Microsoft Swears It's Not Coming For Your Data With Scan For Old Office Versions (theregister.com) 94
Microsoft wants everyone to know that it isn't looking to invade their privacy while looking through their Windows PCs to find out-of-date versions of Office software. From a report: In its KB5021751 update last month, Microsoft included a plan to scan Windows systems to smoke out those Office versions that are no longer supported or nearing the end of support. Those include Office 2007 (which saw support end in 2017) and Office 2010 (in 2020) and the 2013 build (this coming April). The company stressed that it would run only one time and would not install anything on the user's Windows system, adding that the file for the update is scanned to ensure it's not infected by malware and is stored on highly secure servers to prevent unauthorized changes to it.
The update caused some discussion among users, at least enough to convince Microsoft to make another pitch that it is respecting user privacy and won't access private data despite scanning their systems. The update collects diagnostic and performance data so that it can determine the use of various versions of Office and how to best support and service them, the software maker wrote in an expanded note this week. The update will silently run once to collect the data and no files are left on the user's systems once the scan is completed.
The update caused some discussion among users, at least enough to convince Microsoft to make another pitch that it is respecting user privacy and won't access private data despite scanning their systems. The update collects diagnostic and performance data so that it can determine the use of various versions of Office and how to best support and service them, the software maker wrote in an expanded note this week. The update will silently run once to collect the data and no files are left on the user's systems once the scan is completed.
Obviously (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Obviously (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
From my cold, dead hands!
Seriously, that interface is heaps better than the atrocity that MS cooked up.
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly... give me keyboard shortcuts for Headings 1 through 5, numbered lists, bullet points and basic bold/italic/underline formatting and I'm pretty much done. If I can paste images inline as text without the document imploding after 100 pages I'm happy.
Fuck all the other cruft - UI my ass.
That said, my LibreOffice experience has not been one of stability... still actively trying to figure out why (now running with hardware acceleration disabled, let's see if that does the trick)...
You Data No (Score:2)
They are coming for your checkbook, they will use your data to get there!!
Re: (Score:2)
The update will silently run once to collect the data and no files are left on the user's systems once the scan is completed.
Interestingly, that's exactly the same behavior exhibited by some viruses: after scanning your system, they ensure no files are left.
Re: (Score:2)
Data no, license yes (Score:5, Informative)
Re: Data no, license yes (Score:3)
They are very thirsty for that, yes.
SaaS is bullshit though. The sooner office360 dies, the better off the world is.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
LOL. I use Office 2003 and the reasons are simple. It works, it does exactly what I need and it is the last version of Office that doesn't suck donkey shit. Microsoft (and everyone else) can fuck off with their SaaS bullshit.
At this point, you're better off using the latest version of LibreOffice. Probably more compatible with current MS Office.
Re: (Score:2)
At this point, you're better off using the latest version of LibreOffice. Probably more compatible with current MS Office.
LibreOffice. You get what you paid for.
Re: Data no, license yes (Score:5, Insightful)
LibreOffice. You get what you paid for.
I would say you get a LOT more than you pay for with LibreOffice.
Re: Data no, license yes (Score:4, Informative)
In addition, you get to keep your data usable too. I have versions of word documents from my student days that current ms office doesn't understand. At least with LO and open formats there's compatibility.
MS Office doesn't really care about its userbase or interoperability, sometimes even between its own versions.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Data no, license yes (Score:2)
I think it is ironic though. Word processing is a quaint terms for what came out of word perfect and desktop publishing. Suddenly you could buy a power tool that put you on a new level. Like, a website, but printed on paper. So that is what replaced a clerk doing typing or shorthand and working on paper documents. What we wanted was a toothbrush and a letter opener, and what we got was a combination chainsaw front end loader. So now we reached a new level of
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
LibreOffice works fine for me. Its graphing abilities are not as good as Excel, but otherwise I have no complaints. My files are usable on the Linux box, the Windows boot camp setup, the i5 Mac mini and the M1 laptop.
