Internet Explorer 6.0 Sp1 Component Update 3.0 for Windows 98

For those of you that want to use various Win-2K updates from Microsoft
and apply them to your Win-98 system, this update package has been
designed to bring together all those various updates and install them
automatically.

MD InternetExplorer 6.0sp1 Component Update 3.0

*Windows Script Update 5.6
*971961 - Unofficial JScript Security Update
*944338 - Unofficial Windows Script Security Update
*973354 - Unofficial Outloook Express Cumulative Security Update
*976325 - Unofficial Internet Explorer Cumulative Security Update (with
uninstall)
*905495 - Unofficial Security Update (MSIEFTP)
*885258 - Security Update (PROCTEXE)
*816362 - Security Update (MSHTA)
*958869 - Unofficial Security Update (VGX)
*906216 - Unofficial Security Update (DHTML+TRIEDIT)
*920670 - Unofficial Security Update (HLINK)
*918439 - Security Update (ART Image Rendering)
*816093 - JVM 3810 Security Update
*961371 - Unofficial Web fonts update
*824220 - Unofficial Security Update (IMGUTIL)
*886677 - Unofficial Security Update (MLANG)
*896156 - Unofficial Security Update (MSHTMLED)
*893627 - Hotfix for Bug with Group Policies Not Applied in IE6sp1
*973525 - Unofficial ActiveX Kill Bits (AKB) Security Vulnerability Fix
*931125 - Windows Roots Update

*Unofficial DirectX Media (DXM) 6.0 Update

--------------------------------------------------------------
http://rapidshare.de/files/48815001/MDIE6CU30E.EXE.html
---------------------------------------------------------------

*Size: ~14mb

What's new:

*976325 - Unofficial Internet Explorer Cumulative Security Update (with
uninstall)
*961371 - Unofficial web fonts update

removed:

*974455 - Unofficial Internet Explorer Cumulative Security Update
*976749 - Unofficial Internet Explorer Update
*908519 - Web fonts update

On 12/10/2009 08:46 AM, 98 Guy wrote:
For those of you that want to use various Win-2K updates from Microsoft
and apply them to your Win-98 system, this update package has been
designed to bring together all those various updates and install them
automatically.

You know damn well these also subject the users to potential and
ongoing vulnerabilities which are *not* protected via 9X capable AV
and other programs due to the differing operating environments and
expected respective activities. Moreover, *these files* may give users a
false and dangerous feeling that they HAVE secured their systems, when,
IN FACT, they have added to the potential and/or now unknown real
vulnerabilities.

Why don't you just keep this crap over on MSFN and the other sites and
forums that cater to this type of UNTESTED [other than installation]
modifications.

Don't bother pointing to the users of those modifications for supposed
"testing" as most of those {such as you} know *only* that the
modifications install.



MD InternetExplorer 6.0sp1 Component Update 3.0

*Windows Script Update 5.6
*971961 - Unofficial JScript Security Update
*944338 - Unofficial Windows Script Security Update
*973354 - Unofficial Outloook Express Cumulative Security Update
*976325 - Unofficial Internet Explorer Cumulative Security Update (with
uninstall)
*905495 - Unofficial Security Update (MSIEFTP)
*885258 - Security Update (PROCTEXE)
*816362 - Security Update (MSHTA)
*958869 - Unofficial Security Update (VGX)
*906216 - Unofficial Security Update (DHTML+TRIEDIT)
*920670 - Unofficial Security Update (HLINK)
*918439 - Security Update (ART Image Rendering)
*816093 - JVM 3810 Security Update
*961371 - Unofficial Web fonts update
*824220 - Unofficial Security Update (IMGUTIL)
*886677 - Unofficial Security Update (MLANG)
*896156 - Unofficial Security Update (MSHTMLED)
*893627 - Hotfix for Bug with Group Policies Not Applied in IE6sp1
*973525 - Unofficial ActiveX Kill Bits (AKB) Security Vulnerability Fix
*931125 - Windows Roots Update

