Slashdot Log In
WGA Turning Off PCs in the Fall?
Posted by
Zonk
on Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:41 PM
from the no-more-clippy dept.
from the no-more-clippy dept.
thesaint05 writes "We all know about Microsoft's WGA initiative that started last July. Most of us were troubled to learn that the WGA has been 'phoning home' to Microsoft at every boot. Well, get ready, because eventually Microsoft may be turning off copies of Windows without WGA installed. According to a Microsoft technician, 'in the fall, having the latest WGA will become mandatory and if its not installed, Windows will give a 30 day warning and when the 30 days is up and WGA isn't installed, Windows will stop working, so you might as well install WGA now.'" A new version of WGA was released on Tuesday and, at least for the time being, Windows users have the option of removing WGA from their systems.
Related Stories
[+]
Your Rights Online: Microsoft Misrepresenting WGA's Functionality? 458 comments
Legal Ethics writes "According to an article on Groklaw, Microsoft is misrepresenting what the Windows Genuine Advantage (WGA) tool is to pressure people into installing it. It comes with no uninstall, it fails to disclose many pieces of information it provides to Microsoft, and it misrepresents itself as a 'critical update' when it does not address any security vulnerability, although it remains to be seen if it can create one. ZDNet has a series of screenshots so that you can see exactly how badly it misrepresents itself. Oh, and it also checks for updates, so Microsoft can presumably execute arbitrary code on any machine with it installed, merely by making that code part of a WGA update."
[+]
Microsoft Genuine Advantage Cracked 427 comments
piyush ranjan writes "An Indian researcher has cracked the much-touted "impenetrable" Windows Genuine Advantage of Microsoft. According to Microsoft this service would soon require all Windows users to verify their license before downloading updates."
[+]
Backslash: Windows Genuine Advantage Makes Few Friends 352 comments
Readers left more than 800 comments on yesterday's report (based on the say-so of a Windows tech-support provider) that Microsoft may be turning off copies of Windows without WGA installed, as of this fall. (WGA is Microsoft's "Windows Genuine Advantage," a program using software of the same name installed on Windows users' computers intended to verify that the OS is correctly licensed.) Many suggested reasons that this sounds like no more than a rumor, while others took the opportunity to critique WGA as it currently operates on Windows machines, or to describe what they see as opportunities for the users and makers of operating systems other than Windows if (or perhaps when) Microsoft actually does shut down copies of Windows which it suspects are being used out of license. Read on for the Backslash summary to see some of the comments which defined the conversation. Update: 06/30 21:28 GMT by T : A cut-and-paste mishap gave the word "people" one too many Ps; now corrected.
[+]
Your Rights Online: Paul Thurrott Bitten by WGA 591 comments
suntory writes "Paul Thurrott, one of the most important Microsoft advocates, has been bitten by Windows Genuine Advantage. As some Slashdot users have reported, Paul installed a bunch of updates in his machine and now Microsoft thinks that he is using pirated software." From the post: "Truthfully, I can only imagine what triggered these alerts. The software was installed to a VM a long time ago and archived on my server. I no doubt used a copy of XP MCE 2005 that I had received as part of my MSDN subscription. If the WGA alerts are to be believed, it's possible that Microsoft thinks I've installed this software on too many machines, though that seems unlikely to me. I can't really say. Anyway, that's what it looks like to be a suspected pirate. Like many people who will see these alerts, I don't believe I did anything wrong. I'm sure that's going to be a common refrain in this new era of untrusting software and companies. Ah well."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Interesting)
To keep the current Futurama motif running, quoth Professor Farnsworth, "The Jedi are going to feel this one!"
Seriously, though, doesn't Microsoft realize that significant number of users aren't going to go out and suddenly buy Windows? Sure, most (half?) will, but the rest will go hunting for a truly free (read: no-cost) alternative until a hack comes out.
How could this possibly be a good idea now ? Maybe if it had been there all along, or was introduced in a new release (XP, Vista, whatever)... but why spring it on the unsuspecting masses mid-cycle? That just screams massive user migration.
Not that I'm shedding any tears in reaction to that concept!
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Funny)
Wait, wait, wait... Apple just convinced me that my Mac was a PC... 'cause it can run Windows... how does getting a Mac help if I still install a pirated copy of Windows under Boot Camp?
