Jump to content
eduard.malakhov

Public testing PF90 for KES 8 CF1: HTTPS traffic blocked with Google Chrome [In progress]

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

 

We would like everyone to join public testing of Private Fix 90 for Kaspersky Endpoint Security 8 CF1 that addresses the problem of blocked HTTPS traffic in Google Chrome. Please find the installation package attached.

 

Since this fix is has not been thoroughly tested we strongly recommend you to test it on several machines before deployment to production environment.

 

Please share your experience in this topic. We will be happy to answer your questions.

patch_pf90.zip

Share this post


Link to post

So far this patch has worked for me. I can browse to HTTPS sites that would fail before.

 

Thx.

Share this post


Link to post
Hi guys,

 

We would like everyone to join public testing of Private Fix 90 for Kaspersky Endpoint Security 8 CF1 that addresses the problem of blocked HTTPS traffic in Google Chrome. Please find the installation package attached.

 

Since this fix is has not been thoroughly tested we strongly recommend you to test it on several machines before deployment to production environment.

 

Please share your experience in this topic. We will be happy to answer your questions.

 

Hello

 

An update. Another day and restart. So far the fix works fine.

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Hi guys,

 

We would like everyone to join public testing of Private Fix 90 for Kaspersky Endpoint Security 8 CF1 that addresses the problem of blocked HTTPS traffic in Google Chrome. Please find the installation package attached.

 

Since this fix is has not been thoroughly tested we strongly recommend you to test it on several machines before deployment to production environment.

 

Please share your experience in this topic. We will be happy to answer your questions.

 

Is this for 8.1.0.831a.b.c.d only? We have experienced this issue on 8.1.0.646a.b as well. Thank you in advance.

Share this post


Link to post
Is this for 8.1.0.831a.b.c.d only? We have experienced this issue on 8.1.0.646a.b as well. Thank you in advance.

 

Essentially all private fixes are assembled for specific KES builds, so, yes, PF90 is specific for build 8.1.0.831 and configurations based on it (i.e. a, b, c, d). It is probable that the changes introduced with PF90 are compatible with build 8.1.0.646, however this is not guaranteed. And unfortunately there is no easy and secure way to check that except for installing PF90 on build 646 and seeing what happens. As for now I am not informed if similar patches will be released for build 646 or other builds. I will have to ask my colleagues from KES 8 team, if something like that is planned and will post here on the topic if anything is known.

Share this post


Link to post
Essentially all private fixes are assembled for specific KES builds, so, yes, PF90 is specific for build 8.1.0.831 and configurations based on it (i.e. a, b, c, d). It is probable that the changes introduced with PF90 are compatible with build 8.1.0.646, however this is not guaranteed. And unfortunately there is no easy and secure way to check that except for installing PF90 on build 646 and seeing what happens. As for now I am not informed if similar patches will be released for build 646 or other builds. I will have to ask my colleagues from KES 8 team, if something like that is planned and will post here on the topic if anything is known.

 

I understand. Thank you for the quick reply.

Share this post


Link to post

It sloved problem (thx). Sadly it took hours to find that KES 8 is causing this "unknown error" on every computer with chrome from (mayby) a week.

 

post-458780-1363397198_thumb.jpg

 

And around half hour to find this post (lucky me). Why it isn't automatic update, why? :dash1:

Share this post


Link to post
It sloved problem (thx). Sadly it took hours to find that KES 8 is causing this "unknown error" on every computer with chrome from (mayby) a week.

 

post-458780-1363397198_thumb.jpg

 

And around half hour to find this post (lucky me). Why it isn't automatic update, why? :dash1:

 

Before publishing anything as a public update we need to make sure that the patch does not have any significant negative effect on the clients, and the only way to do so is to run public testing first. This patch will probably be incuded in the next autopatch for KES8.

Share this post


Link to post
I understand. Thank you for the quick reply.

 

You're welcome. Just in case you will try to apply PF90 to build 646 for test, could you please let the forum know of the results? This could be helpful for other users of build 646.

Share this post


Link to post

I was experiencing this issue on a WS patched with a.b.c.d.pf80, but not on any without pf80. In any case, this patch solved the problem on the affected WS, with no apparent side-effects.

Share this post


Link to post

The patch works on 8.1.0.831 a.b.c.d. I have not tried it on 8.1.0.831 a.b.c.dpf80 yet.

 

When it is released with the auto patch, will there be something in the version that will identify it has been applied? Thanks again.

 

Share this post


Link to post
The patch works on 8.1.0.831 a.b.c.d. I have not tried it on 8.1.0.831 a.b.c.dpf80 yet.

 

When it is released with the auto patch, will there be something in the version that will identify it has been applied? Thanks again.

 

If this fix comes as a part of an autopatch then of course the autopatch letter (e.g. "e") will be listed in the version string. For example if you had version 8.1.0.831 a.b.c.d.pf90, after the autopatch you will have smth like 8.1.0.831 a.b.c.d.pf90.e. PF90 will be there still since you've installed it once, though in fact it would be overwritten by patch E, or whatever.

