Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | Re: SUS strange language behaviour with Microsoft .NET Framework Service Pack 2 |
|---|---|
| Date: | Mon, 27 Sep 2004 13:19:01 -0400 |
Summary of responses: Paul Adare said; Regarding the downloads of the Framework, this is a common question about SUS and is by design. Unlike other language specific OS patches which can only be applied to a matching language OS, the Framework service packs can be applied to any language. IOW, the Framework SP in Chinese can be applied to an English Windows XP system. This is why it appears that the language setting is being ignored for the Framework SPs. You can find more info on this by googling the Microsoft SUS news group. Rick Newton said; I too can confirm this oddity in SUS... I however, only have English "selected" (the default) and for several of the updates pulled down to my SUS server I've obtained copies for between 6 and 10 languages. It doesn't happen for every update downloaded only some (thank god...). I've gotten Italian, Korean, Chinese (both), Russian, German, etc. ... And as I say, XP SP2 isn't the first update to come to me in multiple languages! If you get an answer to this problem before I do I look forward to cleaning out all the non-requested language files... As an aside, for those using SUS... I've just finished with MS Support on a different SUS issue. Perhaps this information might be useful to others utilizing SUS: I had a few systems that were once listed in my AD 2003 domain, and reporting to SUS, which were then removed from the domain/SUS and moved to a satellite office with VPN connectivity for reaching our Terminal Server; these systems after being moved were still attempting to contact the SUS server for updates. All "visible" (e.g.: registry, etc.) references to the SUS server had been changed back to Windows Update (e.g.: Automatic Updates, registry entries). Since the SUS server refuses connections from anything but the segment it is on, the systems were being refused. Thankfully, the systems were getting their updates successfully from the Windows Update site (although a little later than expected). However, they were appearing on the SUS logs as refused connections. It took about a month to correct (due to travel to the secondary site, etc.) and the execution of several tools supplied by MS Support, and several scripts of my own for delivery and information collection, without resolution (everything appeared correct) before the following was suggested and resolved the issue... The culprit turned out to be the URLLOG.DAT file (the file can be found on systems that reported to a SUS server in C:\Program Files\WindowsUpdate\v4). This file contained information pointing back to the SUS server. Deleting the file resolved the issue. Rob Pickering said; <saw the same thing and added> As an interesting sidenote, the SUS content directory (for a installation that has only choosen English as it's language)now exceeds 1.2Gb, that's a lot of patches! Cheers, Russ - NTBugtraq Editor ----- NTBugtraq Editor's Note: Want to reply to the person who sent this message? This list is configured such that just hitting reply is going to result in the message coming to the list, not to the individual who sent the message. This was done to help reduce the number of Out of Office messages posters received. So if you want to send a reply just to the poster, you'll have to copy their email address out of the message and place it in your TO: field. -----
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: 2003 Server NTP time issue, Jeff Berner |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | MinorRev: Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-027 - Vulnerability in WordPerfect Converter Could Allow Code Execution (884933), Russ Cooper |
| Previous by Thread: | SUS strange language behaviour with Microsoft .NET Framework Service Pack 2, Tommaso Calosi |
| Next by Thread: | Re: A question about preparation for patching, Beegle, Chris |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |