{"id":562,"date":"2004-09-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-09-22T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2004\/09\/22\/microsoft-releases-vpn-patch-for-sp2\/"},"modified":"2021-12-30T11:37:41","modified_gmt":"2021-12-30T11:37:41","slug":"microsoft-releases-vpn-patch-for-sp2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2004\/09\/22\/microsoft-releases-vpn-patch-for-sp2\/","title":{"rendered":"Microsoft releases VPN patch for SP2"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Microsoft has announced it is to patch a patch &#8212; it&#8217;s fixed a hole in XP Service Pack 2 that prevented VPNs from working properly.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Microsoft has published the patch through its Web site.  It fixes a problem that installing XP SP2 creates with VPNs and can be downloaded here.<\/p>\n<p>Once installed, XP SP2 can cause users to see a &#8216;cannot establish a connection&#8217; message if a the machine tries to connect to IP addresses in the loopback address range, according to Microsoft&#8217;s Web site.<\/p>\n<p>However, Redmond won&#8217;t be expecting too many hits on the patch yet.  XP SP2 has only reached a fifth of the people Microsoft had hoped, missing its target by 80 million.  The patch is the second Microsoft has been prompted to offer following the emergence of XP SP2.<\/p>\n<p>Microsoft&#8217;s CRM product also needed a fix to become compatible with the service pack.<\/p>\n<p>The VPN fix is one of the downloads that features in a pilot programme to test if users&#8217; licences are genuine.<\/p>\n<p>To download the fix, users are required to have their licences validated through Microsoft&#8217;s website.<\/p>\n<p>http:\/\/news.zdnet.co.uk\/software\/windows\/0,39020396,39167556,00.htm<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[29],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-562","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/562","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=562"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/562\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3049,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/562\/revisions\/3049"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=562"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=562"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=562"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}