I do have Office 98 on a Mac G3, I wonder if they would be looking for that?
Re: (Score:2)
At this point, you're better off using the latest version of LibreOffice. Probably more compatible with current MS Office.
LibreOffice. You get what you paid for.
Spoken like a true skeptic. Keep on denying it's value until the day you die. Such a noble hill to die on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I get a working office suite - that can recover MS Office files MS Office can't ...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Did I miss a memo? Last I heard Microsoft's "open" document formats were riddled with binary blobs documented only as, essentially, "the way Office does it" (as in literally no further description). Not to mention even just the documented portions are incredibly convoluted (I want to say the OOXML standard is 50-100x as long as for ODF?), and still inaccurate enough that MS Office has *never* supported standard OOXML files.
The format was created for one purpose only - to trick governments that were moving
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I mean from what I've seen Microsoft isn't even compatible with itself. I was working collaboratively with a colleague on a document once through Office 365, and the layout and word spacing on his computer were different than mine, even though we were editing the *EXACT SAME DOCUMENT*. Page break locations, page count, etc were all different. How does that even happen?
Re: (Score:2)
They'd better watch out. A lot of people seem to think that Google Docs and pals are good enough to actually use for things that matter. It's not, but 'convenient and free' is pretty compelling.
Speaking of alternatives. Is anyone using Libre Office? How is it these days? I haven't tried it since I was finally forced to move from Office XP to Office 2007, but it might be time to give it another go.
Re: (Score:2)
Libre Office is all I use these days. Well, I DO use Microsoft Office at work. I find Libre Office more intuitive and it does everything I need and more (though all I use is Writer and Calc).
Re: (Score:2)
That's good to know. How's the compatibility as far as preserving the page layout moving documents between Writer and Word? I had some problems years ago with tables which kept me from switching over.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. Built-in regular-expressions for search and replace is quite handy. As is getting a list of what was affected by a "Replace all"
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Data no, license yes (Score:5, Funny)
In our company it's known as Office 363. Because 2 days a year it will just not work for whatever effin' reason.
Though this year might be the year of Office 350. Because we already had the 2 average fuck up days and we barely scratched February.
Corporate scorecards (Score:5, Insightful)
My guess is they want to make one of those PHB reports called "Scorecards" where they put a little chart up showing the installs not yet converted and then some manager bothers his reports to keep weekly updates to the "score card" showing that the manager is properly converting all these poor saps office installs to run the latest and greatest.
This is what this is for.
Re: (Score:1)
My Computer My Data (Score:5, Insightful)
It is none of their business what software people have installed. If they want to know ASK and accept the answer even if it is "F... right off". It isn't Microsofts computer.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Exactly. But not doubt they are working hard with legislatures they own to change the rules, so that THEY own your computer. I'm not a fan of this line, but it seems appropriate: "Over my dead body!"
They don't own mine. I don't have a Windows machine.
Re:My Computer My Data (Score:4, Insightful)
The license agreement you accept when you install windows on your system allows them to do this. Microsoft considers your computer a window that it can use to peer into your life, maybe regulate it a bit for you, and of course advertise at you.
If you don't like that arrangement, you don't have to accept it. Use Linux instead. [ubuntu.com] Problem solved.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is none of their business what software people have installed. If they want to know ASK and accept the answer even if it is "F... right off". It isn't Microsofts computer.
But the OS is THEIR software -- they LET you use it.
Re: (Score:1)
It is none of their business what software people have installed. If they want to know ASK and accept the answer even if it is "F... right off". It isn't Microsofts computer.
But the OS is THEIR software -- they LET you use it.
Nope. Those who use it (legally) have paid for the right to use it. Just like a book or movie that you buy a copy of. Doesn't apply to me.
Re: (Score:3)
Except it's not "Just like a book." You did not "buy a copy of" Windows. You bought a license to use Windows, and that license comes with all kinds of restrictions on you and permissions for them that an ordinary copy of a book does not come with.
Maybe that isn't how things should be, but that is how things are.
