• Announcements

    • xper

      MSFN Sponsorship and AdBlockers!   07/10/2016

      Dear members, MSFN is made available via subscriptions, donations and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, become a site sponsor and ads will be disabled automatically and by subscribing you get other sponsor benefits.
Dave-H

Latest IE6 (SP1) Security Update for Win 9x/ME

95 posts in this topic

Before I start, I want to make it quite clear that I don't want any lectures about how I shouldn't be using IE6!

I'm well aware of the much better and more secure alternatives, in fact I use Opera for most of my web needs (including posting this!)

I do still occasionally use IE for some sites which break in other browsers, and what I'm going to say is relevant to Windows Explorer as well as Internet Explorer.

Thank you!

:)

I have a dual boot system with Windows 2000 and Windows 98SE.

Since MS dropped support for Windows 98, I have been trying to keep my copy of IE6 SP1 on Windows 98 patched as best I can using the files offered by Windows Update for IE6 SP1 on Windows 2000.

This has worked successfully up until now, the last successful transplant being achieved with the files from KB969897.

However, with the latest update (KB972260) this no longer seems to work.

:no:

When I copied the usual 16 files from the cumulative update across to the Windows 98 system folder, Windows 98 would no longer start properly. The desktop appeared, but the taskbar just flashed up momentarily and then disappeared.

The startup then went no further, with only a few things running.

After a lot of very tedious trial and error, I discovered that this was being caused by the new shdocvw.dll file.

If I went back to the previous version Windows would at least start up OK.

Unfortunately things still weren't right.

Windows Explorer wouldn't show its web view at all, and Internet Explorer wouldn't show any web sites, instead crashing out to a "this is potentially dangerous, do you want to open or save it" (or words to that effect) dialogue.

After more tedious investigation, this turned out to be due to the new mshtml.dll file.

Again restoring the old version made it come good.

So at the moment I have all the new files from KB972260 except shdocvw.dll and mshtml.dll, which are from KB969897.

I merely report this as an observation, as I know that some people are trying to keep Windows 98 patched with Windows 2000 security patch files.

For the record, the last mshtml.dll file that seems to work with Windows 98 is 6.0.2800.1627.

The latest version, 6.0.2800.1634, does not work.

Likewise, the last shdocvw.dll file that seems to work with Windows 98 is 6.0.2800.1972.

The latest version, 6.0.2800.1983, does not work, and will stop the system starting properly in my experience.

Can anyone else confirm my findings?

I have no idea what MS have done to these files to finally break compatibility with Windows 98 after all this time, but I would be interested to know if anyone does find out!

:)

Edited by dencorso
Renamed thread to better reflect contents
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have KernelEx installed ? If you haven't maybe you could try that.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you have KernelEx installed ? If you haven't maybe you could try that.

No, I don't use KernelEx, because I mainly use Windows 2000 nowadays and therefore haven't thought it necessary to enhance Windows 98 so I can run non-Windows 98 programs on it.

Good thought though, and I'd be interested to know if anyone else who does use it has the same problem with the latest IE files.

:)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Confirmed. I'm now using the same files as you. Everything seems to be ok, but I seldom use Internet Exploder. FWIW, I am using KernelEX 4.0 RC2.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Curious... where is a list of "the usual 16 files" one would copy from the Windows 2000 installation ?

Do you refresh IE by just copying, or do you have to re-register some DLLs ?

Is there a write-up of the process you refer to, on this site maybe ?

TY

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Curious... where is a list of "the usual 16 files" one would copy from the Windows 2000 installation ?

Do you refresh IE by just copying, or do you have to re-register some DLLs ?

Is there a write-up of the process you refer to, on this site maybe ?

TY

There isn't actually a list anywhere, but the files I copy across are the files that all the IE6 SP1 Cumulative Security Update packages seem to replace.

They are -

browseui.dll, cdfview.dll, danim.dll, dxtmsft.dll, dxtrans.dll, iepeers.dll, enseng.dll, jsproxy.dll, mshtml.dll, msrating.dll, mstime.dll, pngfilt.dll, shdocvw.dll, shlwapi.dll, urlmon.dll, and wininet.dll.