Oh... wait, right - I'm *NOT* supposed to use/install Windows, I've already got Mac OS...
(Okay... so this post was *pure* sarcasm. Spoken like a true self-deprecating confirmed Mac user for many years...)
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Uh... the average gamer will find a hack for their copy of XP, Turn off windows updates, and firewall the microsoft domain.
Non gamers, on the other hand who might be inclined to buy a new computer after microsoft decides to hold the one they have for ransom may very well be inclined to buy a mac. Especially as it will give him the satisfaction of giving the company that reached into his house and took his data hostage the one finger salute.
Frankly though I'm surprised MS would be stupid enough to disable XP BEFORE VISTA ships though. People would be more inclined to buy a NEW product when their computer demands money than to fork over money to use a product they've had for free for 4 years.
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Funny)
They probably got tired of waiting.
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Insightful)
OTOH, if you've been paying attention, you know a lot of legitimate users run into trouble too. When you're sitting there with a legitimate copy and the best MS support can tell you is buy another copy, that's a problem.
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Insightful)
windows stickyness.
Once you switch to mac, and start buying mac applications you might want to to use a mac at work, you might decide not to deploy exchange server because it won't work well with your mac, you might choose a pda with PalmOS instead of Windows Mobile 5 because Activesync won't sync to Mail.app, and when you launch your browser it will be safari not internet explorer, and you won't be taken to the MSN home page, and when you hit search you won't see MSN results. You'll probably rip your music to AAC or MP3 instead of WMA, etc.
Big whoop, they aren't making money either way.
The hell they aren't.
Why do you think dell pays like 15 bucks to install XP Home on a PC? Sure Microsoft wants to convert as many 'pirates' into paying customers as possible, but given a choice between having users run pirated Windows or Mac OS, Microsoft comes out way way ahead with pirated windows.
Their monopoly on the desktop feeds their search, advertising, applications, browser, and server divisions. Microsoft would be dead if they lost their desktop monopoly. Most of their products aren't priced competitively and most of them are not best of breed, but they perform well simply because of leverage they get from the desktop.
How many people do you know that use MSN search that do not use Internet Explorer?
Zero? Pretty close to it.
And if someone has critical data on a system running a pirated OS, I'm not inclined to feel much pity.
Who said "critical data". We aren't talking enterprises with pirate xp installs for servers here.
The average home user will have their vacation photos, some music, their resume, and so on. Its may not be "critical" but anyone would be pissed if microsoft tried to hold it hostage. Not to mention blocking you from doing online banking, chatting with friends, reading the news, listening to music, and playing solitaire.
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Insightful)
I am a legitimate user of Windows. I know I am, because I bought a licenced copy from a reputable dealer. Thus, I figure, I don't need the WGA to *tell* me if I have a legitimate copy. I *do* have a legitimate copy.
And Microsoft doesn't get to know anything else about anything I do, or affect me. The idea that I can be held hostage because I don't want to trust software from Microsoft. Well, that's kind of crazy.
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Interesting)
They might move to MACs. I've been doing windows support for decades and in the last several months, I've actually had some users ask about hooking their MACs into our network....I was shocked because these users are not savy with the tech. I would have thought moving to a MAC would be a big deal for them...but it wasn't.
I helpped them and I am hopeful about Apple's new sleek laptops. Doesn't hurt that they have such nice ads for the MACs now....
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Informative)
It's like those people who call it OS/X or OS-X. Where are they getting these magic hyphens and slashes from?
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Insightful)
I've had conversations about those ads with probably a dozen people - none of them Mac users; most are Windows people - and all of them LOVE them. A few of them have wondered aloud why Microsoft, with all its millions, can't produce engaging ads like that.
I wonder if maybe, just MAYBE, the Slashdot crowd isn't the target audience...?
<aside>My brother is an ad copywriter/director and has worked on some Microsoft campaigns. He tells me there are just too many people within MS that have to give their "thumbs up" before a campaign gets the go-ahead, which pretty much guarantees banality.</aside>
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure... they could go to Linux or other open source based systems but the fact that most have never heard of it and just want their PC to work exactly as it did before basically precludes this possibility.