*Unofficial DirectX Media (DXM) 6.0 Update

--------------------------------------------------------------
http://rapidshare.de/files/48815001/MDIE6CU30E.EXE.html
---------------------------------------------------------------

*Size: ~14mb

What's new:

*976325 - Unofficial Internet Explorer Cumulative Security Update (with
uninstall)
*961371 - Unofficial web fonts update

removed:

*974455 - Unofficial Internet Explorer Cumulative Security Update
*976749 - Unofficial Internet Explorer Update
*908519 - Web fonts update


--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

In message , MEB
writes:
On 12/10/2009 08:46 AM, 98 Guy wrote:
For those of you that want to use various Win-2K updates from Microsoft
and apply them to your Win-98 system, this update package has been
designed to bring together all those various updates and install them
automatically.

You know damn well these also subject the users to potential and
ongoing vulnerabilities which are *not* protected via 9X capable AV
and other programs due to the differing operating environments and
expected respective activities. Moreover, *these files* may give users a
false and dangerous feeling that they HAVE secured their systems, when,
IN FACT, they have added to the potential and/or now unknown real
vulnerabilities.

I agree, he should have perhaps added some warning to that effect, but
he knows he doesn't need to as you will do so for him. (I just _knew_
what the next post I would see would be!)

Does this set of fixes actually ADD to the vulnerabilities of a system,
or just CHANGE it - i. e. could it be that it introduces some new ones
but closes some (while also adding other things, such as a DirectX and a
web fonts update)?

[They're of academic interest to me anyway - I do not have IE of any
flavour on my '98SEl machines, one of which has never been online and
the other does so very rarely.]

[Full quote of original post snipped.]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **

.... on Thursdays on BBC Two, the former BBC2. (John Peel in "Radio Times", 1-7
May 1999.)

On 12/11/2009 03:16 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , MEB
writes:
On 12/10/2009 08:46 AM, 98 Guy wrote:
For those of you that want to use various Win-2K updates from Microsoft
and apply them to your Win-98 system, this update package has been
designed to bring together all those various updates and install them
automatically.

You know damn well these also subject the users to potential and
ongoing vulnerabilities which are *not* protected via 9X capable AV
and other programs due to the differing operating environments and
expected respective activities. Moreover, *these files* may give users a
false and dangerous feeling that they HAVE secured their systems, when,
IN FACT, they have added to the potential and/or now unknown real
vulnerabilities.

I agree, he should have perhaps added some warning to that effect, but
he knows he doesn't need to as you will do so for him. (I just _knew_
what the next post I would see would be!)

Does this set of fixes actually ADD to the vulnerabilities of a system,
or just CHANGE it - i. e. could it be that it introduces some new ones
but closes some (while also adding other things, such as a DirectX and a
web fonts update)?

[They're of academic interest to me anyway - I do not have IE of any
flavour on my '98SEl machines, one of which has never been online and
the other does so very rarely.]

[Full quote of original post snipped.]

Good questions. If it were the OSs designed for it might fulfill the
desired effect, temporarily. However, there is no "patch Tuesday" or
"zero day" hotfixes for Win9x and these will contain vulnerabilities IN
THE OSs designed, for which updates will be received, Win9X won't.
These are for the interface to the Internet, the browser, waving in the
breeze...

Just as the last posted suggested junk from 98 Guy was patched in a
week or so, and is NOT part of a normal Win9X installation {MS XML4}, so
rather obviously they introduce vulnerabilities that wouldn't be there
to start with. NO ONE tests these for 9X vulnerabilities and they DO
introduce new vulnerabilities into the OSs intended; nor even for
compatibility beyond they install...