They all reside in the windows\system folder (system32 on NT based systems of course).

I have always just copied them across (easy on a dual boot system) and never had any problem with any of them until now. I wouldn't have thought that re-registering was necessary as you're just replacing the file with another of exactly the same name.

:)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However, with the latest update (KB972260) this no longer seems to work.

:no:

bummer, Dave-H. looks like you'll have to use the files from KB969897 for IE6 SP1.

I had a feeling at some point the newer IE6 security patches will no longer work for Win98/ME and only for Win2k & above.

tErmY: KernelEx 4.0 final recently came out. ditch the RC2 version and install the final release.

Edited by erpdude8
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is the bug gone with the wind? i install on my win98se the last ie6 updates from KB974455 (that ms realesed yesterday) and it works o.k. for the time being. is anyone else did so?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
is the bug gone with the wind? i install on my win98se the last ie6 updates from KB974455 (that ms realesed yesterday) and it works o.k. for the time being. is anyone else did so?

Yes, I can confirm that!

I copied the files from the new KB974455 Cumulative IE6 Hotfix across to my Windows 98 installation, thinking that it would "never work" because the last one didn't, and to my utter astonishment, it did work!

:thumbup

It looks as if whatever MS did to the shlwapi and mshtml dlls to break Windows 98 compatibility has been fixed.

I don't believe for one moment that this was done for Windows 98 compatibility reasons of course, but whatever the reason was, I'm really pleased!

:yes:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There isn't actually a list anywhere, but the files I copy across are the files that all the IE6 SP1 Cumulative Security Update packages seem to replace.

browseui.dll, cdfview.dll, danim.dll, dxtmsft.dll, dxtrans.dll, iepeers.dll, enseng.dll, jsproxy.dll, mshtml.dll, msrating.dll, mstime.dll, pngfilt.dll, shdocvw.dll, shlwapi.dll, urlmon.dll, and wininet.dll.

Belated thanks, Dave-H ! I've just applied the plain copying method with this week's mega-patch and so far everything's rolling, like (the other) Dave said.

Note : among the 16 files in your list are some that are related with DirectX rather than IE proper, and I wouldn't just copy those having different versions DX on either OS. Not applicable to this week's update anyway.

Just as a warning for everyone interested to be prudent, as always...

Edited by Ninho
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Ninho!

:)

I had wondered what some of those files' functions actually were, and it's interesting to know that they're not all files directly related to IE6.

I have DirectX 9.0c installed on Windows 98SE and Windows 2000, but the Windows 98 version is the August 2007 update, and the Windows 2000 version is the November 2008 update.

I couldn't get the November 2008 update to install on Windows 98 (although the MS download site says that it should be compatible) it just throws up an "internal error" message (whatever that means!) and won't install.

The saga is here - http://www.msfn.org/board/directx-9-0c-use...&hl=DirectX

I assume subsequent versions have the same problem.

It's never been a problem copying all those files across from Windows 2000 to Windows 98, apart from the time before last anyway!

BTW, I've just noticed in your snip from my old post that I put "enseng.dll".

That was a typo of course, it should be "inseng.dll" in case anyone's puzzled!

:)

Edited by Dave-H
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note on the file list, specifically the dx*.sys files, that they're actually IE interfaces to directx to draw components, they're not directx binaries themselves. Be careful omitting binaries (just as you are with including binaries) when copying updates, as the updates are designed to be used with all binaries shipped in the package. Just FYI, the dx*.sys files are NOT directx files, but they contain the "glue" for IE to call and use directx (when drawing activex controls, etc).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Note on the file list, specifically the dx*.sys files, that they're actually IE interfaces to directx to draw components, they're not directx binaries themselves. ...

Ah! Good point thanks, Cluberti. So, we can assume those interface files are directX-version independent, right ?

--

Ninho

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are indeed.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, MS discovered some error in KB974455 and realesed a new fix - KB976749. The new fix changes only one file - mshtml.dll. Guys who suffer a problem, should try the new realese.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, MS discovered some error in KB974455 and realesed a new fix - KB976749. The new fix changes only one file - mshtml.dll. Guys who suffer a problem, should try the new realese.

