Update to .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 for the .NET Framework Assistant 1.0 x86 (KB963707)

Sponsored Links

Vista Home Premium 32 bit, SP1, WLM 14v.
I do not have Firefox. Do I need to install this Update ?
t-4-2

If you do not have .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 installed
on your PC then you may not need it. Keep in mind that
SP1 includes updates to .NET 3.0 and 2.0 which may be
installed on your PC.

How to determine which versions of .NET Framework
are installed and whether any service packs have been applied:
See: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/318785

KB963707 is a patch to NET Framework for Firefox users.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/963707

But even if you do not use Firefox install it anyway.
Upcoming Updates for .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 (link previously
posted by PA_Bear)
http://blogs.technet.com/wsus/archiv...ce-pack-1.aspx

Update History : - -
Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 and .NET Framework 3.5 Family
Update (KB951847) x86
Installation date: ?6/?10/?2009 9:50 PM
Installation status: Successful
Update type: Important
The Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 is a full cumulative update
that contains many new features building incrementally upon .NET Framework
2.0, 3.0, 3.5, and includes cumulative servicing updates to the .NET
Framework 2.0 and the .NET Framework 3.0 subcomponents. The .NET Framework
3.5 Family Update provides important application compatibility updates. This
update is provided to you and licensed under the Windows Vista and Windows
Server 2008 License Terms.

I did have KB951847 installed unwittingly. ( Windows Update is set on "
manual " ).
Can I ignore KB963707, and " hide " it, or just go ahead and install it ?

You don't have to answer if you don't want to. Nobody is putting a gun at
your head.

Nobody's forcing you to read my [posts in brackets] either.

The integrity of an MVP has just been tarnished by your childish behaviour.

How's the OP supposed to check for a (possible) answer if he/she doesn't
open and read it?

You should install this update whether or not you currently use FireFox.
Otherwise, if you ever do use FireFox (and you should be using it instead of
IE anything) then you will still have the dangerous add-on that Microsoft
snuck onto your PC and is now lying in wait for when you do install FireFox.
The only way to remove it safely is to use this patch so the uninstall button
becomes available.

Definitely install this patch. And definitely uninstall any Microsoft
add-ons to FireFox. Afterall, that's why we use FireFox - because it's not
Microsoft. Now Microsoft has hijacked it to inject security flaws from IE
into FireFox.

Nope, disabling the ".NET Framework Assistant 1.0" (or "1.1") doesn't
restore the original User-Agent that's send out by a browser to any server,
while uninstalling the Add-On/Extension does.

I stand corrected. A disabled extension shouldn't change the User-Agent string,
though; is this a bug in the extension or in Firefox?

[We've missed you Freudi. Hope all is well...or at least as well as can be
expected...on your end.]

Since the add-ons and extensions were installed without the users knowledge
or permission, and not installed using the procedures established by Firefox
for installing extensions and add-ons, then it does not seem like it would be
a Firefox bug if disabling doesn't properly restore the user agent string.

Since the change to the user agent string was caused by a trojan, you'll
have to reset it by editing the configuration files for Firefox (I think. I
know that IE keeps the user agent string in the registry but I think it is in
a settings file in Firefox but I'm not a Firefox expert.)

(Sigh.) That's not true. The method used is documented by Mozilla here:

The extra part of the user agent string is definitely stored as a preference.
You can remove it using the about:config URL. As far as I know, Firefox doesn't
keep track of which add-on a preference is associated with, so it would have no
way of removing it, and unless add-ons are informed when they are disabled it
wouldn't be able to either.

There may be a supported way for extensions to modify the user agent string; it
seems like something they would often need to do. I guess I should be asking in
the Mozilla Developer forums.

What Dale wrote.