On the other hand, if you want to *manual* check every day to see if
Microsoft has offered any security or file fixes, AND check for whether
they work in 9X, AND are willing to be a "guinea pig" for any new and
COMPLETELY UNKNOWN 9X vulnerabilities, then sure, install; just don't
expect anyone to be able to help fix your system and don't expect your
software will be compatible... including any malware protection.

Somewhere along the line since EOL, these people lost track of what
they hoped to accomplish, keeping 9X alive... that requires someone
actually test and NOT JUST FOR INSTALLATION, and creation of NEW
browsers and malware programs...

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

In message , MEB
writes:
On 12/11/2009 03:16 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
[98Guy's putative enhancements/updates/whatever]
Does this set of fixes actually ADD to the vulnerabilities of a system,
or just CHANGE it - i. e. could it be that it introduces some new ones
but closes some (while also adding other things, such as a DirectX and a
web fonts update)?
[]
Good questions. If it were the OSs designed for it might fulfill the

Thank you.

desired effect, temporarily. However, there is no "patch Tuesday" or
"zero day" hotfixes for Win9x and these will contain vulnerabilities IN
THE OSs designed, for which updates will be received, Win9X won't.
These are for the interface to the Internet, the browser, waving in the
breeze...

Just as the last posted suggested junk from 98 Guy was patched in a
week or so, and is NOT part of a normal Win9X installation {MS XML4}, so
rather obviously they introduce vulnerabilities that wouldn't be there

They certainly have the potential to do so, though whether they actually
do so hasn't been tested either.

to start with. NO ONE tests these for 9X vulnerabilities and they DO
introduce new vulnerabilities into the OSs intended; nor even for
compatibility beyond they install...

They are more likely to, yes.

On the other hand, if you want to *manual* check every day to see if
Microsoft has offered any security or file fixes, AND check for whether
they work in 9X, AND are willing to be a "guinea pig" for any new and
COMPLETELY UNKNOWN 9X vulnerabilities, then sure, install; just don't
expect anyone to be able to help fix your system and don't expect your
software will be compatible... including any malware protection.

Equally, if you don't ever install any of these patches, you will not
suffer from any of the new potential vulnerabilities, but you will also
never experience any of the (equally "potential") benefits, either.

Somewhere along the line since EOL, these people lost track of what
they hoped to accomplish, keeping 9X alive... that requires someone
actually test and NOT JUST FOR INSTALLATION, and creation of NEW
browsers and malware programs...

As I've said before, they can choose to preserve in aspic their 98
system as it was at the instant of EOL, or they can choose to take
potential risks for potential benefits. It's their choice. If they
choose the latter, they can be reassured to whatever extent they trust
98g, and worried to whatever extent they believe you.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **

The fetters imposed on liberty at home have ever been forged out of the weapons
provided for defence against real, pretended, or imaginary dangers from abroad.
-James Madison, 4th US president (1751-1836)

On 12/15/2009 04:56 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , MEB
writes:
On 12/11/2009 03:16 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
[98Guy's putative enhancements/updates/whatever]
Does this set of fixes actually ADD to the vulnerabilities of a system,
or just CHANGE it - i. e. could it be that it introduces some new ones
but closes some (while also adding other things, such as a DirectX and a
web fonts update)?
[]
Good questions. If it were the OSs designed for it might fulfill the

Thank you.

desired effect, temporarily. However, there is no "patch Tuesday" or
"zero day" hotfixes for Win9x and these will contain vulnerabilities IN
THE OSs designed, for which updates will be received, Win9X won't.
These are for the interface to the Internet, the browser, waving in the
breeze...

Just as the last posted suggested junk from 98 Guy was patched in a
week or so, and is NOT part of a normal Win9X installation {MS XML4}, so
rather obviously they introduce vulnerabilities that wouldn't be there

They certainly have the potential to do so, though whether they actually
do so hasn't been tested either.

to start with. NO ONE tests these for 9X vulnerabilities and they DO
introduce new vulnerabilities into the OSs intended; nor even for
compatibility beyond they install...

