MS04-011 and HFNETCHK

Hello.  We've patched our machines for the newest round of holes using Shavlik and SUS.  If we scan using Shavlik, everything looks good.  However we also do an automated daily scan using the command line HFNETCHK.  Today's report shows our Windows 2000 machines as not patched (we have 10 still in use, all 10 are unpatched according to HFNETCHK).  Now it might be an error with the command line version, or it might be something else.  I know I am paranoid since Blaster when we had 3 machines scan as patched even with the Blaster scanner, but the command line showed them unpatched and all three had blaster issues (they didn't catch blaster but they blue screened when attacked by it).

So has anyone else had this issue with MS04-11?  I know I just uninstalled it from a W2K server and reinstalled (with appropriate reboots) and it still shows as unpatched.  The system logs say that the patch was successfully installed.  Shavlik and Windows Update believe it to be successfully patched.  It's just a question if the command line is dumber or smarter than the rest.

Btw, one is a multi-processor server, a couple are single servers and a couple are low-end old workstations.  It's just strange to me the PRO version is returning a safe result while the command line is saying unpatched.
Who is Participating?

[Product update] Infrastructure Analysis Tool is now available with Business Accounts.Learn More

I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

Luc FrankenEMEA Server EngineerCommented:
Hi JG_Howard,

What happens when you download the patch directly instead of using SUS?


JG_HowardAuthor Commented:
I tried downloading and installing the patch directly (after doing an uninstall and a reboot), it was the W2K SP4 patch.  The patch "successfully" installed according to the system log, but hfnetchk still returns that the patch was missing (after another reboot).  In fact it was after doing this exact procedure it dawned on me all the machines returning a patch missing were W2K.  The XML file used by the command line is and was last modified 4/14/2004.  This is the same version hfnetchkpro4 claims to be using.

Luc FrankenEMEA Server EngineerCommented:
>>The XML file used by the command line is and was last modified 4/14/2004<<
That's the same as I'm having without problems, so I guess HFNETCHK is a bit buggy...
10 Tips to Protect Your Business from Ransomware

Did you know that ransomware is the most widespread, destructive malware in the world today? It accounts for 39% of all security breaches, with ransomware gangsters projected to make $11.5B in profits from online extortion by 2019.

Rich RumbleSecurity SamuraiCommented:
Hfnetchk is also outdated, they are now supporting the M$ Baseline Security Analyzer.
From the FAQ   (
Q.      Does MBSA replace HFNetChk?
A.      MBSA V1.2 exposes HFNetChk switches through the MBSA command line interface (mbsacli.exe). The MBSA command line interface can be used to perform both MBSA scans (system configuration and security update checks) via mbsacli.exe as well as HFNetChk scans (security update checks only) via mbsacli.exe /hf.
Q.      How do I use MBSA V1.2 to perform an HFNetChk-style scan?
A.      Users familiar with the standalone HFNetChk tool can use MBSA V1.2 to perform the same type of scan. The MBSA V1.2 command line interface has a flag (/hf) to indicate an HFNetChk-style scan. Users can call "mbsacli.exe /hf" followed by a valid HFNetChk switch after the /hf flag. For those users who have scripts that call "hfnetchk.exe", they can simply replace this with "mbsacli.exe /hf" followed by a valid HFNetChk flag(s).
Q.      What are the advantages of MBSA over HFNetChk?
A.      MBSA is a superset of the HFNetChk technology. Whereas HFNetChk only deals with security updates and service packs, MBSA provides an easy-to-use interface and additional capabilities. These capabilities include examining Windows desktops and servers for common security best practices such as strong passwords, scanning servers running IIS and SQL Server for common security misconfigurations, and checking for misconfigured security zone settings in Microsoft Office and Internet Explorer. Since the release of MBSA V1.1, users can now use one tool versus two separate tools to scan for missing security updates as well as misconfigured system settings.
While not offically a replacement, Shavlik wrote hfnetchk for M$.
MBSA is nice an GUI too.

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
I found a post on a newsgroup with this same problem:
(hope that URL comes out OK when I post this)

Anyway, a few people posted on the thread that after installing this hotfix, that WIndows Update did not show it being installed. Very similar to you using hfnetchk. I like richrumble's suggestion on if the latest MBSA detects this installed correctly or not.

And while we are at it, this specific hotfix also has a CPU usage problem. There are a LOT of posts stating how after putting this hotfix on, the CPU usage hits 100% and stays there for the SYSTEM process, making the systems unusable. Uninstalling this hotfix is so far the only fix for that. Here are a couple of newsgroup posts that talk about this problem:

Remember this ONE patch fixes 14 different problems. From the newsgroups, looks like this approach wasn't the best way to handle this!
nader alkahtaniConsultantCommented:
I agree with richrumble
I had used MBSA and found it a great tool because it can scan a Range of IP and has a nice GUI
Just for reference, the CPU spike this patch seems to do has hit Bigtraq:
Use the latest build of HFNETCHK from USe the option -v to see why a patch may not have installed. Often it is only due to the checksum being incorrect, which throws up an error. THis issue can be caused by patch compilation on SMP machines and installation on single processor machines, and vive versa. The machine is patched
Here is a new Technet article on problems with this patch:
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
OS Security

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.