run-time error 419 permission to use object denied

Discussions on webmail and the Professional version.
Alyson_J
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 9:44 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Post by Alyson_J » Sat Oct 04, 2003 4:32 pm

We had used Mailenable on Windows 2003 Web Server Edition but then when it was launched and the licence prohibited the use of any non web serving applications being used on the server http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2 ... w/web.mspx we had to buy a Standard Edition Licence :( - Just thought I'd mention it just in case this version has limiting code in it to stop non web applications working properly as you mentioned you are using the Web Server Edition.

We had been getting the COM errors but haven't had the 419 Errors on our installation of Mailenable Pro on Standard Edition.
Aly

AlertServ
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 1:36 am
Contact:

Post by AlertServ » Sat Oct 04, 2003 4:39 pm

From what I have done in testing, the Web Version Limit is on paper and not crippled in any fucntionality from the OS side (except from specific Microsoft Application which it prohibits like the streaming meida server).
Alert Serv | Managed Windows Servers, Incident Support
Including Support for Mail Enable & Helm - http://www.AlertServ.com
------------------------------------------------------
Authorized Helm Reseller

AlertServ
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 1:36 am
Contact:

Post by AlertServ » Sat Oct 04, 2003 5:48 pm

Has anyone tried to look at the properties for the SMTP or POP connections?

I was going to make a change and got this error which seems very related...

IMMCPropertyPage_Initalize:POP:Permission Denied

or

IMMCPropertyPage_Initalize:SMTP:Permission Denied

I was connected via remote desktop as an Administrator to W2K3 Standard.
Alert Serv | Managed Windows Servers, Incident Support
Including Support for Mail Enable & Helm - http://www.AlertServ.com
------------------------------------------------------
Authorized Helm Reseller

RBogan
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 5:26 am

Post by RBogan » Sat Oct 04, 2003 8:27 pm

AlertServ wrote:Has anyone tried to look at the properties for the SMTP or POP connections?

I was going to make a change and got this error which seems very related...

IMMCPropertyPage_Initalize:POP:Permission Denied

or

IMMCPropertyPage_Initalize:SMTP:Permission Denied

I was connected via remote desktop as an Administrator to W2K3 Standard.
I just tried that...and got the same popup window.

In fact...after clicking OK on the error window...I noticed my properties for the SMTP connector had been CLEARED OUT. There was nothing in the data boxes for either the SMTP or POP connectors...

Just more "data" for the resolution process...

I connect in exactly the same way as AlertServ (RDC Administrator in W2K3 Standard.

Tom Hundley

Unable to reproduce issues

Post by Tom Hundley » Sun Oct 05, 2003 12:18 am

All,

I just wanted to report that I built a new Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition box and installed ME Professional 1.12-- clean install of both.

I have been running tests and have not yet been able to reproduce any of the issues discussed in this message thread or the COM Surragate thread.

Is there an installation / upgrade pattern to those of you who are experiencing these problems? IE, upgraded 2k to 2003, ME 1.x to 1.12?

I'll keep everyone posted if I can reproduce the reported issues.

AlertServ
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 1:36 am
Contact:

Post by AlertServ » Sun Oct 05, 2003 1:48 am

All of my box with problem was a new delivered W2K3 Standard from Rack Shack with one install of ME 1.116.
Alert Serv | Managed Windows Servers, Incident Support
Including Support for Mail Enable & Helm - http://www.AlertServ.com
------------------------------------------------------
Authorized Helm Reseller

RBogan
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 5:26 am

Post by RBogan » Sun Oct 05, 2003 3:42 am

I think it's nice that people have solved their problems by wiping their systems and reinstalling everything. However, that's hardly a viable solution, or even remotely a clue to solving anything.

I had a new server as well. It all worked great...for about 3 weeks. I could revert back to a fresh imaging...but for what? Only to know the 419 error is looming in the horizon somewhere. No thanks.

Anyone have any experience with Merak mail server? They "talk" a good game....but that hardly means they can bring one.

But...an update to my specific issue...

I completely deleted ME from my server...including the registry entries. I downloaded the latest ME Pro from this site...installed it...and immediately got 419 errors. This time, it wouldn't even work from the start.

Thusly...I tend to believe the MS hotfix listed in this thread may have done something to ME that was not able to be reversed by a simple uninstallation of the MS hotfix or ME. What? I don't know.

Anyway...more FYI kind of stuff...for whomever is "working" on this.

