WGA Notifications Current News Please

[kurttrail]

So you still can't answer then, what a pity.

I have, you are just to lazy to google.

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."

 

[Leythos]

I have, you just can't see it, because you care more about a soul-less
predatory monopoly than real people.


LOL! Few Cases! Hundreds, thousands a month!


Oooh! Didn't see that. Do you have a link to the court case? Or are
you just taking her word for it.

She's posted in the groups and has emailed me at least a dozen times
asking about different things concerning piracy and how to report,
manage, what to do, etc... Look for "Possible Piracy" and contact her
yourself.

 

[kurttrail]

She's posted in the groups and has emailed me at least a dozen times
asking about different things concerning piracy and how to report,
manage, what to do, etc... Look for "Possible Piracy" and contact her
yourself.

LOL! Why? Does her one case negate the hundreds possibly thousands
screwed over by WGA/N each month?

Nope!

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."

 

[Leythos]

LOL! Why? Does her one case negate the hundreds possibly thousands
screwed over by WGA/N each month?

Nope!

No, but you have yet to show me anything that indicates a verifiable
number of "screwed over" Windows users due to WGA/N.

It does indicate that in at least one case, the information was valid,
showing a pirated copy, and that it's working as intended.

I have over 1500 cases showing that it's also not giving false
information on the computers we manage.

While you and I both know that Usenet is a very small place for Windows
users to be represented, based on what I've seen in the Windows groups,
there is not enough verifiable posts to show that WGA/N is really a
significant problem - almost all of it appears to be license violations
or corruptions due to malware.

 

[kurttrail]

No, but you have yet to show me anything that indicates a verifiable
number of "screwed over" Windows users due to WGA/N.

It does indicate that in at least one case, the information was valid,
showing a pirated copy, and that it's working as intended.

I have over 1500 cases showing that it's also not giving false
information on the computers we manage.

While you and I both know that Usenet is a very small place for
Windows users to be represented, based on what I've seen in the
Windows groups, there is not enough verifiable posts to show that
WGA/N is really a significant problem - almost all of it appears to
be license violations or corruptions due to malware.

LOL! It is a significant enough of a problem that MS has had more
versions of WGA/N in the last year than IE has had in this decade!

It is significant enough that MS has created its on debugging tools.

It is significant enough that even you say that there are one or two
problems a month reported to this one group. So that would extrapulate
out to hundreds if not thousands of problems in the real world.

Geez, what would you think is a "significant" problem with WGA/N, if it
happened to you?

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."

 

[A Programmer]

No, but you have yet to show me anything that indicates a verifiable
number of "screwed over" Windows users due to WGA/N.

I find it all the time, in fact for a while I couldn't make one step
in any Windows oriented forum without running into a "Microsoft
screwed me over." post involving WGA/N.

Ultimately, though, this was a completely poorly thought out thing
(perhaps the dumbest thing Microsoft has ever done), especially when
it comes to social engineering and simple common sense - why?

Given the cases I've seen like this, most of them are legit copies
that WGA/N has flagged. Ultimately what likely happened is that the
computer was on a shelf somewhere in a store being shown. The handy
little sticker was out there waiting to be copied down, or to go to a
more technologically advanced thing, snapped with a picture phone.
Person that does this goes home, registers a copy of XP. The legit
person then installs theirs, and attempts to register and gets bonked
out by either WPA (another horrid idea) or WGA.

Now, this person with the legit copy has a legitimate beef now with
the vendor. Also given the attack dogs Microsoft has in their legal
department, vendor now has a reason to be scared to complete death
over something like this. Their customer has a legitimate legal
complaint against them due to no fault of the vendor (non-provision of
purchased services), and Microsoft is going to think that the vendor
is a counterfeit/pirate.

There are, of course, other vectors for people to harvest legitimate
XP S/Ns in a similar manner, but what I described is by and far the
easiest. Most of this is such simple common sense, that it's almost
stupid that no one at Microsoft thought of this before they released
WGA/N. In fact, with Microsoft's OEM sticker policy, the scenario
above got made frighteningly easy.

Really the only way to solve this in the right way is to discontinue
it. WGA/N was irrevocably broken in the conception stage. Bad idea
from the get-go.

 

[Ground Cover]

D'accord.

