-not-here.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:edfg34WUKHA.1092@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> <snip>
>> Well, we can see you're the normal Windows user, unable to understand
>> even the most basic concepts of the OS you are using...
> <snip site spam>
>
> Your over inflated ego and self worth is alive and well.
> What's with the "we can see"? Why do you presume that anyone agrees with
> you?
> Do you lump "normal Windows users" with your "Usenutters" now?
>
>
>

Take a hike Sunny, and take your USENUTTER junk with you when you leave.

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:41:25 +1000, "Sunny" <wombathouse.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com.au>
wrote:

>
>"MEB" <MEB-not-here.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:edfg34WUKHA.1092@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
><snip>
>> Well, we can see you're the normal Windows user, unable to understand
>> even the most basic concepts of the OS you are using...
><snip site spam>
>
>Your over inflated ego and self worth is alive and well.
>What's with the "we can see"? Why do you presume that anyone agrees with
>you?
>Do you lump "normal Windows users" with your "Usenutters" now?
>
>

MEB, he does not believe what I have read and learned. I think MEB
needs to go visit the MSFN forums. They are the ones that said this
but added don't use the directx files unless you have a certain
version of net framework.

MEB, also needs to read how some files are coded. I bet if you dig
through the files of windows nt, xp, vista, w7 you would fine some
windows 9x code in them.

Knowing MEB, he would say the unofficial service pack for windows 98se
would not be secure, even through GRC recommends it.

MEB,
I have more than a basic concept on how an operating system works.

If you read what I said,
I have 3 partitions
Windows 98se partition one
Windows me partition two
No Operating system installed on partition three. I use it to share
files.

I also installed
Memory, Hard drives, Pci cards, Floppy disk, Cd drives, cables,
etc.



Greg

"MEB" <MEB-not-here RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23AO0e5dUKHA.1236@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Sunny wrote:
>> "MEB" <MEB-not-here RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:edfg34WUKHA.1092@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> <snip>
>>> Well, we can see you're the normal Windows user, unable to understand
>>> even the most basic concepts of the OS you are using...
>> <snip site spam>
>>
>> Your over inflated ego and self worth is alive and well.
>> What's with the "we can see"? Why do you presume that anyone agrees
>> with
>> you?
>> Do you lump "normal Windows users" with your "Usenutters" now?
>>
>>
>>
>
> Take a hike Sunny, and take your USENUTTER junk with you when you leave.

Thankfully, you have no say in what I do, or any authority to tell anyone
to "take a hike".
Must frustrate the hell out of you.
Suggestion..... Grow up.