They are more likely to, yes.

On the other hand, if you want to *manual* check every day to see if
Microsoft has offered any security or file fixes, AND check for whether
they work in 9X, AND are willing to be a "guinea pig" for any new and
COMPLETELY UNKNOWN 9X vulnerabilities, then sure, install; just don't
expect anyone to be able to help fix your system and don't expect your
software will be compatible... including any malware protection.

Equally, if you don't ever install any of these patches, you will not
suffer from any of the new potential vulnerabilities, but you will also
never experience any of the (equally "potential") benefits, either.

Somewhere along the line since EOL, these people lost track of what
they hoped to accomplish, keeping 9X alive... that requires someone
actually test and NOT JUST FOR INSTALLATION, and creation of NEW
browsers and malware programs...

As I've said before, they can choose to preserve in aspic their 98
system as it was at the instant of EOL, or they can choose to take
potential risks for potential benefits. It's their choice. If they
choose the latter, they can be reassured to whatever extent they trust
98g, and worried to whatever extent they believe you.

So you intend to claim the benefit of installation, verses say, a
different application providing BETTER support for new formats...

The cost is???? that to use these DOES AND WILL CONTINUE to place these
parties doing so in the position of NO knowledge of what present
vulnerabilities they have and NO way to protect themselves from them.
The *TESTS* come from the fact that these supposed installable files
WILL be updated by Microsoft *for the supported OSs* and Win9X will not
receive them, nor will any fixes be designed to correct vulnerabilities
within 9X created by their installation.

If MSFN and those doing the same want to "keep Win98 alive" then work
on the well defined vulnerabilities at EOL and correct those. These are
supposed coders and programmers,,,

So it appears this is just more of an attempt to waste some more time
while resting on OLD laurels...

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

However, there is no "patch Tuesday" or "zero day" hotfixes for
Win9x and these will contain vulnerabilities IN THE OSs designed,
for which updates will be received, Win9X won't.

Another convoluted statement from MEB.

If the win-2K patch files for IE6 work for win-98, then use them.

If those files introduce new vulnerabilities for a win-98 system, then
there two possibilities:

a) The new vulnerability is unique to win-98 and is caused by some
peculiar interaction between win-98 and the win-2K patch file that does
not exist on a win-2k system.

b) The new vulnerability will effect win-2K and *might* also affect
win-98 equally. Microsoft will issue yet another patch for this
vulnerability when discovered, assuming win-2k is still being supported.

Now look carefully at those two possible outcomes.

Outcome (a) will probably NEVER be discovered because of the simple fact
that no security analysts or hackers will be examining or testing or
looking for vulnerabilites on a platform consisting of win-98 and IE6
patches derived from win-2K updates.

Outcome (b) is much more likely than (a), and it can be presumed that a
fix will be made available soon after it's discovery. And until it is
discovered - it does not exist.

So even if you want to speculate that the use of these files might cause
some unique vulnerability to a win-98 system, the odds of that
vulnerability being discovered and leveraged is ridiculously small.

NO ONE tests these for 9X vulnerabilities

Bingo. Meb just said it himself.

If no one is testing this combination of win-98 and Win-2K patch files,
then any vulnerability they may uniquely cause to a win-98 system will
go undetected and therefore will never be leveraged by hackers.

Security by obscurity.

and they DO introduce new vulnerabilities into the
OSs intended

If MEB is trying to say that these patches introduce new vulnerabilities
into win-2k (the intended OS), then that's complete and outrageously
wild speculation. Presumably Microsoft would not create updates or
patches for the "intended OS's" that contain known vulnerabilities.

If MEB is trying to say that these patches introduce new vulnerabilities
into Win-98, then again that is complete speculation without any shred
of testing evidence that he claims he is an expert at performing.

It would be useful for MEB to cut the bull**** lawyer-speak and behave
like a normal person and utter clear and understandable statements.

