Microsoft 'fixes' its malware problem

Winblows Server 2008 now has "activation technology" as well!

Its bad enough having your home PC stop working because you replaced a graphics card. (Yes, I know thats not *supposed* to trigger a reactivation. But it did.)

But would you bet your mission-critical server application on this "technology"?

And if the activation servers happen to be down when you try to reactivate - as they were when it hit me - well, then youre just SOL, arent you?

And its all your own fault for buying crippleware, isnt it?

Apropos nothing at all, youd be amazed how easy Ubuntu Server is. And no activation! Fancy that.

How many times must we read the same rants on the same topics over and over again?

And no, Ubuntu is not a suitable alternative. Ever.

Microsoft needs to make a Linux Distro called "I Reject WAT". Make it awful to install for a Grandmother, no direct support, etc. Hey, they could base it on Gentoo. You'd have people showering Microsoft with money.

That's their trump card: show the consumer the alternative and they'll have no choice but to accept the software gestapo.

"Its bad enough having your home PC stop working because you replaced a graphics card"

That doesn't happen ever, worst case you have to re-activate within 3 days, if the online tool is broken you phone the free phone number (no big deal, i've reactivated several times with no issues, on windows vista ultimate x64, I'm always upgrading)

Andrew,

Not eveyone lives in the US or Eur. Toll free number is BS. MS sells their software all over the world yet penalize you when it does not work properly and asks for activation wrongly forcing you to make international calls to resolve...Its not free. What about the inconveince to to that.

Ak

lol, WAT?

"Maybe someday, smart users will stop buying software products that have a built-in remote off switch."

smart users never bought anything from microsoft they pirated it

since the activation asks you to select your country, and gives you a toll free number, and a national number for that country.

Which country is asked to phone an international number?
When is the internet activation down for 3 days?
If microsoft asks anyone to phone an international number that is wrong and needs fixing, but please provide details

Are you saying they removed the blindfolds and earplugs from upper management? And then trained themselves to talk out of their mouth, instead of the other end?

http://www.ubuntu.com

"There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence."

- Jeremy S. Anderson

DRM has only every stopped dumb pirates, of which there are very few. Everyone else that doesn't want to deal with the nonsense can get a hold of keygens in seconds (from smarter pirates) and be on their merry way. I would like to see the statistics on how many copies Microsoft 'thinks' they are preventing from being illegally used by this DRM, and compare that to the number of copies that aren't being bought due to customers' frustration with the DRM... and how many copies Microsoft has to sell for pennies on the dollar in China to make any money at all in that market.
I've said time and time again: the only way to reduce piracy is to bow to the the market forces it indicates and LOWER THE PRICES. It seems to work in China to a certain degree: sell the real product at close to the price point of the street copy, and people will opt to buy the real one. It also works fairly well in the US, where university students can get Microsoft OSs for a whole 5 quid - you can guarantee that the university high-speed internet network circulates cracked copies of just about everything else. Why not share this concept with the rest of the public? Why not accept the fact that your product is so overpriced that people (LOTS of people) are willing to risk frying their computer, getting fined, or even going to jail rather than have to pay for your product?

Since it'll get broken quickly they should call it Temporary Windows Activation Technology (TWAT).

Then those people or Subscribers (TWATS) who still use TWAT will know where they stand

"But would you bet your mission-critical server application on this "technology"?.

Considering that Linux runs about 90% of the top500 supercomputers, I have a feeling that perhaps not so much "mission-critical" is based on Windows.
Of course there are banks, for instance, running Windows (I suppose) but on the other hand they do not seem to care much about "mission-critical".

Keep in mind that Microsoft wants this on everyone's computer. It allows them to spy on you, like walmart might by putting a hidden camera in your home. Your computer is an extension of your home incase you didn't understand that already.

They implemented it in Asia. Then brought it to the EU and the US claiming that we should accept it because they accepted it in Asia.

Then they rolled it out as a critical update. This pissed a lot of people off as it wasn't critical in any way. It didn't provide any genuine advantage.

