Re: Vulnerability is Office XP Work Perfect

Shaun Pond

unread,

Jul 8, 2009, 4:04:56 AM7/8/09

to

Shandi,

if you click on the error message in the deployment it should take you
to another page with a more detailed explanation

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Jul 21, 2009, 5:13:37 AM7/21/09

to

Shandi,

then you click on the last run status...

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Jul 21, 2009, 1:49:29 PM7/21/09

to

Shandi,

looks like a problem with the package content - select the
vulnerability and choose "update cache" and try again when it's done...

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Jul 22, 2009, 1:15:06 AM7/22/09

to

Shandi,

usually a few minutes: if you go to "vulnerabilities" then click on
"packages", you can see when packages are actually cached...

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Jul 22, 2009, 4:32:43 PM7/22/09

to

Shandi,

take a look at the logs...

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Jul 23, 2009, 6:30:53 AM7/23/09

to

Shandi,

well they have moved around somewhat with different versions/SPs, but
it's currently in c:\program files\novell\replication services - it's
the plfw.log and default.log that are the most useful

--

Shaun Pond

shandi

unread,

Jul 24, 2009, 2:06:02 PM7/24/09

to

Would that be on the computers that cannot get the patch?

--
shandi
------------------------------------------------------------------------
shandi's Profile: http://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=58195
View this thread: http://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=379323

Shaun Pond

unread,

Jul 24, 2009, 2:21:50 PM7/24/09

to

Shandi,

that's on the server

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Jul 25, 2009, 11:39:18 AM7/25/09

to

Shandi,

what version are you running?

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Jul 28, 2009, 8:27:53 AM7/28/09

to

Shandi,

odd - they should be there. What about under patchlink?

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Jul 28, 2009, 1:56:33 PM7/28/09

to

Shandi,

I meant, logs under the patchlink directory - do a search for plfw.log

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Jul 28, 2009, 6:55:35 PM7/28/09

to

Shandi,

plfw.log

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Jul 29, 2009, 10:10:58 AM7/29/09

to

Shandi,

how about default.log? They have to be there somewhere...

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Jul 29, 2009, 11:02:36 AM7/29/09

to

Shandi,

the server has to write to those files - I'm scratching my head as you
can imagine.
HKLM\Software\Patchlink\Update Server - should have the install path
inthere at least?

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Jul 30, 2009, 7:54:32 AM7/30/09

to

Shandi,

well that's fine for a managed device, but not for the ZPM server...

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Jul 31, 2009, 1:39:02 PM7/31/09

to

Shandi,

I still need those logs

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Aug 1, 2009, 1:55:10 AM8/1/09

to

Shandi,

on the Windows 2003 Server that's acting as the ZPM server, believe me,
they're there somewhere... did it get installed on a different disk
than C:?

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Aug 4, 2009, 3:22:59 AM8/4/09

to

Shandi,

yes, that's where the updates write their install logs. I'm still
baffled by the lack of logs on your server...

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Aug 5, 2009, 3:50:59 AM8/5/09

to

Shaun,

those just show that those old patches installed OK. Right let's go to
the heart of the matter: on the server, look in
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\PatchLink.com\DistributionService
the key "LogLocation" will tell us where to go look for plfw.log and
defailt.log

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Aug 9, 2009, 9:15:15 AM8/9/09

to

Shandi,

on the ZPM 6.4 server?

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Aug 18, 2009, 12:53:33 AM8/18/09

to

Shandi,

yes please, and I look forward to hearing where they were all this
time! :)

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Aug 19, 2009, 6:29:07 AM8/19/09

to

Shandi,

that's definitely showing that your server cannot communicate to the central server. "ERROR SSLCONNECT: CONNECT FAILED".
Do you have any restrictions on how your server can get through the firewall?
You can try this: see the addresses in here
http://www.novell.com/support/search.do?cmd=displayKC&docType=kc&externalId=3653112

and add an entry to hosts for one of the server that's different to the one you get from DNS
novell.patchlinksecure.net x.x.x.x
stop the replication service
do ipconfig /flushdns
and restart the replication service

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Nov 16, 2009, 5:30:06 PM11/16/09

to

Shandi,

umm... this thread was back in August... has the problem never
resolved, or has it started again?

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Nov 17, 2009, 1:40:11 AM11/17/09

to

Shandi,

so you have no new patches since August? OK, so how far back do you
want me to go? Do you know what the HOSTS file is used for in Windows?