On 12/15/2009 04:56 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , MEB
writes:
On 12/11/2009 03:16 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
[98Guy's putative enhancements/updates/whatever]
Does this set of fixes actually ADD to the vulnerabilities of a system,
or just CHANGE it - i. e. could it be that it introduces some new ones
but closes some (while also adding other things, such as a DirectX and a
web fonts update)?
[]
Good questions. If it were the OSs designed for it might fulfill the

Thank you.

desired effect, temporarily. However, there is no "patch Tuesday" or
"zero day" hotfixes for Win9x and these will contain vulnerabilities IN
THE OSs designed, for which updates will be received, Win9X won't.
These are for the interface to the Internet, the browser, waving in the
breeze...

Just as the last posted suggested junk from 98 Guy was patched in a
week or so, and is NOT part of a normal Win9X installation {MS XML4}, so
rather obviously they introduce vulnerabilities that wouldn't be there

They certainly have the potential to do so, though whether they actually
do so hasn't been tested either.

to start with. NO ONE tests these for 9X vulnerabilities and they DO
introduce new vulnerabilities into the OSs intended; nor even for
compatibility beyond they install...

They are more likely to, yes.

On the other hand, if you want to *manual* check every day to see if
Microsoft has offered any security or file fixes, AND check for whether
they work in 9X, AND are willing to be a "guinea pig" for any new and
COMPLETELY UNKNOWN 9X vulnerabilities, then sure, install; just don't
expect anyone to be able to help fix your system and don't expect your
software will be compatible... including any malware protection.

Equally, if you don't ever install any of these patches, you will not
suffer from any of the new potential vulnerabilities, but you will also
never experience any of the (equally "potential") benefits, either.

Somewhere along the line since EOL, these people lost track of what
they hoped to accomplish, keeping 9X alive... that requires someone
actually test and NOT JUST FOR INSTALLATION, and creation of NEW
browsers and malware programs...

As I've said before, they can choose to preserve in aspic their 98
system as it was at the instant of EOL, or they can choose to take
potential risks for potential benefits. It's their choice. If they
choose the latter, they can be reassured to whatever extent they trust
98g, and worried to whatever extent they believe you.

So you intend to claim the benefit of installation, verses say, a
different application providing BETTER support for new formats...

The cost is???? that to use these DOES AND WILL CONTINUE to place these
parties doing so in the position of NO knowledge of what present
vulnerabilities they have and NO way to protect themselves from them.
The *TESTS* come from the fact that these supposed installable files
WILL be updated by Microsoft *for the supported OSs* and Win9X will not
receive them, nor will any fixes be designed to correct vulnerabilities
within 9X created by their installation.

If MSFN and those doing the same want to "keep Win98 alive" then work
on the well defined vulnerabilities at EOL and correct those. These are
supposed coders and programmers,,,

So it appears this is just more of an attempt to waste some more time
while resting on OLD laurels...

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

In message , MEB
writes:
On 12/11/2009 03:16 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
[98Guy's putative enhancements/updates/whatever]
Does this set of fixes actually ADD to the vulnerabilities of a system,
or just CHANGE it - i. e. could it be that it introduces some new ones
but closes some (while also adding other things, such as a DirectX and a
web fonts update)?
[]
Good questions. If it were the OSs designed for it might fulfill the

Thank you.

desired effect, temporarily. However, there is no "patch Tuesday" or
"zero day" hotfixes for Win9x and these will contain vulnerabilities IN
THE OSs designed, for which updates will be received, Win9X won't.
These are for the interface to the Internet, the browser, waving in the
breeze...

Just as the last posted suggested junk from 98 Guy was patched in a
week or so, and is NOT part of a normal Win9X installation {MS XML4}, so
rather obviously they introduce vulnerabilities that wouldn't be there

They certainly have the potential to do so, though whether they actually
do so hasn't been tested either.

to start with. NO ONE tests these for 9X vulnerabilities and they DO
introduce new vulnerabilities into the OSs intended; nor even for
compatibility beyond they install...

