Anti-Piracy Windows 7 Update Phones Home Quarterly 819
Lauren Weinstein sends in news of a major and disturbing Microsoft anti-piracy initiative called Windows Activation Technologies, or WAT. Here is Microsoft's blog post giving their perspective on what WAT is for. From Lauren's blog: "The release of Windows 7 'Update for Microsoft Windows (KB71033)' will change the current activation and anti-piracy behavior of Windows 7 by triggering automatic 'phone home' operations over the Internet to Microsoft servers, typically for now at intervals of around 90 days. ... These automatic queries will repeatedly — apparently for as long as Windows is installed — validate your Windows 7 system against Microsoft's latest database of pirated system signatures (currently including more than 70 activation exploits known to Microsoft). If your system matches — again even if up to that time (which could be months or even years since you obtained the system) it had been declared to be genuine — then your system will be 'downgraded' to 'non-genuine' status until you take steps to obtain what Microsoft considers to be an authentic, validated, Windows 7 license. ... KB971033... is scheduled to deploy to the manual downloading 'Genuine Microsoft Software' site on February 16, and start pushing out automatically through the Windows Update environment on February 23. ... [F]or Microsoft to assert that they have the right to treat ordinary PC-using consumers in this manner — declaring their systems to be non-genuine and downgrading them at any time — is rather staggering." Update: 02/12 02:08 GMT by KD : Corrected the Microsoft Knowledge Base number to include a leading 9 that had been omitted in the pre-announcement, per L. Weinstein.
The importance of freedom (Score:2, Informative)
I know that there is some Windows-only software that people need to use, but if you don't need such software, it's worth the effort to switch to Free Software. This issue highlights yet another reason why such a move may be important.
Re:False Positives? (Score:5, Informative)
Nearly all the Windows piracy out there either uses corporate versions (hence the key is used thousands of times already) or they involve hacks that disable/neuter/replace the WGA components. As a general rule, they don't involve using the individual license keys that you get when you buy a retail or system builder version of Windows.
News flash (Score:5, Informative)
If you buy a computer with windows on it you own the hardware. You never own the software. You license it on the condition that you agree to the EULA. Microsoft's EULA states that you give up all rights, they are not accountable for anything.
Microsoft users have been and will always be slaves to the evil empire.
Re:Son of WGA (Score:5, Informative)
Not to mention that it's trivial to get your machine re-authorized over the phone if you actually did buy your copy of the OS and end up being a false positive.
Hell, Microsoft reauthorized my OEM copy of Vista Home Premium twice when I moved the install to a new system, in spite of the license saying they don't allow that. Awfully kind of them, I thought.
WAT is Voluntary and Doesn't Impact OS Usage (Score:5, Informative)
//Microsoft Employee here//
If you read the blog post it has some valid points about how it works:
1. Voluntary patch :)
2. When non-genuine copies deteced, OS functionality is NOT reduced
3. Yes, Microsoft does decided to notify/annoy you that you're not using genuine software which is a good thing because most people don't know they are.
4. The goal is reduce the number of Windows installations using pirated copies many of which include malicious code.
5. No personally identifiable information is transmitted. Details on this can be found in ANY of our privacy policies which are standard across all Microsoft products.
6. It does not apply to any enterprise installations where Windows Server Update Services (WSUS) is used. @FranTaylor, lots of people use Windows on a server...what planet are you one?
The slashdot headline is a little too Orwellian considering the body of the blog post. Looking forward to all the responses...I think.
Re:Riiiiight! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Giving up on the server market, eh? (Score:2, Informative)
Someone who needs application software for which there is no reasonable Linux/Unix equivalent. Such software includes mid-range accounting systems and point of sale systems.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Windows isn't going away until Sage come out with a Linux version
Re:Well that pretty much settles it for me. (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah, it only phones home on install. Not every 90 days.