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Interesting)
This really smacks of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face. If they do go through with this, I can see them losing their monopoly status within a few years.
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Money is a suprisingly efficient motivator.
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Insightful)
If the pirate knew everything that you and I know, including (1) how to install, configure, and use linux, and (2) how to recover all his important files and make them work in linux, then he might consider switching to linux full-time.
Unfortunately, I don't know the profile of the average windows pirate, but I would assume that he doesn't know the things that we know, and that retaining access to the files that are important to him and the other software (office, iTunes, digital camera, etc.) that he is used to - and may have paid for - is going to outweigh the cost of purchasing windows (which is like $88 [newegg.com]).
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Insightful)
What about the guy who DID buy his copy of Windows, or got it bundled with his machine. If his copy got turned off by mistake, he will be QUITE unhappy to pay again for something that he already owns. In some circles this is called "extortion" if done intentionally. This will breed a LOT of ill will.
The other thing that totally honked me off is that WPA was supposed to reduce piracy. If it actually worked, Microsoft would lose less to piracy. Shouldn't the consumers get reduced prices to compensate for the inconvenience? After all, Microsoft is now making more money, right? Somehow, I bet that Microsoft will not lower the Vista prices even after WGA turns on fully.
Personally, I am grabbing some popcorn and am going to enjoy watching the meltdown of Microsoft if this thing happens. If I were suddenly forced to give up Windows, the only thing that I would miss besides games is my accounting package (and no, Gnucash can't replace that until it learns how to handle inventory tracking).
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Insightful)
First of all, they did have this all along: it's called Windows Product Activation. C'mon, you should have seen this coming from the beginning!
Second of all, doing it slowly like this actually works out better for Microsoft. If you put a frog in a pot of boiling water, he'll jump out. But if you put him in a pot of cold water and heat it up to boiling, he'll get cooked. Similarly, if you started this with Vista people would simply choose to keep their existing XP, or upgrade to Linux instead. But doing it this way, by stealthily installing it and then turning off the software they already have, you get more of them to "fix" it (by doing whatever they have to do to make it "genuine") because they're already invested.
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:A disturbance in The Force? How stupid is this? (Score:5, Funny)
User: "You can't possibly attack us, we are peaceful and have no defenses!
Bill: "You prefer another target, a litigious target, then name the systems!"
Bill: "I grow tired of asking this, so it'll be the last time. Where are the cracked installations of Windows XP Professional Edition?"
User: "Pirates' PCs... they're on Pirates' PCs."
Bill: "You see, lord Ballmer? They can be reasonable. Continue the operation, you may update when ready."
User: "What?!"
Bill: "You're far too trusting. Pirate PCs are too remote for an effective demonstration, but don't worry; we will deal with your rebel friends soon enough!"
Parent
How is this legal? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How is this legal? (Score:5, Informative)
Uh, if you didn't pay for it, you're not a party to the EULA - and if you were, you'd already be violating the EULA, which says you have to purchase it; so you'd already be in breach if it were considered a contract - which has not been shown on a broad basis, only in a couple of lower courts.
The EULA is probably worth more as bumwad than as a contract, and it's printed on paper way too scratchy to be good for that, either.
Parent
Re:How is this legal? (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
They laughed at "arbitrary code execution" (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyhow, just FYI, WGA checks for updates and can install them without any user input. That's right--nothing. When I put "arbitrary code execution" in the story I submitted on this, folks laughed, but think about it: any auto-update function from an untrusted source *is* arbitrary code execution! They could send you a freaking "format the PC" program and your system, like a dumbass, would simply run it! Now, I *hope* they won't go that far, but how can we trust them? You can't. I won't play WoW for the same reason (their "warden" program may currently only snoop on a few things, but *nothing* prevents them from modifying that, and it's damned hard to reverse since it's only ever memory resident, etc. so only cheaters were monitoring it...).
You can say that I'm paranoid or whatever, but it's *my* computer and I sure as hell don't like giving untrustworthy people the ability to silently install software on it. For the same reasons, I will never support DRM. It's all about their ability to control my computer. I won't stand for it. It's mine and they can go screw themselves if they want to pretend otherwise.
Parent
Re:How is this legal? (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's some reasons for you.