Then, after a while they were sued by a few US States based on the fact that it installed and spied on the users without letting them know in advance.

They took it down for a short while and when it came back it was set to install as a critical update except you were prompted with a message indicating they would be installing it with some crap info about a genuine advantage. if you chose to not accept the install it still collected the information and sent it back to Microsoft anyway.

This too soon dropped from the critical updates and it was brought back and dropped many times, until what we have today where it randomly appears to choose who it is going to prompt to install it.

What happened in the community was that they found a way to remove it and created tools to do that. One of which was the removewga.exe program. If you were careful enough you could see that Microsoft was trying to get it installed on your computer. If you went into the custom install for the security updates you could uncheck the box indicating you didn't want it installed. Then you could check the box that said that you didn't want to be prompted again.

The problem was that even though you told them you didn't want to see it again they'd change the program a little and you'd get prompted again. Sooner or later people would be tired of being prompted and let it go.

What they are doing now with this change is simply changing it so that more users are prompted again to install it, only hoping it will get past their watchful eyes with a new moniker.

Don't be fooled. Having a program monitoring you is just like having Walmart come to your home some Sunday morning asking to inspect your belongings to ensure you have nothing that wasn't stolen. Just because Microsoft does this with a hidden camera (so to speak) it is no different.

This is nothing more than a violation of your privacy and a pretty severe one at that.

This article is complete and total FUD. It's lies and libel, and Charlie really needs to stop it.

WGA only runs once on your computer (i.e., it doesn't run as a background process later) to check and make sure that your copy of Windows isn't pirated. It has nothing to do with "other" software on your computer, and is not "malware" in any way, shape, or form, according to any definition -- except Charlie's perhaps... more on that later.

WGA (or WAT now I guess) after its initial check to make sure you have a legal version of Windows, will only run when called upon. This is usually when you want to download software from Microsoft's website (for free) such as Virtual PC, DirectX runtimes, or Windows updates. Before you download these softwares, you must let the WGA run to validate to the website that you have genuine Microsoft software. Before you do this, you have to click on a button that says "Validate" It tells you that you're about to run WGA. It is in no way malware.

The benefits are obvious: by installing WGA, you get to download Microsfot software from their website for free. How isn't that an "advantage" to a user? I'm an IT professional, and I've installed WGA on scores of computers... and it has absolutely NO negative effects -- and there have been some times where I've needed to go to the MS site to download something or another... in short, this article is a bunch of lies and libels.

Now, by Charlie's definition of malware, let's take a look at what we get by coming to this site and reading Charlie's articles. We have: "news blogger/journalist writes to public to expose truth for public betterment" and instead get "news journalist who spreads deliberate lies in order to attract more traffic and promote his biased, ridiculous agenda". As real as Charlie is to any person reading on this site, he's malware. As a real person, Charlie is just, well, "malo".

Charlie should just quit. I'm not saying this from just this article -- I've been following this site for quite some time (ever since it tried to attract attention to itself by libelously trying to tear NVIDIA down. I’ve never commented on any article here before, but, I figured now was the time for another voice to call Charlie out.

"Maybe someday, smart users will stop buying software products that have a built-in remote off switch"

Maybe Microsoft wouldn't need to a built in remote off switch if people did actually BUY the software instead of pirate it!

http://blogs.msdn.com/wga/archive/2008/08/26/update-to-wga-notifications-for-windows-xp-professional.aspx
"Our research has clearly shown that customers value the ability of Windows to alert them when they may have software that is not genuine... The other reason is that hundreds of millions of installs of WGA Notifications have already taken place, and most customers are already aware of what the program is and just want the fastest and most seamless way to install and stay up-to-date."

or

"When we went out and talked to customers, we found that activation was the concept that resonated most strongly with them".

Those are examples of clear, logical wording as opposed to Charlie's FUD, I suppose?

You are a perfect example of the harm caused by WGA (TWAT). That is, presuming you were a reasonably intelligent person at one time.

