Microsoft updates Windows without users' consent

KarenMarie

Elite Member
Sep 20, 2003
14,372
6
81
Locked since this is a discussed in a number of other threads such as this longer one.
Anandtech Moderator - bsobel


Text

Microsoft updates Windows without users' consent


Microsoft has begun patching files on Windows XP and Vista without users' knowledge, even when the users have turned off auto-updates.

Many companies require testing of patches before they are widely installed, and businesses in this situation are objecting to the stealth patching.

Files changed with no notice to users

In recent days, Windows Update (WU) started altering files on users' systems without displaying any dialog box to request permission. The only files that have been reportedly altered to date are nine small executables on XP and nine on Vista that are used by WU itself. Microsoft is patching these files silently, even if auto-updates have been disabled on a particular PC.

It's surprising that these files can be changed without the user's knowledge. The Automatic Updates dialog box in the Control Panel can be set to prevent updates from being installed automatically. However, with Microsoft's latest stealth move, updates to the WU executables seem to be installed regardless of the settings ? without notifying users.

When users launch Windows Update, Microsoft's online service can check the version of its executables on the PC and update them if necessary. What's unusual is that people are reporting changes in these files although WU wasn't authorized to install anything.

This isn't the first time Microsoft has pushed updates out to users who prefer to test and install their updates manually. Not long ago, another Windows component, svchost.exe, was causing problems with Windows Update, as last reported on June 21 in the Windows Secrets Newsletter. In that case, however, the Windows Update site notified users that updated software had to be installed before the patching process could proceed. This time, such a notice never appears.

For users who elect not to have updates installed automatically, the issue of consent is crucial. Microsoft has apparently decided, however, that it doesn't need permission to patch Windows Updates files, even if you've set your preferences to require it.

Microsoft provides no tech information ? yet

To make matters even stranger, a search on Microsoft's Web site reveals no information at all on the stealth updates. Let's say you wished to voluntarily download and install the new WU executable files when you were, for example, reinstalling a system. You'd be hard-pressed to find the updated files in order to download them. At this writing, you either get a stealth install or nothing.

A few Web forums have already started to discuss the updated files, which bear the version number 7.0.6000.381. The only explanation found at Microsoft's site comes from a user identified as Dean-Dean on a Microsoft Communities forum. In reply to a question, he states:

* "Windows Update Software 7.0.6000.381 is an update to Windows Update itself. It is an update for both Windows XP and Windows Vista. Unless the update is installed, Windows Update won't work, at least in terms of searching for further updates. Normal use of Windows Update, in other words, is blocked until this update is installed."

Windows Secrets contributing editor Susan Bradley contacted Microsoft Partner Support about the update and received this short reply:

* "7.0.6000.381 is a consumer only release that addresses some specific issues found after .374 was released. It will not be available via WSUS [Windows Server Update Services]. A standalone installer and the redist will be available soon, I will keep an eye on it and notify you when it is available."

Unfortunately, this reply does not explain why the stealth patching began with so little information provided to customers. Nor does it provide any details on the "specific issues" that the update supposedly addresses.

System logs confirm stealth installs

In his forum post, Dean-Dean names several files that are changed on XP and Vista. The patching process updates several Windows\System32 executables (with the extensions .exe, .dll, and .cpl) to version 7.0.6000.381, according to the post.

In Vista, the following files are updated:

1. wuapi.dll
2. wuapp.exe
3. wuauclt.exe
4. wuaueng.dll
5. wucltux.dll
6. wudriver.dll
7. wups.dll
8. wups2.dll
9. wuwebv.dll

In XP, the following files are updated:

1. cdm.dll
2. wuapi.dll
3. wuauclt.exe
4. wuaucpl.cpl
5. wuaueng.dll
6. wucltui.dll
7. wups.dll
8. wups2.dll
9. wuweb.dll

These files are by no means viruses, and Microsoft appears to have no malicious intent in patching them. However, writing files to a user's PC without notice (when auto-updating has been turned off) is behavior that's usually associated with hacker Web sites. The question being raised in discussion forums is, "Why is Microsoft operating in this way?"

How to check which version your PC has

If a system has been patched in the past few months, the nine executables in Windows\System32 will either show an earlier version number, 7.0.6000.374, or the stealth patch: 7.0.6000.381. (The version numbers can be seen by right-clicking a file and choosing Properties. In XP, click the Version tab and then select File Version. In Vista, click the Details tab.)

In addition, PCs that received the update will have new executables in subfolders named 7.0.6000.381 under the following folders:

c:\Windows\System32\SoftwareDistribution\Setup\ServiceStartup\wups.dll
c:\Windows\System32\SoftwareDistribution\Setup\ServiceStartup\wups2.dll

Users can also verify whether patching occurred by checking Windows' Event Log:

Step 1. In XP, click Start, Run.

Step 2. Type eventvwr.msc and press Enter.

Step 3. In the tree pane on the left, select System.

Step 4. The right pane displays events and several details about them. Event types such as "Installation" are labeled in the Category column. "Windows Update Agent" is the event typically listed in the Source column for system patches.

