Partager via

Response to recent web posts [updated]

  • Article

A quick note regarding automatic update settings getting changed...

We have been hearing some questions recently regarding Tuesday’s update release changing automatic updating settings. We have received some logs from customers, and have so far been able to determine that their AU settings were not changed by any changes to the AU client itself and also not changed by any updates installed by AU.

We are still looking into this to see if another application is making this change during setup with user consent, or if this issue is related to something else. We are continuing the investigation, and as I have more information I will update this post.

If you are running into this issue, your help would be greatly appreciated. You can contact support, and they can walk you through the steps necessary to provide logs and other useful data.

 

[Updated] As discussed above, we have been looking into reports of AU settings changing during the recent security release, and here is what we have found:

  • From the customer logs that we received, we found that none of the updates released as part of the October security release have made any changes to users’ AU settings. In fact, in the logs we reviewed, AU in all cases was set to “install updates automatically” prior to the October security release.
  • I want to stress that the Windows Update client does not change AU settings without user’s consent. However, AU settings can be set or changed in the following scenarios:
    • During the installation of Windows Vista, the user chooses one of the first two recommended options in the “Out of Box Experience” and elects to get updates automatically from Windows
    • The user goes to the Windows Update Control Panel and changes the AU setting manually
    • The user goes to Security Center in Windows Vista and changes the AU setting
    • The user chooses to opt in to Microsoft Update from the Microsoft Update web site
    • The user chooses to opt in to Microsoft Update during the installation or the first run experience of another Microsoft application such as Office 2007

If you believe that your AU setting changed, and none of the scenarios above apply to you, please contact support so we can help determine what may have prompted the changes.

 

Nate Clinton

Program Manger

Microsoft Update

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Comments

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    Source A quick note regarding automatic update settings getting changed... We have been hearing some

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    Microsoft Update Product Team Blog : Response to recent web posts: http://blogs.technet.com/mu/archive

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    After reading this: http://blogs.technet.com/wsus/archive/2007/10/25/wds-revision-update-expanded-applicability-rules-auto-approve-revisions.aspx I have a better understanding of what might have happened. And it seems like the behavior is by design. However, I believe the way this update was packaged and presented, undermines the logic we have come to expect from WSUS updates. The problem is that the package is presented internally as a revision -update-, which are by default -always- automatically approved (your other approval settings don't override this), but it was combined with a scope change, that allowed the package to also install WDS on systems that did not have it previously. It is the second behavior that causes the problem. Installation on systems that did not have it previously, is NOT an -update-, they should not behave as such. Revision 105 was called "Windows Desktop Search 3.01 for Windows XP (KB917013)".  Classification: Update Now from the name alone, it looks like its not an update, but a complete installation (which it was). I never got to see the name before the fact of course, because it auto-approved and installed itself. The classification is "Update", and this is what troubles me. Surely, if this "update" can install itself on systems without previous revisions, it does not belong in the "update" classification? This should have been split into 2 packages.

  1. An -update- with new revision number 105, possibly with a slighty differnet name including the word "update". This would have been automatically approved if the default option for revisions auto-approving was not altered by the admin. The scope would be only install on systems with previous revisions of WDS
  2. A new package, called "Windows Desktop Search 3.01 for Windows XP (KB917013)", possibly a new revision number, but certainly a different classification. I don't have a list of all the WSUS classifications here, but I am sure there is one that is suitable, wasn't their something for new Windows features?

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    Microsoft Update Product Team Blog : Response to recent web posts: http://blogs.technet.com/mu/archive

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    On September 13, 2007, Scott Dunn of Windows Secrets reported "Windows Update (WU) started altering

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    OneCare will reset the settings like this. http://weblogs.asp.net/jgalloway/archive/2006/02/09/437790.aspx

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    Ever since I applied the SP1 update, I'm experiencing a nagging problem:

  • Each time an office application (any one) starts, "Office is configuring..." and it goes through a installation sequence over and over for about 30 seconds. Very frustrating.

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    read your post was very good article you would like to follow continuously

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    Thanks this is great news for everyone in

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    PingBack from http://internet.blogfeedsworld.com/?p=12882

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    updates on a computer, we use our safe and beautiful way microsoft a thank you

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    Your article was very nice thank you I was injured blogger http://www.parcakontorbayiniz.com http://www.yenilezzet.com http://www.webreklamajans.com

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    Your article was very nice thank you I was injured blogger

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    was a nice article, thank you

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    read your post was very good article you would like to follow continuously

  • Anonymous
    December 12, 2010
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    January 09, 2013
    If it can change settings it could easily change logs too