You're trying to say that those quotes you provided are FUD?

Well sorry, but, besides the fact that they aren't FUD (You assume that his research is false? How about some evidence to back up your claim)... your quotes really don't have any relevance.

The facts I pointed out in my original post still stand. The blog you pointed to only reinforces them. Perhaps you need a brain transplant.

IT professional hahahahaha! What a joke.

IT professionals don't do Windows :-)

Maybe the point was that it does not stop piracy.
And, to the pirate, WGA is never an issue. To a normal user, it can be problematic.
I've seen our IT guys have to call microsoft numerous times after rebuilding a server.

Is the activation process explained in the EULA outside the box? I don't know. But if not, I'd call it malware. Software that I do not want on my PC but cannot remove. I'm forced to download updates to it as well?

Does WAT cover MS Office activation? If so, that constitutes 'other software'.

Maybe don't read the guy's articles if you don't like them..? Or just keep trolling. Either way.

It says at the top that it's a RANT.

Some people pay for bandwidth. Does windows firewall ever ask about allowing WGA/WAT to connect?

re: Jonathan Hanson

You should Google Vista secret encrypted packets microsoft

Vista sends encrypted packets to IP blocks registered to Microsoft while it runs. It hides these packets on it's own system and the other Microsoft systems tested in the TCP/IP stack code but they show up with hardware loggers, Linux, BSD and AmigaOS based loggers.

@Jonathan Hanson,

The WGA program runs all the time.

There's the activation process where you simply just check to see if you have a valid product key. That's the way it was at the start. It is still there, and in fact, any time you go get updates from Microsoft's site you have to prove you are a legit user. That's different than the WGA/WGN implemented in a less than virtuous way.

Years LATER, Microsoft began to implement a WGA series of files that were downloaded and installed on your computer, which every time you rebooted it would contact Microsoft's computers. This began in Asia and later Microsoft said that since the Asian countries had accepted it those of us in the US and EU should.

Further, it turns out that the WGA/WGN program was installed without the knowledge of the consumer/end-user. What this means is that they installed it in a stealth way as part of the critical updates. The end result was a spyware program installed without the consumer's knowledge.

As a result the State of Washington, the States of Texas and I believe California sued Microsoft using their anti-spyware laws.

Microsoft then reacted indicating that they'd change it so that the consumer knows it was being installed. What they did, was change it so that the software would prompt the user to allow the install. They also gave the consumer a method to turn off the spyware. Programs such as removeWGA.exe were introduced to assist. Later that program was flagged as malware by the likes of Grisoft's AVG antivirus. It has been fixed and is no longer considered to be a malware product.

When the consumer chose to deny Microsoft the opportunity to install the software the procedure then collected the information anyway and sent it back to Microsoft.

Initially the WGA/WGN programs were triggered every time you rebooted your computer. That meant that potentially every day some of your information was sent to their servers.

Later Microsoft changed this to a less frequent interval. Nonetheless the process occurs at regular intervals.

On top of that the program will constantly nag you if it believes you have an invalid product key, even if your product key is valid.

In Vista Microsoft upped the ante and made the procedure for testing for valid keys more stringent and as a result there was an incident or two where most legitimate users who hit their servers were unable to use their computer. Microsoft then decided that in this Vista implementation that they needed to eliminate the feature that actually disabled the computers if their servers felt the software was pirated.

You need to stop attacking people dude without having accurate information. You attach Charlie without having your facts and those you do have are either inaccurate or totally wrong.

aGENT dRASHEK OR bOT dRASHEK iS CHARACTERIZED hERE:

User Agent Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.1; Trident/4.0; SLCC2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0)
Accept image/jpeg, application/x-ms-application, image/gif, application/xaml+xml, image/pjpeg, application/x-ms-xbap, application/x-shockwave-flash, */*
Language en-US
Encoding gzip, deflate
Charset
Window Size 839x664 pixels
Screen Resolution 853x683 pixels
Color Depth 32 bit
JavaScript 1.3
Java Support Yes
Cookie Support Yes
User Agent Plugins
SVG Viewer No
Shockwave Director No
Shockwave Flash Yes
RealPlayer No
QuickTime No
Windows Media Player Yes
Acrobat Reader No

thats what 6.1.7100 can do to you, too. BOTS Unite. drashek

AMEN, Great info Jblaich thanks,

Charlie Rocks Friction !