They are more likely to, yes.

On the other hand, if you want to *manual* check every day to see if
Microsoft has offered any security or file fixes, AND check for whether
they work in 9X, AND are willing to be a "guinea pig" for any new and
COMPLETELY UNKNOWN 9X vulnerabilities, then sure, install; just don't
expect anyone to be able to help fix your system and don't expect your
software will be compatible... including any malware protection.

Equally, if you don't ever install any of these patches, you will not
suffer from any of the new potential vulnerabilities, but you will also
never experience any of the (equally "potential") benefits, either.

Somewhere along the line since EOL, these people lost track of what
they hoped to accomplish, keeping 9X alive... that requires someone
actually test and NOT JUST FOR INSTALLATION, and creation of NEW
browsers and malware programs...

As I've said before, they can choose to preserve in aspic their 98
system as it was at the instant of EOL, or they can choose to take
potential risks for potential benefits. It's their choice. If they
choose the latter, they can be reassured to whatever extent they trust
98g, and worried to whatever extent they believe you.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **

The fetters imposed on liberty at home have ever been forged out of the weapons
provided for defence against real, pretended, or imaginary dangers from abroad.
-James Madison, 4th US president (1751-1836)

On 12/11/2009 03:16 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , MEB
writes:
On 12/10/2009 08:46 AM, 98 Guy wrote:
For those of you that want to use various Win-2K updates from Microsoft
and apply them to your Win-98 system, this update package has been
designed to bring together all those various updates and install them
automatically.

You know %^&% well these also subject the users to potential and
ongoing vulnerabilities which are *not* protected via 9X capable AV
and other programs due to the differing operating environments and
expected respective activities. Moreover, *these files* may give users a
false and dangerous feeling that they HAVE secured their systems, when,
IN FACT, they have added to the potential and/or now unknown real
vulnerabilities.

I agree, he should have perhaps added some warning to that effect, but
he knows he doesn't need to as you will do so for him. (I just _knew_
what the next post I would see would be!)

Does this set of fixes actually ADD to the vulnerabilities of a system,
or just CHANGE it - i. e. could it be that it introduces some new ones
but closes some (while also adding other things, such as a DirectX and a
web fonts update)?

[They're of academic interest to me anyway - I do not have IE of any
flavour on my '98SEl machines, one of which has never been online and
the other does so very rarely.]

[Full quote of original post snipped.]

Good questions. If it were the OSs designed for it might fulfill the
desired effect, *temporarily*. However, there is no "patch Tuesday" or
"zero day" hotfixes for Win9x and these will contain vulnerabilities IN
THE OSs designed, for which updates will be received, Win9X won't.
These are for the interface to the Internet, the browser, waving in the
breeze... or are these supposedly NOT for people using IE6? Then there
is ZERO reason to install them as they patch the last group of supposed
fixes...

Just as the last posted suggested junk from 98 Guy was patched in a
week or so, and is NOT part of a normal Win9X installation {MS XML4}, so
rather obviously they introduce vulnerabilities that wouldn't be there
to start with. NO ONE tests these for 9X vulnerabilities and they DO
introduce new vulnerabilities into the OSs intended.

On the other hand, if you want to *manually* check every day to see if
Microsoft has offered any security or file fixes, AND check for whether
they work in 9X, AND are willing to be a "guinea pig" for any new and
COMPLETELY UNKNOWN 9X vulnerabilities, then sure, install; just don't
expect anyone to be able to help fix your system and don't expect your
software will be compatible... including any malware protection.

Somewhere along the line since EOL, these people lost track of what
they hoped to accomplish, keeping 9X alive... that requires someone
actually test and NOT JUST FOR INSTALLATION, and creation of NEW
browsers and malware programs...

But this was already stated for the most part... WHY you two chose to
post otherwise is the actual question...

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---