Re:False Positives? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Just going to annoy legit customers (Score:5, Informative)
I have a machine, purchased by my employer that has to be validated against the key server at the office.
The machine however is at my house. The only way to make it validate is to ensure that I'm connected to the VPN when it attempts to find its key.
You shouldn't be using a KMS-licensed computer away from the KMS server for such a long time. The whole point of KMS is to reduce licensing headaches by having clients automatically aquire a volume license and activate themselves, all without going over the Internet. Removing such a machine from the local network completely invalidates this.
If you have a computer at home, it should be converted to a MAK license so that it doesn't need to communicate with the KMS server. Anyone mildly familiar with Windows 7 volume licensing should know this. I suggest you (or your system administrator) take a look at the Win7 Volume Activation Deployment Guide [microsoft.com] and the Volume Activation Planning Guide [microsoft.com]. You know, the things you should read before you do a wide-scale deployment of a new system.
I'll probably end up cracking my legit install to stop this stupid behavior.
So instead of connecting to your VPN four times a year, you'll put yourself in a position of almost certainly getting blacklisted? That makes sense.
Re:Really bad strategy (Score:5, Informative)
The false positives will turn into real positives. When a machine gets marked as non-genuine, it stops receiving updates. Which means is WILL get 0wned by the next zero-day attack.
They are basically just manufacturing more spambot machines with this strategy.
Unless they've changed their policy very recently, non-genuine Windows machines will still receive security updates.
Re:Note to self.... (Score:5, Informative)
Get spare box (or VM, or even your own machine if it's beefy enough), install WSUS [microsoft.com] (Supported Operating Systems: Windows 7; Windows Server 2003; Windows Server 2008; Windows Vista; Windows XP Service Pack 3, Windows Server 2008 R2, Windows Small Business Server 2008, Windows Small Business Server 2003), point clients at WSUS either with a GPO or in local policy (gpedit.msc), decline KB71033 (if it even gets pushed through WSUS, which it probably won't; WGA didn't), sit back and relax.
This is also handy for any other "critical" updates that you might want to avoid, or any updates that are incompatible with your system, or may cause errors (Like KB977165 [arstechnica.com]), especially in environments where other people have administrator access to your machine and like to click things without reading them or you're managing several machines (friends, family, housemates, girlfriends, etc).
News flash (Score:3, Informative)
You know that clause in your EULA that states that if they cannot take away a certain right, by law, the rest of the EULA is still binding?
I wonder why they need that clause...
Re:Son of WGA (Score:5, Informative)
Can you give me the name of the tech support people you talked to, so that I can ask for them specifically? Your experience is quite different from mine. I had Windows XP on a Dell system. I had to replace the motherboard, Afterwards, I got messages that the software was no longer valid. I called a Microsoft support number. I think I was talking to someone in India who told me I would have to speak to Dell tech support. I said I thought it was a Microsoft Windows issue, since it wasn't Dell software, but was "Windows Genuine Advantage" from Microsoft telling me the software was invalid. When I kept insisting that I thought it was a Microsoft problem, the Microsoft support person kindly gave me a phone number. I hung up and called the number. It was a nonworking number. I called Microsoft support again. A different person also seemed to want to get me off the phone as quickly as possible - I'm sure that makes their performance metrics look good when they "solve" problems so quickly. I was given another different number to call. I hung up and again found that I had been given a nonworking number. I called back again. I was given yet another number to call, but I was told that, since it was a weekend, I would have to wait until Monday morning to get anyone at that number. I've just ignored the "WIndows Genuine Advantage" message since then, since the system is a game server for friends and family where no one actually sits at the console normally.
That's not the only time when I've replaced hardware that I've encountered problems, especially when I've replaced a motherboard that wasn't the exact same model of motherboard. If you're replacing hardware in others' systems, they don't want to hear that now they've got to buy another copy of windows for several hundred dollars for a system that is several years old. In some cases, you might as well throw the system away, just because a new copy of Windows can cost more than a system is then worth, just because you upgraded or replaced a failed motherboard. Because Microsoft will say that the OEM copy only goes with the exact hardware in the system when it was purchased.
