Feeds

Windows XP repair disk kills automatic updates

Critics speak out of both sides of mouths

The Power of One Infographic

Comment A commonly used method for repairing Windows computers can disable the automatic installation of Microsoft updates, or patches, it was revealed this week.

The company is getting a kicking from critics for this - the same people who slammed the company two weeks ago when Microsoft forced a Windows patch on users who had turned off automatic updates.

They have a point, but their latest tirades also show them speaking out of both sides of their mouths.

Two weeks ago, they rightfully said how misguided it was when, in July, Microsoft issued a patch that automatically installed itself even when Windows users specifically opted out of automatic updates. The issue boiled down to control, and since the PC belonged to the end user, it was the end user who should ultimately decide what software runs on it.

Beyond that bedrock principle, many IT administrators also said that forcing installs without a company's consent or knowledge could jeopardize compliance requirements since as they could no longer affirm they were in complete control of machines storing patient records and other sensitive types of data.

Hatch, patch, match, dispatch

Microsoft eventually explained that the forced update concerned Windows Update itself, and as such, was installed on machines that were configured to keep track of new patches, even if the user had opted not to have them automatically applied. Failure to patch Windows Update would prevent it from working reliably, Microsoft said.

Redmond also admitted it could have been more transparent, meaning it should have explicitly explained that unless a user completely shuts down Windows Update (and not for instance sets it to download updates and install them later) certain files related to Windows Update will automatically change from time to time.

That seemed like the end of the debate, but it wasn't.

The latest friction came after a post here by Scott Dunn and a piece here by Adrian Kingsley-Hughes pointed out that users who used the repair option from a Windows XP CD-ROM were no longer able to install Windows updates, putting them at considerable risk for Worms and other types of malware.

It turns out the repair disk - which is often used to roll back a corrupted version of Windows an earlier, undamaged state - unregisters some of the files that were installed in the Windows Update update, and in doing so, prevents Windows Update from working at all.

This, they suggested, was proof positive that the forced update from July, which by dint of its version number was branded 7.0.600.381, was nefarious after all.

"Now that we know that version .381 prevents a repaired instance of XP from getting critical patches, 'harmless' no longer describes the situation," Dunn writes. "The crippling of Windows Update illustrates why many computer professionals demand to review updates for software conflicts before widely installing upgrades."

Rather than raise red herrings about stealth updates, we should recognize the true fault here, which is that repair disks break Windows Update, something that should never, ever happen.

Latest fix

In a blog post here, Microsoft's Nate Clinton says the company has issued a KB article to restore Windows Update after it becomes disabled.

Now that Microsoft has recognized the problem and issued a fix, it needs to redouble its efforts to make sure Windows Update never again disabled.

But it's inconsistent for critics to take Microsoft to task for pushing an update that was necessary for the continued smooth running of Windows Update and then gripe when the update gets undone by a repair disk. Microsoft's lack of transparency - although a problem - wasn't at issue here so much as a needed change in Windows Update that could be undone by an officially sanctioned utility that many Windows admins rely on.

As the linchpin for a securely running machine, Windows Update will inevitably have to be updated from time to time. Here's hoping Microsoft provides better notice in the future - and that users heed common sense when told to install it. ®

Seven Steps to Software Security

More from The Register

next story
Whoah! How many Google Play apps want to read your texts?
Google's app permissions far too lax – security firm survey
Chrome browser has been DRAINING PC batteries for YEARS
Google is only now fixing ancient, energy-sapping bug
Do YOU work at Microsoft? Um. Are you SURE about that?
Nokia and marketing types first to get the bullet, says report
Microsoft takes on Chromebook with low-cost Windows laptops
Redmond's chief salesman: We're taking 'hard' decisions
EU dons gloves, pokes Google's deals with Android mobe makers
El Reg cops a squint at investigatory letters
Big Blue Apple: IBM to sell iPads, iPhones to enterprises
iOS/2 gear loaded with apps for big biz ... uh oh BlackBerry
OpenWRT gets native IPv6 slurping in major refresh
Also faster init and a new packages system
Google shows off new Chrome OS look
Athena springs full-grown from Chromium project's head
prev story

Whitepapers

Top three mobile application threats
Prevent sensitive data leakage over insecure channels or stolen mobile devices.
The Essential Guide to IT Transformation
ServiceNow discusses three IT transformations that can help CIO's automate IT services to transform IT and the enterprise.
Mobile application security vulnerability report
The alarming realities regarding the sheer number of applications vulnerable to attack, and the most common and easily addressable vulnerability errors.
How modern custom applications can spur business growth
Learn how to create, deploy and manage custom applications without consuming or expanding the need for scarce, expensive IT resources.
Consolidation: the foundation for IT and business transformation
In this whitepaper learn how effective consolidation of IT and business resources can enable multiple, meaningful business benefits.