Microsoft can expect thousands of extra technical support calls after the release of its security update for Windows XP this summer, according to security analysts.The Windows XP security update will turn security options on by default, which means that many users will need to reconfigure their software in order to connect to wireless networks, game servers and even their home networks. Read the report at News.com.
SP2 to Cause Microsoft Support Call Flood?
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
I got the tech preview download, and I have to say, no issues on my machine.
It’s relatively simple installation, and the firewall and security directions are clear and concise.
Makes me wonder if the “talking heads” are just stirring up non-issues to have something to say.
It certainly does break some apps. An Outlook 2003 plugin I use (and support, ACK) broke, as well as all the “stand-alone” IE versions I use for compatibility testing.
Hi
I had my share of issues. Security framework cannotb be pedalled into a OS in a service pack. Basically a whole lot of apps are not geared to work in such a environment and people continue to run as the administrator.
Jess
Really. Other posts from you make it sound like Microsoft is some evil corporation. I would be surprised to find that you use it at home. Or do you do some compatibility testing at work? Either way, please share what problems you had, instead of just saying you “had issues.”
Please read the following to see how useful your comment is.
I had my share of issues. Desktop usability cannot be pedalled into a OS in a rpm.
One interesting aspect of SP2, is the nag screens that keep complaining if you do not reboot after updates to the system are installed. And the real interesting part, as I realized this weekend, is that my system was forcibly rebooted (after a few days of nags). I was running a long job and was delaying the reboot. The bad part of course is that microsoft/other vendors force you to reboot windows most of the time they update software, just in case. So this should be disconcerting at least for some users
Naren
This SP is essentially supposed to be a security overhaul right?
Then wtf are they thinking bundling the Alexa plugin with IE? SpybotS&D has always classified this as Spyware!!
Not Really has a point, it’s very hard to think about security after the fact of releasing a product. Mirosoft is in this boat and they are working on it. I think they have done a good job, most problems will get fixed, hopefully developers are out there trying out the customer preview version of SP2 now, so that they can fix their software if it needs to be.
This can’t be put off forever, i say it’s good microsoft is finally dealing with the security problem.
thats was me ^^
I knew fair well that it was a beta, and I tried it:
After installing it, my dial-up networking connection would appear disconnected, while in fact I was still connected (easily determined by picking up the phone) – only a restart would disconnect the modem. After a couple days of this, I uninstalled the service pack. Now I can’t start media player up. It just plays an error sound and does nothing. The old mplayer2 doesn’t work either, same result. I tried uninstalling and reinstalling media player, but I have the same problem still… I’m going to have to reinstall XP to take care of the media player problem, most likely.
I think the writer was overstating what may happen. As it is most Linux users are happy with at least having basic security on by default. The same should be fo Windows. The last time I installed WinXP Pro I noticed Internet Connection Firewall was on by default. What are the new default security settings in SP2?
As a side note on security tools Microsoft release a free MSN toolbar for IE that includes pop up blocker (you can actually enter addresses to the safe list), search, access to MSN Messenger and Hotmail. This is something I wish Linux developers would make available for all Linux browsers and not just integrate in a select few. See link below.
http://toolbar.msn.ca/
Hi
“I had my share of issues. Desktop usability cannot be pedalled into a OS in a rpm.”
Thats was a crazy irrelevant comment. who is talking about rpm or linux. the specific issues has got to do with software refusing to run as non administrator like scanner software and other third party stuff. Basically changing things in a SP is NOT the way to go forward. Microsoft should have brought these type of changes slowly and with clear documentation and good set of best practises guidelines. give time for other developers to react.
Jess
They have been informing developers about SP2 for half a year now, and it’s still not out. I’d say they’re going TOO slowly
Microsoft has brought a lot of new security features fast with one update – that would explain why it takes a little bit longer to apply it – in one package.
I found the security features to be partially nice, they didn’t do anything to my system negatively. I ended up turning most of the things off because I prefer to update the system at my own time. The new idea of making a system to restart when updates are done, unless you specifically say “NO” doesn’t work too well with me.
So I guess you are just going to nitpick at the irrelevant, and not provide info on what problems you had. And if you did even experience any problems (with the beta software), did you report it with the handy button they place on your desktop?
1. An improved ICF.
2. Integrated Virus protection.
3. Pop-up/Ad blocker utility (see my previous post).
4. Spam block/removel utility.
5. All users run by default as Limited User. Admin functions such as installing/removing programs require an Admin login/password.
6. System updates that do not require reboot.
7. The ability to remove Outlook Express and MSN Messenger 4.7 from WinXP.
8. A secure web browser.
I beta test SP2.
A few weeks ago my harddrive started dying on me, sectors were becoming unreadable, etc… it got to the point if I restarted Windows I couldn’t boot anymore… anyway, I had Windows up for at least a week after doing an update without rebooting just because I didn’t have a new drive to install Windows to yet, the nags screens came, but it NEVER forced me to reboot.