As if Dimdows isn’t aggravating enough already...

I'm generally fairly pro-Microsoft, but even I think the whole WGA/WAT concept is wrong.

Anyone who seriously pirates software will have a crack for it in a matter of minutes; it's only legitimate users that are likely to get hurt by the process IMO.

Of course Microsoft aren't the only guilty party here; looks pointedly at Adobe.

Doesn't matter who's implementing it really, it's still wrong.

All it achieves is driving people towards the alternatives, whether they're Apple or F/OSS.

In the 1st quote MS claims implementing WGA was the result of customer demand. That was just the 1st quote I found in a google search. I remember well the claim that customer demand has driven WGA because it has been made so frequently and is so laughable. That is FUD, perhaps even a classic example of that liars art.

Yes MS probably has a survey or 2 with questions like "Would you prefer MS send an inspector to give you an anal probe and check your computer for illegal software or should we just check your software whenever your computer is online?", that show overwhelming demand for WGA.

The 2nd quote "resonated most strongly with them", is a classic example of marketing speak that actually says nothing. It probably means they hated it but MS is spinning it otherwise.

Your points have been debunked by others so stand by them if you wish. I stand by my claim that you are an example of the harm caused by WGA (TWAT). You can no longer think straight and marketing speak makes sense to you.

Charlie, oh Charile. :)

Apparently you've never invented a piece of software that everyone wants to pirate. You've never had to do everything you can do to keep people from cheating you out of money for every copy stolen. You've never had to hire lawyers, detectives, law enforcement, or the SBI/FBI, or international governments to crack down on pirates. You don't know what it's like because you're a journalist and you'll never fully understand what it's like for everyone to be contstantly stealing from you.

Microsoft has every right to include activation technology in its software just as any other company trying to make a buck would. WGA/WAT whatever. If every user is legally using Windows every vendor selling legit copies, then WGA/WAT wouldn't have a purpose and wouldn't exist. No one lives in that utopic world. The tech is unintrusive as long as you're using Windows as it was intended to; as you, the user, agreed to when you clicked on "I Accept" upon first boot of your PC. Every user who is properly using Windows as intended will *never* have a problem. The only people I know who have had issues were getting illegal copies or purchased a PC from a vendor who was selling pirate copies (even complete with fake stickers).

Having said that, I do believe that even if piracy was < 1%, the price of Windows wouldn't change any. Why lower the price when you're making more money without raising prices? :)

Similarly, Office has had an activation program since 2002, and in that time the price hasn't been lowered, however the licensing terms did-- so if you by Office 2007/2003 Standard, you could install it on 3 PCs in your home. (This isn't true for OEM/Student/Enterprise licensing; only for RETAIL boxes only).

If I come across as harsh- perhaps perspective puts it in place. It costs a lot to defend your product, especially when everyone wants it for free / feels *entitlement* to it.

Travis

Yeah, I'd move to the free OS's as soon as they could load every game I bring home from Best Buy - not just pong and the nth iteration of Tetris. I'd like them as well as do all the cool video editing and music creation stuff Windows can. Truth is, free OS's are still the equivalent of watching Grandmas black and white TV - even down to the Aesthetics. True, the Pro's love them, but until they are more usable to the masses, they will stay with the server and code-jockey crowd - and the poor saps who just want to surf the web and email or bang away on a notepad equivalent. Until that day free OS's give me WAT I ask for, I'm stuck with a loss of four hundred dollars (that's like 800 pounds yes?) for two OEM copies of Vista, that's WAT. Sigh....