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Nov 18, 2009, 3:45:50 AM11/18/09

to

Shandi,

the last thing we were talking about in this thread before it was left
was you not getting new vulnerabilities downloaded, so I am confused
now

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Nov 18, 2009, 5:07:52 AM11/18/09

to

Shandi,

I'm concerned that your lack of some basic knowledge, such as the
purpose of the HOSTS file, is making your job more difficult for you
than it needs to be: I wonder if it would be worth speaking to your
employer about some extra Windows training to plug the gaps?

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts_file for the HOSTS file.

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Nov 21, 2009, 12:08:41 AM11/21/09

to

Shandi,

that was most of this thread, but we can move on - you're still saying
that this vulnerability gives a 190C error? Have you re-cached it?

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Nov 24, 2009, 2:59:04 AM11/24/09

to

Shandi,

let's try to look at this when we do the webex

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Nov 25, 2009, 1:01:29 AM11/25/09

to

Shandi,

OK, is this the only deployment that fails to these machines?

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Nov 25, 2009, 11:32:17 AM11/25/09

to

Shandi,

could you rephrase that?

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Nov 26, 2009, 4:01:19 AM11/26/09

to

Shandi,

OK, so the 190C error - what's the detailed error description on these
machines?

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Nov 29, 2009, 3:48:20 AM11/29/09

to

Shandi,

for this one, it's checking for the existence of wpft532.cnv in the
path \Microsoft Shared\TextConv under the directory shown in
HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion,CommonFilesDir

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Dec 1, 2009, 2:12:37 AM12/1/09

to

Shandi,

can you send me the detection log from one of those two please?

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Dec 4, 2009, 1:48:38 AM12/4/09

to

Shandi,

I only got it once :) I did a double-check, and the log bears me out -
wpft532.cnv should have a modification date >= January 23 2004, and
yours is '07/15/2003' - what happens if you manually apply the update,
and specify /n:v on the command-line? It should install over any
version then. I am wondering if, for some reason, your Wordperfect
converter was overwritten by an older version...

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Dec 5, 2009, 2:02:17 PM12/5/09

to

Shandi,

yeah, or download it from MS, or, and here's the clever thing... you
can just deliver it to the machine by specifying -pldo in the
deployment flags, and it will just drop it to windows\temp then it can
be manually run

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Dec 8, 2009, 2:53:41 AM12/8/09

to

Shandi,

OK, ticket 091208-000000 raised for this

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Dec 9, 2009, 2:52:44 PM12/9/09

to

Shandi,

they're working on this now

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Jan 5, 2010, 4:08:32 AM1/5/10

to

Shandi,

no, but I doubt if it comes top of the list, and there's been the
Christmas break...

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Feb 2, 2010, 2:28:39 AM2/2/10

to

Shandi,

asking...

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Feb 2, 2010, 12:12:50 PM2/2/10

to

Shandi,

they tell me "Yes we do have an update. Please Install MS09-010 960477 933399 (English/MUI) Security Update for Microsoft Word 2002 on systems needing this package as it supersedes MS04-027- which will be changed to a Critical 05."

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Feb 4, 2010, 2:43:06 AM2/4/10

to

Shandi,

yes, and critical-05 means it's superseded. Generally, you can disable
critical-05 patches. They remain in the list, for example because some
companies (say banks) like to be 100% in control over which patches are
deployed in their environment, and new patches need to be "approved"
before roll-out, and the old patch may be the approved one.

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Feb 5, 2010, 10:59:58 AM2/5/10

to

Shandi,

> Okay, So i'm supposed to deploy the MS09-010 960477 933399 patch to the
> devices that aren't working?
>
yes please, and then I can go back and say "ya boo sucks, that didn't
work"

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Feb 16, 2010, 3:32:32 AM2/16/10

to

Shandi,

define "worked"? It would be useful to have details of what you did,
and what did, or did not, happen

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Feb 17, 2010, 3:12:33 PM2/17/10

to

Shandi,

not deploying, or deploying and still saying it's vulnerable?

--

Shaun Pond

unread,

Feb 17, 2010, 11:37:41 PM2/17/10

to

Shandi,

since this thread has been gong on for some months now, could you
remind me please of the exact name of the vulnerability with which
you're still having an issue?

--

Shaun Pond