Re:Well that pretty much settles it for me. (Score:3, Informative)
I'm pretty sure WGA was optional at first too.
Re:Son of WGA (Score:4, Informative)
Re:WAT is Voluntary and Doesn't Impact OS Usage (Score:2, Informative)
Had to do work on a client's computer. Has XP and WGA and all that.
1. User got notified every time he logged in that his copy was not genuine.
2. User could not open e-mail attachments in Outlook Express (let's not talk about how horrid this app is....)
3. User's background could not be set to anything other than MS Blue.
So the functionality was reduced here. I can't believe that they'd not do something to slightly annoy you to pay up. The cost to fix? $149, direct to MS via credit card.
WGA and WAT are two different things. The behavior you described was correct. In Windows 7, the background will change and notifications will appear, but applications will still continue to work. We won't be rebooting your machines or anything like that.
Re:News flash (Score:4, Informative)
Re:WAT is Voluntary and Doesn't Impact OS Usage (Score:3, Informative)
Re:False Positives? (Score:4, Informative)
There are two kinds of windows 7 keys KMS and MAK. I have win7 MAK keys available to me that have 5000 allowed activations. As I am not a dishonest person and have no need nor want for windows I do not use them.
The KMS version authenticates with a local server, and that could be faked to avoid this.
Re:It's been phoning home all along. (Score:4, Informative)
You have a corporate license it sounds like... And yes - it does check the license server for a valid license (KMS - Key Management Service). They do have a voluem license called MAK (multiple activation key) for machines that are connected and disconnected from the corporate network constantly that you can use.
I have a regular retail license for Windows 7 and do not have this issue at all.
Re:Well that pretty much settles it for me. (Score:3, Informative)
From Wikipedia:
"WGA also advertises the latest service pack for Windows XP, which requires manual intervention to disable. Previously voluntary, it became mandatory for use of these services in July 2005."
Re:Son of WGA (Score:4, Informative)
That sounds like a once-in-a-blue-moon kind of issue, to be honest. Of the years I've been activating (and transferring) licenses of all sorts in the local PC repair business, I've never once had Microsoft refuse to activate a legit license, regardless of the OEM (I also once screwed up and used a known illegit license just to get Windows installed for the sake of time and forgot to change it afterwards; The guy at the other end actually ended up giving me an activation code for it, too).
Hell, the shop I worked at bought CoA's on the side from a vendor in Ontario. They were usually pulled from VLK systems and so on, and a few of them even had OEM branding. They basically always worked if you told the IVR that you had made an upgrade. :P
Usually, I don't end up having to even talk to a rep over it. If I do, it's mostly "I'm a tech at a PC repair shop, I'm activating this for a customer after a reinstall due to [your choice of: severe malware infection, motherboard failure, hard drive failure, hardware upgrade, etc]. This is the key on the side of the system." - They usually comply.
Re:wow (Score:2, Informative)
I've been reading Slashdot for over 10 years i think. :) The guys at Port 25 probably read slashdot a lot!
Port 25 is the Open-Source Lab at Microsoft
http://port25.technet.com/ [technet.com]
Re:Son of WGA (Score:5, Informative)
Every piece of hardware does not work with windows. There is a huge backlog of hardware that does not have windows 7 drivers and never will. Linux, for the most part, supports far more hardware than windows.
Re:Statecraftsman's free software article (Score:4, Informative)
WINE causes Microsoft to release new versions? lol!
Wait...you're serious, aren't you?
Re:Just going to annoy legit customers (Score:3, Informative)
All I can figure is that you're one of the upper-level MS sales execs astroturfing Slashdot.
Nope. Just a system administrator who is planning on migrating to Win7 this year. A few simple Google queries [google.com] resulted in finding this page [microsoft.com] which is pretty comprehensive and has the essential information needed by any competent sysadmin planning a migration.