Firstly, it would be the best PR they could ever give to every other operating system on the market; Linux, BSD, heck, even ReactOS; and, yes, also Apple. "Hey, our operating system isn't designed to break deliberately." MS have a marketing department. They wouldn't like that.
Secondly, ever wondered just how much critical infrastructure REALLY runs on unlicensed copies of Windows? MS has a CEO. He'd get angry presidential phonecalls. He wouldn't like that.
Thirdly, the fact that such a thing existed would represent a single critical point of failure for all internet-connected Windows PCs, a global killswitch. MS do have a security department, as do many other people who use Windows as part of their global businesses, many of which are larger than Microsoft. They wouldn't like that.
And finally, ever think what #1 and #2 would do to the share price? Assuming the stock markets keep running, that is. Microsoft would stand a very real chance of being put out of business overnight. The board and the shareholders wouldn't like that.
Oh yeah, one more thing; the pirates would crack it so fast and so hard, and the crack would be such big news, it wouldn't have nearly as significant an effect on the number of unlicensed Windows boxes as you think (though it would mean that no-one, anywhere, would ever trust Microsoft again for anything).
Microsoft are't always the brightest bulb in the box, but they aren't literally suicidal.
Parent
Re:How is this legal? (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Time to upgrade my PC (Score:5, Insightful)
BTW, I've got a Home PC running my office's license of XP. I get some crazy messages at home from the WGA.... strangely the office PCs hardly grumble.
No wonder Gates is leaving the party...
Not Likely (Score:4, Interesting)
User #1: Has auto update on and is a member in good standing anyway. No problems
User #2: Has auto update off and is a member in good standing. No problems because they haven't updated their computer since they bought it.
User #3: Running cracked copy and will have a way around this doomsday scenario pretty soon.
Your user #3 is a minority in the U.S. Microsoft and every successful software company -knows- the key to making popular software is to make it easy enough to crack. So I don't see the Microsoft playing "license enforcer" anywhere except maybe the U.S.
Sensational summary though.
Re:Not Likely (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Not Likely (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
No way. (Score:5, Interesting)
The thing to look it is how this might affect legitimate corporate versions of XP--and by that, I mean VLK versions actually being used in an enterprise setting.
The company for which I work has more than 100,000 copies of XP running in offices on six continents, participating in one of the largest Active Directory installations in the world. Every system's load is tightly controlled and managed, and I can tell you that there are no copies of WGA anywhere on any of those desktops (I've seen the SMS reports). Nor will there ever be.
People say to "vote with your dollars", but your dollars, and my dollars, don't matter. Large corporate dollars matter--like the kind of dollars that can outfit a company's world-wide IT needs. WGA has no place on a configuration-controlled and managed enterprise desktop, and MS would never risk upsetting their real customers--corporate Windows & Office sales--to emplace something like this.
what is the source here? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:what is the source here? (Score:5, Funny)
I think that's is all the proof you really need.
Parent
Oh this is going to be good for PR... (Score:5, Insightful)
And I'm just a little bitty guy with one server running. What happens when this hits some company's server farm and they all shut down? How much liability is MicroSoft going to have when that happens?
And every time they "fix" my copy after the new WGA comes out, I have to make manual registry changes. Can you imagine having to do that on a 500 machine server farm?
Great idea MicroSoft, if your product actually worked.
Ed Foster already wrote about this (Score:5, Insightful)
See http://www.gripe2ed.com/scoop/story/2006/6/27/054
Personally, I think he's correct -- why else would WGA suddenly become a "required" part of any update?
Furthermore, why should WGA ever need to confirm that a copy is legit more than ONCE? if a given install was legit last week, how could it possibly become pirated next week?
Parent
Windows Genuine Activation (Score:5, Insightful)
Now they seem to be telling us, "Oh, no, Activation never really worked. We need to continuously validate the system."
No. You don't. And you won't.
I just built a brand new machine, primarily for gaming. Oblivion has been fairly sweet. But it looks like I won't be playing those games anymore -- not unless the entire game industry decides to support Linux.
This is morally and ethically reprehensible, and Microsoft knows it, and apparently doesn't care. Well, I do care. I do not, and shall not, grant consent to Microsoft to remotely snoop on my machine, regardless of their ostensible reasons. If my copy of Windows stops functioning as a result, I will take that as a maliciously incorporated product defect, and respond accordingly.