Re: (Score:1)
Each time I bought Windows I received a receipt for one copy of Windows NOT for a license. I doubt very much the computer stores I bought it from had a legally bestowed right to sell licenses for Windows from Microsoft.
Re: (Score:2)
You sound dangerously ignorant of how this works. This line of reasoning you just used would not hold up in any court of law were you to violate the license, or attempt to sue Microsoft for doing what the license allows.
The stores were authorized to sell you licenses to windows. The boxed copy of windows on a DVD came with a license that you had to agree to before you could run it. If you found some technical way to bypass that license-agreement step, you are still bound by it. If you bought a computer
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It is none of their business what software people have installed. If they want to know ASK and accept the answer even if it is "F... right off". It isn't Microsofts computer.
But the OS is THEIR software -- they LET you use it.
Nope. Those who use it (legally) have paid for the right to use it. Just like a book or movie that you buy a copy of. Doesn't apply to me.
You need to learn one day the difference between "what the world is like" and "what I think it *should* be like". Preferably before you get into trouble. Or get someone else into trouble by offering them dubious legal advice.
Re: (Score:1)
You need to learn one day the difference between "what the world is like" and "what I think it *should* be like". Preferably before you get into trouble. Or get someone else into trouble by offering them dubious legal advice.
Did you read the comment I was responding to where the poster said "But the OS is THEIR software -- they LET you use it.". That right to use it was PAID for it wasn't a "Let you". situation. I might LET YOU take a short cut across my property but if you have a legal right of way I don't have a choice.
There is a legal precedent with a claim of a sold license that if there is no end date or requirement to return it at that time that it is a sale not a license.
Re: (Score:2)
This is the cost of free updates for a decade (or more).Your computer does not have to ask Microsoft for updates. Microsoft did not reach out to your computer, your computer asked for updates and Microsoft obliged. Microsoft's definition of 'updates' is different than yours, something to keep in mind when you consider using Windows Update.
Software update handling all code from same vendor (Score:2)
It is none of their business what software people have installed.
When the operating system vendor also publishes optional applications and utilities, it is entirely reasonable for a system update to check for anything the vendor offers.
Cybercrime (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't own an affected system but it would be great if people who use Microsoft software and are therefore victims of this crime would make a class action.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I guess in a way you can trust them more. You never know when Microsoft is going to abuse you. Apple, in contrast, is completely open about their abuse. You never have to wonder.
Re: (Score:2)
Hope someone files a class action lawsuit.
I'd rather see them access a few systems with classified/protected information and have their security clearances yanked.
Re: (Score:2)
You have to prove damages.... which would be what exactly?
Re: (Score:2)
That's unauthorized access to a protected system. A couple hundred million instances ot it.
I suspect that the operating system license agreement authorizes it. Not defending the action, but I doubt it's legally "unauthorized access".
Re:Cybercrime (Score:4, Informative)
"That's unauthorized access to a protected system."
Nope, 'cause when you installed Office, you agree to let them do this. They're authorized.
Re: (Score:2)
Not if the License agreement you clicked on allows it -- that makes it authorized.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> unauthorized access
Of course it's authorized. Didn't you read the EULA?
Where is this in the EULA? (Score:2)
Can users decline the scan, and get the output? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The only possible way this kind of intrusive scan could be almost acceptable, would be to have it opt-in, and to make sure the users gets a full, and complete output from the software. Even then it's a dicey move, and one that should make everyone wise up that Microsoft does not, even by accident, care about your privacy.
I would go one step further. (1) scan is opt-in. (2) results of scan are presented to user. (3) user can choose to send the result to Microsoft. Default is not to send.
Re: (Score:2)
Only once. (Score:2)
Only once for each sunset event. At lest this time they are scanning for three versions, one an oncoming sunset. Not like they wouldn't re-scan next time, just in case they missed one, right?