 

[-Alias-]

almost all of it appears to be license violations
or corruptions due to malware.

Or corruptions in the XP installed. In any case, however, WGA does not
benefit the end user one iota unless they are into catching thieves like
your friend was (most people have more important things to do than work
for MS for free). That said, end users are not the legal authorities and
for MS to assume that everyone wants to help them catch pirates is not
only presumptuous but unethical.

If someone has a pirated copy, and they know they have a pirated copy,
they won't download and install WGA/N and can continue to merrily
download security updates through AU and continue to use their pirated
copy. Sooo, the only ones to suffer are paying customers, as usual.

Alias

 

[Leythos]

I find it all the time, in fact for a while I couldn't make one step
in any Windows oriented forum without running into a "Microsoft
screwed me over." post involving WGA/N.

I agree with the seeing of posts, what I have issue with is that when
you get to the bottom of most of them, it's really a pirated copy,
license violation, or a corrupted installation, when they reinstall or
fix the problem (without additional purchase, unless pirated) they don't
have a problem getting it to validate in almost all cases.

Ultimately, though, this was a completely poorly thought out thing
(perhaps the dumbest thing Microsoft has ever done), especially when
it comes to social engineering and simple common sense - why?

No, the dumbest thing MS ever did was add Usenet access to Outlook
Express, the second dumbest was making IE.

Given the cases I've seen like this, most of them are legit copies
that WGA/N has flagged. Ultimately what likely happened is that the
computer was on a shelf somewhere in a store being shown. The handy
little sticker was out there waiting to be copied down, or to go to a
more technologically advanced thing, snapped with a picture phone.
Person that does this goes home, registers a copy of XP. The legit
person then installs theirs, and attempts to register and gets bonked
out by either WPA (another horrid idea) or WGA.

Now, this person with the legit copy has a legitimate beef now with
the vendor. Also given the attack dogs Microsoft has in their legal
department, vendor now has a reason to be scared to complete death
over something like this. Their customer has a legitimate legal
complaint against them due to no fault of the vendor (non-provision of
purchased services), and Microsoft is going to think that the vendor
is a counterfeit/pirate.

Actually, you're flawed in your case example - if you have the COA on
the box, all it takes is a call to MS to get it properly validated.
Also, if the vendor provided access to the public to a COA and then sold
the COA (machine exposed), then the vendor is an idiot and the customer
has a complaint with the vendor for not securing the COA.

I've seen nothing that indicates the masses of false positives as the
Hype would seem to indicate.

There are, of course, other vectors for people to harvest legitimate
XP S/Ns in a similar manner, but what I described is by and far the
easiest. Most of this is such simple common sense, that it's almost
stupid that no one at Microsoft thought of this before they released
WGA/N. In fact, with Microsoft's OEM sticker policy, the scenario
above got made frighteningly easy.

Except that anyone that bought a computer sitting on an exposed shelf
with a COA in full view would be foolish and the vendor is negligent.

Really the only way to solve this in the right way is to discontinue
it. WGA/N was irrevocably broken in the conception stage. Bad idea
from the get-go.

I agree, I don't like WGA/WGAN either, in fact I don't like WPA, but
I've never had any machine fail WPA, never had a clients systems or my
own fail WGA, and I've personally seen machines properly indicate a
pirated copy of WX to be installed.

 

[A Programmer]

Actually, you're flawed in your case example - if you have the COA on
the box, all it takes is a call to MS to get it properly validated.
Also, if the vendor provided access to the public to a COA and then sold
the COA (machine exposed), then the vendor is an idiot and the customer
has a complaint with the vendor for not securing the COA.

And Microsoft would have a complaint against the vendor for not
putting the license sticker on the computer in plain sight. And
that's what Microsoft mandates through it's licensing agreements (for
OEM versions). There's no "properly securing the COA" or "not
exposing the COA" to it - Microsoft mandates that both happen. And
how is Microsoft going to prove that a person that calls in is the
legitimate holder of that sticker? They aren't and won't.

And most people are going to want to "try" or "test drive" the
computer. I know most software companies have it fixed by law that
software be the only product that can be legally purchased sight
unseen (and against the law to see it before purchasing it). The
computer gets tried, the sticker is out there for all to see.