You probably were typing something when the nag screen came up and hit a shortcut key to tell it that it was Ok to reboot the system now.
Hi
“So I guess you are just going to nitpick at the irrelevant”
Did you read. I said my scanner software didnt work. is that irrelevant to you. its not at all irrelevant to me.
No. I am not going to report anything. I am just uninstalling it and hope people improve their technics outside from marketing
1. ICF often hangs, causing loss of internet connectivitiy. Have not yet narrowed the exact cause down yet.
2. ICF does not correctly detect apps that are accessing the internet correctly (outbound). This is pure hit and miss, does a good job with some apps and fails miserably on others (Spybot S&D update is one it fails to detect for example). Often times a non detected app will cause it to lock up.
3. Due to problems above ICF is disabled (dont worry, have a hardware firewall in front of it). Now I keep getting annoying pop ups that dont go away stating that its disabled – yeah, its disabled because it doesnt work.
4. Cisco VPN client was broken.
5. Does not correctly detect the AV software I have on the system – states I have none (minor problem)
***** Ran into some other small apps that broke as well. Really this biggest issue Ive found is the unrealible ICF. When it is up and working it often doesnt do its job right. This is a problem.
Of course Sp2 is buggy –> It’s not even officially *RELEASED* yet! IF anyone installed it on a machine that was important, they shouldn’t be surprised when bugs come and bite them. I installed sp2, but did it on a spare machine to play with it. I noticed a few bugs, but one seriously cannot judge fairly until the final version is out.
sp2 breaks virus scan 7 ent. (the definition update part) if you want to fix it to go into componant services (MMC) -> dcom -> mcafee framework and set the security to lauchable for the admin group
is it right, that u can’t uninstall the WMP after u installed SP2 RC1? could that be one of the reason of the EU against the WMP?
In my experience, this RC SP2 made things quite a bit snappier (correcting some undetermined issue that cropped up when I upgraded the video card on this box), and most basic or builtin functionality (drivers, IE, etc.) worked flawlessly.
It did however break a few third party apps (thankfully, mostly those offering free downloadable updates). It’s good that they are finally starting to put some attention into their QC, but the sad fact is, that it’s gonna break things. I’m only hoping that it’ll not break anything that is no longer being updated, like most games on the market.
the author isnt far off on this. most people on the newsgroup for SP2 would probably be aware of the number of applications that have simply stopped working, for which reinstalling hasnt worked so far. McAfee Virusscan Enterprise is one of those apps, but at least it can be fixed as someone suggested
I’m no Microsoft fanboy by any stretch of the imagination, however, if you are going to blame some for the applications not working, blame the vendor will doesn’t release updates to allow you to run your software with the latest service packs.
These software vendors have had months to prepare for the unleashing of Windows XP Service Pack 2 onto the general populace and yet we have whiners here whinging about compatibility!
To fix security holes, compatibility in some places HAS to be broken. That is a fact of life. It is up to the third party vendors to then adequately test their software against this new service pack and make changes to their software to allow to run smoothly.
The fact is, Microsoft is doing THEIR part, its about bloody time third party software vendors pulled their weight and did their part.
I’m with you on this one. But what fun would it be to see a Microsoft article without all the bitching that comes with it. Funny how people like to complain about this, but are perfectly fine dealing with Linux and some of the compatiblilities it brings to the table.
I’m with you on this one. But what fun would it be to see a Microsoft article without all the bitching that comes with it. Funny how people like to complain about this, but are perfectly fine dealing with Linux and some of the compatiblilities it brings to the table.
Yeap, and when people do say, “oh, I had no problem”, of course they had no problem, when they update one package, everything else that depends on that one package that is supplied by the distributor is updated to.
If something is changed in OpenSSL via an update, and Mozilla is provided by the distributor, then mozilla is downloaded as well, thus, the dependency has been automatically satisfied.
The fact is, Microsoft doesn’t control every software vendor, they rely on the software vendor to get off their behind and work with Microsoft to make sure that the software works reliably with the latest service pack or quick-fix patch.
After reading these posts it is clear that some issues still surround updates and service Packs from MS. As a user of both Linux and Windows I have had to slowly migrated to Linux. This has only been done because I was fed up with the security confusion on MS products. Now before anyone thinks I am a MS basher I am not. I made a decision to try another OS and found over time that the security concerns I had with MS do not apply to my linux PC.
As long as MS has securty issues that concern me and the lack of well written and distributed knowledge on this then I am unlikley to move back to MS. If MS needs to apply the security fix then before you do the update on your PC, it should tell you in nice English what the update is doing. Most people on this planet including me just click the update button and hope it all works after.
Like I said I am not a MS basher, but the confusion surrounding updates has got to stop so that the average user can understand what is happening to there own PC.
Please feel free to comment on this as you see fit. I will try and visit later today for a sensible discussion and not a slanging match – Only fair!