 

It is still a bit early to speak about pf90 as an autopatch because the product team is now busy with CF2 release. I won't expect the next autopatch before CF2 is released. Even then the team will need time because an autopatch requires additional development and testing.

Share this post


Link to post
I was experiencing this issue on a WS patched with a.b.c.d.pf80, but not on any without pf80. In any case, this patch solved the problem on the affected WS, with no apparent side-effects.

 

This appears strange to me because p80 did not contain any changes to traffic monitor. None of the autopatches did either.

Share this post


Link to post
It helps me too, thanks

So far OK. :b_lol1:

I didn't find any new errors. <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Hi guys,

 

We would like everyone to join public testing of Private Fix 90 for Kaspersky Endpoint Security 8 CF1 that addresses the problem of blocked HTTPS traffic in Google Chrome. Please find the installation package attached.

 

Since this fix is has not been thoroughly tested we strongly recommend you to test it on several machines before deployment to production environment.

 

Please share your experience in this topic. We will be happy to answer your questions.

Does this patch works with Russian KES 8.1.0.831?

Share this post


Link to post
Does this patch works with Russian KES 8.1.0.831?

 

Yes, this patch is not bound to any localization. The binaries posted on the Russian an English forums are just the same.

Share this post


Link to post

We applied this to one machine which was having the problem ( 8.1.0.831 a.b.c.d) and it fixed the problem. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post

Please let your software engineers know that I would also like to see an official patch for 8.1.8.646 as well for the Chrome issue. Thanks! ! !

Share this post


Link to post
Please let your software engineers know that I would also like to see an official patch for 8.1.8.646 as well for the Chrome issue. Thanks! ! !

 

Hello, unfortunately build 646 is on limited support, as can be seen here: http://support.kaspersky.com/support/support_table. Apparently this means that no updates except for virus bases will be released for that build. We strongly recommend you to upgrade to build 831 (CF1) or upgrade directly to CF2 for KES 8 once it is released. After CF2 release a patch for the Chrome HTTPS problem will be reassembled for that build and released.

Share this post


Link to post

Just installed, rebooted, and tested with my gmail. Worked great! Thanks a lot, I'll be sure to report any issues if I come across them on this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Hello, unfortunately build 646 is on limited support, as can be seen here: http://support.kaspersky.com/support/support_table. Apparently this means that no updates except for virus bases will be released for that build. We strongly recommend you to upgrade to build 831 (CF1) or upgrade directly to CF2 for KES 8 once it is released. After CF2 release a patch for the Chrome HTTPS problem will be reassembled for that build and released.

 

OK thanks.

I've just been reading about a lot of issues with the latest builds, so I'm sort of scared to move forward. I'm a one-man IT shop, and having to touch each machine due to BSOD's or other issues would be devastating. (5 sites in 3 states) I suppose I need to continue testing in my lab environment. (When I can find the time.)

 

Which version has less issues at the moment? KES/KSC 10 or KES9/KSC8 (w/ latest patches) ? ? Is it safe to install KSC10 and slowly roll out KES10 a few machines at a time? (Or will there be complications with that?) I thought I read somewhere someone was having trouble with the 'converted policies' and everything got an order of magnitude more complicated for them. I do have a Win8 desktop and a Server 2012 VM that I would like to have Kaspersky protect, but again, I'm very concerned with moving forward. Hopefully what I've seen in the forums are an exception to the rule.....but it sounded like I avoided a huge mess a month or so ago by NOT being on the latest version. :)

Share this post


Link to post
OK thanks.

I've just been reading about a lot of issues with the latest builds, so I'm sort of scared to move forward. I'm a one-man IT shop, and having to touch each machine due to BSOD's or other issues would be devastating. (5 sites in 3 states) I suppose I need to continue testing in my lab environment. (When I can find the time.)

 

Which version has less issues at the moment? KES/KSC 10 or KES9/KSC8 (w/ latest patches) ? ? Is it safe to install KSC10 and slowly roll out KES10 a few machines at a time? (Or will there be complications with that?) I thought I read somewhere someone was having trouble with the 'converted policies' and everything got an order of magnitude more complicated for them. I do have a Win8 desktop and a Server 2012 VM that I would like to have Kaspersky protect, but again, I'm very concerned with moving forward. Hopefully what I've seen in the forums are an exception to the rule.....but it sounded like I avoided a huge mess a month or so ago by NOT being on the latest version. :)

 

As for now, the most stable version of KES 8 that is officially supported is build 831 (CF1). If you do not have any urgent issues that need to be fixed right away I would suggest you to wait for KES 8 CF2 release which is expected in April. Also we will have soon CF1 for KES 10 released which will be a more stable version of KES 10 and hopefully will not have the issues that were reported for KES 10 TR, but if you do not need any specific features of KES 10 (i.e. data encryption) I think it would be more secure to stay with KES 8.

Share this post


Link to post

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We use cookies to make your experience of our websites better. By using and further navigating this website you accept this. Detailed information about the use of cookies on this website is available by clicking on more information.