And let's not forget that most people will throw out any other
paperwork that happened to come with the disk, so that won't be of any
help. To wit, when I work on computers and need to reinstall the OS,
most can not produce their install disks, even - either thrown out or
lost (they do produce a manual, so usually I go along with
reinstalling it by that).

And to do that, I usually readily harvest the key off of the computer
itself before I fdisk/reformat (yet another vector these hypothetical
people I describe would use to harvest a key - it's *not that hard to
do*).

Except that anyone that bought a computer sitting on an exposed shelf
with a COA in full view would be foolish and the vendor is negligent.

Anyone that would buy a computer without inspecting it first would be
negligent. Most won't, and the vendor would have to show the computer
to sell it. And the vendor would be negligent with Microsoft for
*NOT* making the COA sticker in full view. So the COA sticker would
be in full view of anyone seeking out the purchase. And therefore the
install code would be in full view.

 

[Charlie Tame]

I find it all the time, in fact for a while I couldn't make one step
in any Windows oriented forum without running into a "Microsoft
screwed me over." post involving WGA/N.

Ultimately, though, this was a completely poorly thought out thing
(perhaps the dumbest thing Microsoft has ever done), especially when
it comes to social engineering and simple common sense - why?

Given the cases I've seen like this, most of them are legit copies
that WGA/N has flagged. Ultimately what likely happened is that the
computer was on a shelf somewhere in a store being shown. The handy
little sticker was out there waiting to be copied down, or to go to a
more technologically advanced thing, snapped with a picture phone.
Person that does this goes home, registers a copy of XP. The legit
person then installs theirs, and attempts to register and gets bonked
out by either WPA (another horrid idea) or WGA.

Now, this person with the legit copy has a legitimate beef now with
the vendor. Also given the attack dogs Microsoft has in their legal
department, vendor now has a reason to be scared to complete death
over something like this. Their customer has a legitimate legal
complaint against them due to no fault of the vendor (non-provision of
purchased services), and Microsoft is going to think that the vendor
is a counterfeit/pirate.

There are, of course, other vectors for people to harvest legitimate
XP S/Ns in a similar manner, but what I described is by and far the
easiest. Most of this is such simple common sense, that it's almost
stupid that no one at Microsoft thought of this before they released
WGA/N. In fact, with Microsoft's OEM sticker policy, the scenario
above got made frighteningly easy.

Really the only way to solve this in the right way is to discontinue
it. WGA/N was irrevocably broken in the conception stage. Bad idea
from the get-go.

Whilst I disagree a bit with the last statement thank you for presenting a
realistic and sensible view of potential problems. I certainly can agree
that there are cases where the legit user can lose out. If you ever played
Half Life or similar which is now distributed online using a system called
"Steam" you will know that this is a problem but the one thing it does do is
make you protect your "Key" because if you lose it and someone else
commandeers it you are without recourse really.

I don;t give copies of my car keys to anyone and nor would I give software
keys, this is not a matter of protecting some big software giant but a
common sense measure to cover my own ass.

However the one thing that people are forgetting is that spammers, spyware
merchants, back door designers and such are getting smarter all the time. At
this time they have to contrive some method of "Planting" a malware on your
machine or persuading you to plant it. If a large number of pirate copies of
Vista got out with something already planted than reformat reinstall is no
answer, and the internet could suffer badly - all users not just the Vista
community. This could happen just as well with any OS including Linux but in
general Linux users are smart enough to protect themselves, many Windows
users are just users not technically savvy. This is what makes Vista a more
serious concern than any other OS at this time.

Then, internet users in general will be in a fix and many will demand some
"Intervention", that "Somebody do something" and this gives the Federal
Government an excuse to bring in Homeland Security to police the internet.
This will be paid for by taxes that will cost us all (Naturally it has to be
paid for even though we know they will be worthless).

I prefer to see MS use their resources to at least "Try" and protect their
OS than have to pay some Federal Agency to close the door after the horse is
already over the horizon. This has nothing really to do with Microsoft as
far as my opinion is concerned, which is why I cannot respect the views of
the rabid Microsoft bashers. It really has nothing to do with any sort of
self righteous "Piracy is wrong or illegal" standpoint. I see it as being
something that has become a security issue for all of us, Windows, Linux,
Solaris the whole lot of us.