It seems these days that the only way to stop being treated like a pirate is to become one.

...or just use Linux.

Why do game dev's only support Windows ?

I agree TOTALLY with john, IF Linux could run ALL new 3D pc games I bought off the shelf ... I would go Linux. But the only way i see that happening is if Linux became 80% plus of the PC users .Then PC games and hardware would have to cater to the OS the majority of users use .

So it's a catch 22 = No major game support for linux till the majority of gamers use linux & The majority of gamers will not use linux till it supports all the major 3D games !

..and no I don't want to mess with wine for the two or 3 modern 3d games that might run on it. I want massive multiplayer online gaming ! All Games ,When Linux can provide that ,my dozen close friends and I that mainly only use a pc for gaming would switch to Linux in a minute !

@Travis:

You are correct that MS can pretty much charge whatever it likes. Why is that? Because they have a monopoly position in the market and use that position aggressively to exclude competitors. Many, many people install Windows not because they like it, but because they have to use it. The fact that you have to get a root canal is no evidence that you LIKE root canals.

Whenever MS don't have a monopoly position on a product, they either buy up their competitors (with their monopolistic dollars), or give their product away to deny sales to their competitors.

Get real, almost $400 dollars for an operating system is rape, sweet and simple. But if you're a gamer, many businesses, or some individual who has a substantial investments in Win software, you're stuck running Windows natively or in a VM. Either way, MS get their blood money.

Another thread disolves into "My Linux PC runs appZ usin Wine so there" territory. Put it to bed. Game devs will start coding for Linux when a) The user base is big enough. b)The card makers provide proper dirivers so you can run stuff in DirectX mode (LMAO) and not OpenGL. c) The GNU lobbyists get their own way and all the software released is open source OR give in and make Linux a commericial piece of software. d) Satan takes up snowboarding in Hell.

Trojan said (and note that I've corrected his English)
"Another thread dissolves into "My Linux PC runs apps using Wine so there" territory. Put it to bed. Game devs will start coding for Linux when
a) The user base is big enough.
b)The card makers provide proper drivers so you can run stuff in DirectX mode (LMAO) and not OpenGL.
c) The GNU lobbyists get their own way and all the software released is open source OR give in and make Linux a commercial piece of software.
d) Satan takes up snowboarding in Hell."

After I stopped laughing, I thought I should answer him/her/it

a) The worldwide Linux user base is above 10%, and growing quickly. That's a huge market.
b) No need. Good cards have OpenGL support. Professional cards always do, because high level CAD/Video programs use OpenGL.
c) The GPL is heavily dependent upon copyright law. While the FSF may wish that all software would become GPL, they are not going to force it. Nor would taking GPL source code proprietary be legally possible.
d) Read "Dante's Inferno", the Ninth Circle of Hell is frozen. Of course one wonders how Satan would be able to buy a snowboard there. No, wait. The inventor of the snowboard is in hell you say...

I got really curious about the games argument a couple of months ago, and since I've been off work for medical reasons, and had some free time, I started looking into what sort of games are available for Linux. I got a huge surprise. There are more native Linux games available, most of which are BSD or GPL licensed, than there are Windows games, and there are more Linux native games in development than there are Windows games. Production values on many of these games are very good, many of them look just as good, and are just as much fun as the Windows games.

So why does everyone scream about Linux game support? Because they don't know what's available. It's scattered here and there, all over the net, and you can't play it, if you don't know it's there.

Oh, and as to Charlie's original article? I've seen WGA/WAT problems as well. The impression I get based on the errors I've seen, is that Microsoft got some summer intern to write the code, and that's why it's such a kludge.

WGA/WAT brings no value to the consumer. Nor does DRM. Any company which produces a product, large parts of which are of no value to the end user, is committing seppuku slowly. You'd almost think that Bill Gates wants everyone to buy an Apple.

Think of it as Evolution in Action.

LOL.

What side of the bed did that guy get out of this morning?

Give it a rest, so bored of listening to this tosh.