On systems that were checked recently by Windows Secrets readers, the Event Log shows two installation events on Aug. 24. The files were stealth-updated in the early morning hours. (The time stamp will vary, of course, on machines that received the patch on other dates.)

To investigate further, you can open the Event Log's properties for each event. Normally, when a Windows update event occurs, the properties dialog box shows an associated KB number, enabling you to find more information at Microsoft's Web site. Mysteriously, no KB number is given for the WU updates that began in August. The description merely reads, "Installation Successful: Windows successfully installed the following update: Automatic Updates."

No need to roll back the updated files

Again, it's important to note that there's nothing harmful about the updated files themselves. There are no reports of software conflicts and no reason to remove the files (which WU apparently needs in order to access the latest patches). The only concern is the mechanism Microsoft is using to perform its patching, and how this mechanism might be used by the software giant in the future.
 

Smilin

Diamond Member
Mar 4, 2002
7,357
0
0

Dravic

Senior member
May 18, 2000
892
0
76
Originally posted by: Smilin
See, this is the thing about FUD. One person says it then everyone repeats it without checking to see if it's true. Pretty soon everyone is saying it and there is a consensus that it's true when it isn't.

So First I would suggest checking the facts before posting:
http://blogs.technet.com/mu/ar...itself-up-to-date.aspx

Second, I would suggest checking to see if this has already been posted (and discredited):
http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2095849&enterthread=y

discredited???

its true...

MS is updating the WU client when you choose either, 1. inform me of downloads but don?t download and install, or 2. download updates but don?t install.

They are still installing updates after the user has specifically set the system to not auto update. It?s a trust issue.

If you went a diner and ordered pancake and they brought you waffles, then proceed to tell you that everyone likes the waffles, and is baffled why you have an issue, would you not be upset?

I fully understand its just an update to the WU client, but what they updated isn?t the issue. Benign or not they made an update even after asking me, and me telling them not to.
 

nerp

Diamond Member
Dec 31, 2005
9,867
105
106
So run linux. Or click no when faced with the MS EULA.
 

Dravic

Senior member
May 18, 2000
892
0
76
Originally posted by: nerp
So run linux. Or click no when faced with the MS EULA.


Ehhh.. ok then? what exactly does the eula have to so with this, and as far as run Linux?

I do run Linux on my network server/workstation. I run win 2k on my office machine with office 2003, I run win xp 64 on my gaming box, I run win 2k on my photo/video editing/secondary gamer box( may try out ubuntu studio soon).. run win xp professional on my laptop. and thats just at home.

13 years Unix experience at work, 11 as a Unix admin and security engineer.

I run the proper OS when and where needed. Heck my OS of choice as far as production goes is Solaris first, Linux second.

With that out of the way?..


This isn?t a bash MS topic, it?s a bash stealth updates topic. If MS is going to ask me if I want to not auto update, then respect my wishes. This kind of thing can cause large amounts of man hours when a update that wasn?t expect can cause a change in variance while testing, or when a software compatibility issue arises. It not like it hasn?t happened before.


 

stash

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2000
5,468
0
0
I agree that the explanation of the settings could be clearer. There should be a statement that says that the WU settings do not control updates of the WU client itself, and that the WU client will always autoupdate itself.

I can just imagine the uproar if the WU client didn't update itself, and people weren't able to update their machines at all. The client is auto updated to maintain the quality level of the client, which in turn helps better protect customers. When you operate a service that is responsible for updating almost a billion machines, you can't leave it up to the end-user to maintain the client part of that service.
 

Smilin

Diamond Member
Mar 4, 2002
7,357
0
0
Originally posted by: Dravic
If MS is going to ask me if I want to not auto update, then respect my wishes.


This is why the story is so popular. You need to *read and understand* what is happening. Instead of taking it at face value and believing it.

If you turn off automatic updates then nothing updates. Period.



The scenario that the FUD flinger is talking about is different. Again, read.


 

DasFox

Diamond Member
Sep 4, 2003
4,668
46
91
How can the system be updated if you have it shut off?

I have auto updates off, plus I have them disabled in the Services.
 

mechBgon

Super Moderator<br>Elite Member
Oct 31, 1999
30,699
1
0
Originally posted by: DasFox
How can the system be updated if you have it shut off?

I have auto updates off, plus I have them disabled in the Services.

One way is to download the monthly updates and install them manually. Go to this page and sign up for email notification of new updates.

Another way would be to use the Secunia Personal Software Inspector, which I think is a good idea regardless, in this day and age. Screenshot of the PSI at work :camera: This software isn't licensed for commercial use, only home use, btw.

Yet another way would be to use the Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer, although I'm not sure it'll function if Automatic Updates are completely turned off. But you can give it a try :) MBSA gives you links to each missing patch, so you can manually download them and install them, as well as links to their security bulletins so you can see what they're for.

And if that's not enough ways, you can also set up an in-house WSUS server* which pulls every update from Microsoft, and then you can approve them after you've looked them over, at which point it will dole them out to your fleet.

*Windows Server 2003 domain controller not included, sold separately ;)