Thanks,

MailEnable
Site Admin
Posts: 4441
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 3:03 am
Location: Melbourne, Victoria Australia

Post by MailEnable » Sun Oct 05, 2003 7:45 am

-------------------------------------------------------------

PLEASE DO NOT APPLY THE PROCEDURE THAT ASSIGNS THE IWAM_MACHINE NAME ACCOUNT DCOM PERMISSIONS
BECAUSE IT IS LIKELY TO RENDER THE MAILENABLE MMC UNUSABLE


-------------------------------------------------------------
It appears that a procedure that was posted as a potential fix for the COM+ Surrogate Issue may in fact be the root cause of the 419 permission denied error in the MMC. The actual post may cause this problem can be found here:
http://forum.mailenable.com/viewtopic.p ... c&start=15

To test this, we have installed dozens of instances of Windows 2003 (all Editions) and had been unable to reproduce the Error 419 permission denied error (despite applying various system updates, hotfixes, etc).

Then, on each of these installations we applied the posted procedure for modifying COM security modificatons. The result was that every one of these test builds aquired the Error 419 permissions issue.

For those with the problem we are very interested to know whether you had infact modified the default COM security settings.

Unfortunately, simply reversing the posted procedure does not rectify the 419 permissions error. We are currently determining exactly what persistant changes are the result of the procedure outlined.

Until we establish exactly what changes are made to the system state, the procedure posted will be annotated to ensure that others do not execute it.
Regards, Andrew

RBogan
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 5:26 am

Post by RBogan » Sun Oct 05, 2003 9:23 am

More FYI stuff...

I actually had the 419 errors first. I actually visited this forum to research/find a solution for it...when I ran across others having the com surrogate errors.

After reading about others having com surrogate errors, I searched for a solution for it...while waiting for 419 solutions. The next day, after doing some searching and fixing...I solved my own com surrogate error and applied the fix listed in the other thread (com surrogate thread).

I had the 419 error before, during, and obviously after the aforementioned com surrogate "fix". The only thing that's changed for me is I no longer have com surrogate issues.

FYI...

Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 827
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2002 6:31 pm
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Post by Admin » Sun Oct 05, 2003 11:32 am

Hi all,

We're still doing our investigation of the issue, but have outlined below how to fix this. If you experience the error, and the steps below do not work, please email support@mailenable.com

1) Click Start, go to Run, type in "dcomcnfg".

2) When the COM Services MMC pops up, expand Component Services, expand Computers, and then expand DCOM Config.

3) Right-click on MMC Application Class icon and select Properties from the popup menu.

4) Click the Security tab

5) Under Access Permissions, set it to Customize

6) Click the Edit.. button.

6) Add the Administrator user

7) Click OK to apply changes.

If the MMC was open you would need to close and open again.

AlertServ
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 1:36 am
Contact:

Post by AlertServ » Sun Oct 05, 2003 3:17 pm

That fixed it for me. :)
Alert Serv | Managed Windows Servers, Incident Support
Including Support for Mail Enable & Helm - http://www.AlertServ.com
------------------------------------------------------
Authorized Helm Reseller

RBogan
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 5:26 am

Post by RBogan » Sun Oct 05, 2003 6:57 pm

I had forgotten the simple pleasure of retrieving email ;)

I'm completely fixed!

Thanks so much!

RBogan
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 5:26 am

Post by RBogan » Tue Oct 07, 2003 7:12 pm

RBogan wrote:
cassius wrote:Oh nm, I guess that was the point. You secessive states always take me by surprise =)
So...if you "knew" my email address...(RBogan at houston.rr.com)...why would you also fail to realize I live in the United States?


PLEASE ANSWER THIS...I'm still laughing about it...
Cassius? Oh brilliant one...please answer this?

cassius
Posts: 338
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 2:29 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN

Post by cassius » Tue Oct 07, 2003 7:38 pm

Ummm because I didn't think about it? When I was talking about the burden of proof being on the accuser, I didn't want you to say "ah but I'm xxxxx, we believe people are guitly until proven innocent". So I prefaced my comment by saying "I don't know if you live in the US, but here..."

Oh man, you found a quasi-flaw in something I said. Oh darn. I hope someday I can be as cool as you, man, but I guess until then I'll just have to live with fallibility. Please forgive me my sins, oh perfect one.

=)

RBogan
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 5:26 am

Post by RBogan » Tue Oct 07, 2003 7:53 pm

That makes no sense. LOL

I think you were just trying to appear as "Mr Hack Daddy" or something...and you screwed up your own roleplaying. ROFL...

You might be able to fool truckers in Indiana...but....well....nevermind. Pursuing this (or any) conversation with you is truly beneath me.

lol

Post Reply