For once I think Microsoft have foreseen a security issue, quite a change of
attitude from the early days, because security concerns have impacted their
business, and that is quite proper. What they cannot do is educate millions
of users to the same standard that Linux users mostly have, all Microsoft
can do is try a software solution.

I don't personally feel that Microsoft distrust me at all, but then as an
MSDN member I have more reason to believe that than the average user would
have, rather I feel that Microsoft are actually trying to be responsible on
behalf of the wider community and of course to protect their own reputation.
Obviously agreements have to be signed, but there's nothing in there to
prevent me criticizing Microsoft where I feel they are in error, not even in
their own newsgroups. I certainly have done so in the past and still do so
on some issues, but I do feel that with WGA despite the false positives they
have to try and develop a solution that cannot be purely based on some
programmatic or hardware development. It is regrettable that some innocent
folks are affected, but if WGA slips "Under the radar" for many users then
so will all manner of other things - on occasions one has to fight fire with
fire perhaps.

Charlie

 

[Leythos]

If someone has a pirated copy, and they know they have a pirated copy,
they won't download and install WGA/N and can continue to merrily
download security updates through AU and continue to use their pirated
copy. Sooo, the only ones to suffer are paying customers, as usual.

If a paying customer doesn't know they have a pirated copy, as is the
case in most instances I've seen, they are being screwed by the vendor
that sold them the PC/OS, MS is only helping them to know about it so
that they can go after the vendor/pirate.

 

[-Alias-]

If a paying customer doesn't know they have a pirated copy, as is the
case in most instances I've seen, they are being screwed by the vendor
that sold them the PC/OS, MS is only helping them to know about it so
that they can go after the vendor/pirate.

Translation: MS is playing cops and robbers and is forcing paying
customers to help them. Since when are paying customers also cops? Most
people who have pirated copies know it and WGA/N doesn't affect them one
iota. The ones that are affected are people with legit copies that WGA/N
flags as pirated.

Alias

 

[Leythos]

Translation: MS is playing cops and robbers and is forcing paying
customers to help them. Since when are paying customers also cops? Most
people who have pirated copies know it and WGA/N doesn't affect them one
iota. The ones that are affected are people with legit copies that WGA/N
flags as pirated.

It seems, as normal, that you like to throw more into something that it
really means. Taken at it's face value, WGAN is a tool that identifies
pirated copies of XP and notifies the user.

If you can't see the benefit in that simple test, to end-users, then you
will never see it. It's just that simple.

 

[kurttrail]

Translation: MS is playing cops and robbers and is forcing paying
customers to help them. Since when are paying customers also cops?
Most people who have pirated copies know it and WGA/N doesn't affect
them one iota. The ones that are affected are people with legit
copies that WGA/N flags as pirated.

Alias

MS uses WGA/N to victimize people that have already been victimized.

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."

 

[kurttrail]

It seems, as normal, that you like to throw more into something that
it really means. Taken at it's face value, WGAN is a tool that
identifies pirated copies of XP and notifies the user.

If you can't see the benefit in that simple test, to end-users, then
you will never see it. It's just that simple.

LOL!

WGAN Results: You're a Sucker!

Very beneficial, Lamegirl!

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."

 

[Leythos]

MS uses WGA/N to victimize people that have already been victimized.

How would they know they've been victimized if MS didn't tell them?

 

[kurttrail]

How would they know they've been victimized if MS didn't tell them?

They wouldn't. And then they wouldn't be victimized a second time by MS
going after them, instead of the real pirate. MS uses WGA/N to get the
victims of pirates to pay for the crime of the pirates.

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."

 

[Leythos]

They wouldn't. And then they wouldn't be victimized a second time by MS
going after them, instead of the real pirate. MS uses WGA/N to get the
victims of pirates to pay for the crime of the pirates.

Why should MS have to suffer a lost sale because the computer owner
purchased/was given a pirated copy of XP?

It seems unfair that you believe vendors should take a loss for their
products because someone pirates it.

 

[Ground Cover]

Oh come on, you know it's more than that. It usually is not installed at
specific request of the user (heck, the way it installs is almost sneaky).
It reports, it nags and it is probably architectured for a kill swtich.
Don't give me the gears.