It’s ironic that when someone questions an OS developer such as Microsoft they are branded either as a troll or a zelot. Even though I switched to Linux several months back I still work with WinXP and Win2003 Server on occassion trouble-shooting other co-workers/friends systems. Yeah I know I’m a jack of all trades..total Super Geek
It’s an annoyance not only to myself as being a former Windows user but also those I’m helping to see the security flaws not yet fixed with Windows. Knowing this I don’t understnad why you are implying Microsoft should not be accountable and we are to blaime 3rd party developers for system issues. I nearly fell out of my chair laughing at that idea. It’s a Microsoft typical tactic to constantly deny accountability for buggs in their OS. Microsoft has a long history of producing buggy updates and delaying patch fixes for security issues. Third party developers have little if anything to do with this.
Like that will ever happen, unless of course they buy out the competition and integrate it into the OS.
Secure not, Microsoft is… Secure will be, never.
Sounds like you want Linux Dark_night <sniker> ..
There are still stuff that were reported years ago, still not fixed in Windows. For list visit MS support forum. And they are fixing things fast??? Are you guys on crack??
to point 5: that seems so bee a good idea, but before you can do this, it must be easier to gain superuser privileges. I tryed it for a few days as a normal user but ist was to circuitous.
“Run as” does not work for eveything( for example i was not able to run the explorer as administrator ). So it was very bothering, everytime to log out and to log in as Administrator to change very trivial settings( file permission for example ). Because fast user switching isn’t enabled, when you use the classic login method.
It would be much more simpler if Windows would just ask for the superuser password if it needs it like MacOS X or KDE.
It would be much more simpler if Windows would just ask for the superuser password if it needs it like MacOS X or KDE.
Yeah, and users would type the Administrator’s password to run that mail attachement…
Most problems we are facing right now are not in the computer but rather in front of it.
If something is changed in OpenSSL via an update, and Mozilla is provided by the distributor, then mozilla is downloaded as well, thus, the dependency has been automatically satisfied.
The fact is, Microsoft doesn’t control every software vendor, they rely on the software vendor to get off their behind and work with Microsoft to make sure that the software works reliably with the latest service pack or quick-fix patch.
True, but the method you seem to promote above would be impossible to do for Microsoft.
And there are issues with it. I’ve encountered many broken packages on either Debian or Gentoo (often in the “stable” x86 branch). Furthermore, you become dependant on the distributor: if he doesn’t deliver the update(s), you’re often on your own.
Will be when a user upgrades their adware/spyware/malware-ridden machine and then it refuses to let IE run or connect to the Internet. From what I’ve been hearing, this will most certainly be an issue due to the way the firewall works.
NOTE: I’m not bashing MS here, I think better security is a great idea. BUT, this is going to most certainly be stressful for many.
I have an HP Pavilion 700 MHz system that is experiencing an odd problem. Windows XP installs on it flawlessly and detects everything without exception. Service Pack 1 for XP worked beautifully.
The BETA of Service Pack 2 worked, again, without hassle.
Now Release Candidate 1 of Service Pack 2 completely broke the system. I mean, after reboot, the video was no greater than 8 bit, 640X480. I absolutely could not install a proper video driver as XP was telling me it was incorreect, yet it is a legit XP video driver for that system and could be installed without trouble prior to SP2 RC1.
Also the internet connection after installing RC1 was very sluggish (I have a broadband cable connection). I was surfing at nearly 56k speeds.
I had no choice but to format and reinstall, especially since absolutely nothing I did granted me the right to install a working video driver for the system.
Oh yeah, and I also tried the Windows Update site and it sold me no driver updates were available for my system, even though prior to SP2 RC1 there were like 5 or 6 updates for my hardware listed.
For the life of me, how in the world can a Service Pack make my HARDWARE suddenly incompatible with its software drivers???
After a format, XP reinstalled and everything worked perfectly again. I somehow think M$ is forcing incompatibility with older systems. This can be the only solution I can find to this problem.
Oh, and I tried this scenario two times just to make sure if was not a fluke.
“Turning on the Internet Connection Firewall will cause consumers to not be able to access services they were able to access prior to the SP, such as game servers. This will result in support calls, as the consumer tries to get back what they had prior to SP installation,” he said.
I don’t think this guy has a clue how firewalls work. It isn’t going to stop you from accessing services, but it does stop your computer from listening for certain traffic externally.
This just sounds like a way to make money from peoples’ panic when many things just stop working.
Really. Other posts from you make it sound like Microsoft is some evil corporation. I would be surprised to find that you use it at home. Or do you do some compatibility testing at work? Either way, please share what problems you had, instead of just saying you “had issues.”
Typical clueless response. You’ve obviously never rolled out a service pack to several hundred machines. The only thing you can say when rolling out a service pack is “I had issues.” Everyone then knows what you mean.
Please read the following to see how useful your comment is. I had my share of issues. Desktop usability cannot be pedalled into a OS in a rpm.
Yes it can actually, because all of the security infrastructure such as permissions are very well built in to a Linux/Unix distribution in a modular fashion. What’s more, applications have been designed to work in that environment for years so nothing needs to be redesigned.