Yeah, this is part of the sale/marketing effort, predictable but not very respectful. I'm marginally offended.
always better to ask for forgiveness (Score:2)
notice that there is no discussion of them NOT doing this.
that's a foregone conclusion, there just trotting out PR to make you think they won't do anything else.
corporations learned many years ago that it's better to ask for forgiveness than ask for permission.
however, now they know they don't even need to ask for forgiveness.
more like "it's better to do what ever the fuck you want because nothing will happen anyway".
Why does anyone need MS office when you have Libre (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Libra Office is fine if you are not collaborating (Score:2)
However if I am collaborating with others these little discrepancies can be quite annoying. A team that is collaborating, ie anyone may edit, may rightfully have to standardize on something.
Been there done that. For internal stuff, fine. For printing the word doc from the lawyer for my own use, fine. For collaboration where I have to make edits and sha
Re: (Score:2)
Different versions of Office will also do this ... ...
They will also fail to take into consideration internationalization and mis-format due to it
Collaborative editing, is best done of the same version of the same software - and it's cheaper if they all use a free suite ...
Re: (Score:2)
Different versions of Office will also do this ...
But an upgrade can fix that. Unlike in the Libre/MS mixed environment.
Collaborative editing, is best done of the same version of the same software - and it's cheaper if they all use a free suite ...
The outliers don't generally get to select the software to standardize on.
Guilty conscious (Score:1)
LibreOffice 7.5 is Out! Free as in Kittens! (Score:2)
Federal Trade Commision Sleeps, Again (Score:2)
No worries here (Score:2)
"Those include Office 2007 (which saw support end in 2017) and Office 2010 (in 2020) and the 2013 build (this coming April)."
I'm all good, I'm still running Office 2003
Re: (Score:2)
"Those include Office 2007 (which saw support end in 2017) and Office 2010 (in 2020) and the 2013 build (this coming April)."
I'm all good, I'm still running Office 2003
Child. Somewhere around here I have an office 97 disk. I wonder how well it runs in Wine.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably better than on a contemporary Windows.
Not a problem (Score:3)
Not a problem for me. I don't download and install kb's, mainly because I have stayed with win 7. F them.
Re: Not a problem (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
That won't find embeded office engine components in other applications - which is probably what they're really trying to find out. Like access engine components I have in an application i wrote - they're office 2010 components. (And yes, they are freely redistributable as embedded components).
Registry and start links won't tell you shit about these, and there is a /huge/ base of these types of components out there in lots and lots of software.
That's what they want to know.
Re: (Score:2)
XP and XP64 here for everyday, and funny thing, due to a massive fuckup by LibreOffice, I'm about to dredge up one of the old MSO versions to install... out of reach of their grubby hands.
Microsoft would NEVER lie about this (Score:3)
Just a check... (Score:2)
This is just a check, sir. You don't have to worry. Now please lean forward... (checking...) done! See? It was nothing, eh? Next please!
liars! They can see installs in the registry (Score:5, Interesting)
At best (Score:2)
Microsoft has already said it won't support them (EoL date), so this is nonsensical: It would be nice if they issued a security patch for 15 year-old software but there's no profit in that. At best, it's planning to nag the user to buy ^H^H^H choose a current version of MS Office.
Jokeâ(TM)s on them! (Score:2)
Iâ(TM)ve been using a fully patched version of Office 2003 on Windows 10 for years, and it works fine for what I use it for. If they start giving me crap over that, Iâ(TM)ll have to look into reverting to an older version.
No one who uses Chrome can complain (Score:2)
or sue about Microsoft scanning their PC when Google's browser regularly does the same thing.
Seriously.
I'm forced to use the damn thing for select important websites, and the first thing I do then is open the task manager to kill the fricking "Software Reporting Tool".
Google scum.
Whole system why? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
That won't find embeded office engine components in other applications - which is probably what they're really trying to find out. Like access engine components I have in an application i wrote - they're office 2010 components. (And yes, they are freely redistributable as embedded components).
Registry and start links won't tell you shit about these, and there is a /huge/ base of these types of components out there in lots and lots of software.
IT guys will love it!! (Score:1)