Re:Really bad strategy (Score:3, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_day_attack [wikipedia.org]
"Zero-day attacks occur during the vulnerability window that exists in the time between when a vulnerability is first exploited and when software developers start to develop a counter to that threat."
The term "zero-day" has nothing to do with whether the updates are applied to a specific computer, only the time between an attack being found and the developers' releasing an update to fix. So once a patch is released at all, the attack is no longer zero-day.
Re:Son of WGA (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Son of WGA (Score:2, Informative)
This was the same argument with WinXP... and look where we are now? The old stuff will die, the new stuff will have drivers.
Re:Son of WGA (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Statecraftsman's free software article (Score:2, Informative)
Bet you're not a game developer, are you?
You're the one full of shit clinging to decade old quotes. Carmack himself later said DirectX is better nowadays. Maybe the notion of some things getting better and the other things degrading is foreign to you. Anyway, read this and the comments http://braid-game.com/news/?p=364 [braid-game.com]
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/08/11/2135259 [slashdot.org]
http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=243195&Main=45784#Post243195 [opengl.org]
Stop sitting on your couch and spouting off things that game developers should do, they have their own constraints.
Re:WAT is Voluntary and Doesn't Impact OS Usage (Score:2, Informative)
Your statement about what constitutes "genuine" is not factual. 1 in 3 pirated copies of Windows actually have malicious software, malware, spyware, trojans, or other undersirable elements. Yes, I agree, they are not knock-offs because at least part of the code is from Microsoft, but by "genuine," Microsoft means untampered copy.
It is always easy to count the number of potential people inconvenienced by a method like this, but considering the number of people saved from buy dangerous software, the trade-off seems justified. Microsoft firmly believes that those who purchase counterfeit copies of Windows are VICTIMS not criminals. If we actually thought they were criminals, we would be taking grandmas and children to court like the RIAA. Just to show you how much damage can happen from illegal software, read the following article.
http://windowsitpro.com/article/articleid/96647/china-makes-biggest-software-piracy-bust-in-history.html [windowsitpro.com]
As a final point, if you consider how sophisticated the world's botnets, trojans, and online attack vectors are becoming, a significant delivery method for these loads are via pirated software, if you refuse to acknowledge this, you're being ignorant.
Re:Son of WGA (Score:2, Informative)
Linux supports a lot of old hardware, however it supports bugger all new hardware, and really never has and never(at least while the current political wind is blowing among the kernel developers) will.
A lot of the problems you're aluding to aren't actually the problems you think they are.
The sound card problem is really more of an issue with creative labs than anything else. In order to achieve the market position they have, creative labs built quite a number of their own proprietory systems on top of direct sound which was, prior to Windows Vista the audio stack for all windows versions going back quite a number of years. With Windows Vista, Microsoft switched their sound stack from their own proprietory direct sound implementation into one based on OpenAL which is the audio equivilant of OpenGL and as far as I can tell a free and open standard. This was a good thing, a buggy old proprietory standard was replaced with an open one. Unfortunately a lot of creative cards, given that their drivers and software were so tightly integrated with the old sound stack had rather serious problems. Creative refused to update a lot of their drivers for quite some time, presumably believing that they were big enough that Microsoft would cave and put direct sound back on, they didn't. While it's true that the original sound blasters didn't use much of this stuff and work fine on most systems(including linux) you can't really blame Microsoft for not trusting those drivers however.
I'll take your word on the 10/100 cards, I've never seen or heard of it happening. Same with analog game ports, though that might be sound cards again.
The problem with USB scanners is the proprietory TWAIN drivers. Before Microsoft implemented a halfway decent version themselves, companies used to make their own and they'd use direct kernel access and undocumented APIs to make them work, which Microsoft never has and never will support.
Most of the problems you encounter are caused by vendors giving up on a particular piece of hardware and not writing drivers for it.