I've already put the new MSHTML.DLL file from KB976749 into my Windows 98 system, and I can confirm that it still works!

:thumbup

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can confirm that it still works!
Hello Dave-H,

thanks for sharing! :hello:

Not only that IE6 become more secure,

it is also more stable!

I had a bug when reading offline videos downloaded from Youtube: they where making VLC to crash.

With the new files, everything is smooth! :thumbup

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New update IE6 SP1 for Win 2000 SP4: KB976325 released

...working fine with Win 98 SE! :thumbup

There are 17 files to change: the usual 16 and 'tdc.ocx'.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
New update IE6 SP1 for Win 2000 SP4: KB976325 released

Why is MS showing vulnerability details for both IE6 and IE6-sp1?

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/...n/MS09-072.mspx

I thought that IE6 (sp0) was EOL ???

I don't quite understand how, according to that page, IE6 applies to XP-SP2 and win 2k3, yet IE6-sp1 applies to win 2k. Did they get something backwards in that list?

Direct DL for IE6.0sp1-KB976325-Windows2000-x86-ENU.exe

http://download.microsoft.com/download/9/8...000-x86-ENU.exe

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
New update IE6 SP1 for Win 2000 SP4: KB976325 released

Why is MS showing vulnerability details for both IE6 and IE6-sp1?

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/...n/MS09-072.mspx

I thought that IE6 (sp0) was EOL ???

I don't quite understand how, according to that page, IE6 applies to XP-SP2 and win 2k3, yet IE6-sp1 applies to win 2k. Did they get something backwards in that list?

IE6 in this scenario is actually IE6 on XPSP2 or XPSP3 - IE6 SP1 is actually the IE6 tree from the XPSP1 codebase that was used to backport IE6 to Windows 2000, and is actually at this point a fairly different browser than IE6 on XPSP2 or XPSP3 (the rendering engine is basically the same, but the rest of the browser, including the security model, is not). They denote IE6 SP1 specifically for this reason, but call IE6 on XPSP2 or SP3 just "IE6".
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@CharlesF

Yes, the new update seems to work fine under Windows 98SE.

:thumbup

Doesn't seem to include SHLWAPI.DLL for the first time that I can remember, but as you say adds TDC.OCX instead.

Still only 16 files to patch then, not 17.

@cluberti

I take it from what you say that this is the reason why no-one to my knowledge has ever got IE6 SP2, let alone IE7 or IE8, to work on Windows 2000.

A shame, but I guess it's just not possible.

:(

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doesn't seem to include SHLWAPI.DLL for the first time that I can remember, but as you say adds TDC.OCX instead.

Still only 16 files to patch then, not 17.

Interesting.

The french KB976325 patch includes definitely 17 files (in 'rtmgdr' folder),

but you're right the 'shlwapi.dll' is identical with the previous one from KB974455:

same version number '6.00.2800.1990 (xpsp2.090827-1539)', same size (403 456 bytes), same MD5. :)

BTW, I've checked the others:

- 'danim.dll' has the same version number 6.03.01.0148, same size 1 056 768 bytes, but different MD5. :wacko:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume you're getting the files from the off-line download for the patch.

As I have Windows 2000 and Windows 98 on a dual boot system, I'm getting it from Windows Update.

Maybe that's the difference.

danim.dll is indeed a strange one.

It is included in all the IE6 SP1 cumulative updates. but always seems to be the same version, just with a different date stamp.

:)

Edited by Dave-H
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BTW, I've checked the others:

- 'danim.dll' has the same version number 6.03.01.0148, same size 1 056 768 bytes, but different MD5. :wacko:

It can mean it's a different compilation of the same source. Or so minor a update that warrants no version number change. As it's impossible to decide which, it's usually best to stick with the newest version. And, when in doubt, you can always use MiTeC EXE Explorer to find out the real (unless it's been deliberately spoofed, which is unusual, as it's not a very well known feature) compilation date, the "PE Timestamp" of any Win-32 executable.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.