Schwab
BS meter pegged (Score:5, Insightful)
It wouldn't be surprising if the whole thing was a hoax. At best it's some OneCare peon trying to socially engineer a customer into installing WGA.
Let's not get silly here (Score:5, Insightful)
Then, of course, there's the fact that if you install WGA today on a pirated copy of Windows, all you get is the notification message that pops up. You don't get shut down, and you don't even get cut off from Windows security updates (which are truly the only updates that matter, and even they aren't that good). I find it very difficult to believe that Microsoft is going to go from "Hey, your copy of Windows doesn't look genuine, but you can still install our security updates" to "I don't know if your system is pirated or not because you haven't installed WGA, but even if it is a legitimate copy I'm just going to shut you down simply because I have no way of verifying it." Especially not in the span of 6 months.
Let's think about this for just a second. If this shutdown is a function of WGA, and you don't install WGA, then how are they going to a) know that you don't have WGA and b) shut down your PC? Assuming that you only install security updates to your copy of Windows (legitimiate or pirated), then it seems that the only way they can get this "remote killswitch" functionality is to hide it in a security update. You know, kinda like a Trojan horse. Which would of course be unethical at the very least, and most likely illegal. Especially if they killswitched a legally licensed copy of Windows who just didn't have WGA installed.
But hey, it's Microsoft. So let the FUDslinging begin.
Re:And? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:And? (Score:4, Interesting)
First, you're completely correct, and I completely agree. But, the conundrum here is that one of Microsoft's biggest assets is their market penetration. Legal or not, a PC running Windows *tends* to be a PC not running Linux. If you suddenly force all the non-legal users off your platform, you're forcing the to use something else. Which means, in turn, more demand for OpenOffice, games on Linux, GAIM, ad infinitium - until there is a more, better, complete Linux end-user software stack to seriously compete with Windows.
This WGA might (and I stress might) look good on paper to the beancounters at Microsoft, but if you're an architect, visionary, or strategist there, you've got to scream to every senior leader to can get on the phone about what a phenomenally stupid idea this... and what it's potential impact on marketshare will be.
Parent
Some of us are forced to use Windows (Score:5, Insightful)
First off I did pay. Second I do not like having to have it call home and it giving them any personal information including my IP and prod ID to activate which seems to happen every time a tech savy person does anything significant to their computers. Third, I do not like having them infect my computer with endlessly growing DRM shit to support all this. Forth once you grant them this right you give them the power to do so much more than they are currently claiming they are going to do. Imagine forced DRM installation, expiring software leases, and complete user tracking from purchase to forced obsolescence. Fifth, we are the customer, it is their job to meet our demands, not make us their slaves.
Parent
Re:And? (Score:5, Insightful)
You don't get it. If Microsoft has the ability to remotely disable Windows, they could do it to anyone. Today it's copyright infringers; tomorrow it could be people who run P2P apps or who use iTunes or who aren't white or any other thing. Or, for that matter, some malicious employee or outside hacker could do it. There are any number of scenarios where your computer could get disabled whether your copy is actually legitimate or not.
Apparantly you're a sheep, but I care enough about my own property that giving somebody the ability to cut off my access to it is Not Acceptable. I don't care that it doesn't affect me because I use Linux; it's still a moral outrage!
Parent
Re:TOLD YOU SO! (Score:5, Informative)
Now this, this is absolutely rediculous. This is going to have huge repercussions; I happened to click over to the "Genuine Windows Forum" and saw all kinds of posts there of NEW Dell desktops, valid CDs, and other licensed systems having problems with WGA. When these systems stop working, people are going to flip. To them, this will be akin to the computer crashing and taking their data along with it.
Parent
Re:TOLD YOU SO! (Score:5, Insightful)
That's because you didn't notice Scenario 3:
I legally paid for my copy of Windows but WGA screws up, a malicious person gets control of it at Microsoft, or any number of other things happens and my computer gets shut off anyway.
Or, for that matter, Scenario 4:
I care about my right to property, and I have a moral objection to someone being able to arbitrarily take away my property as a matter of principle.
Parent
Slim left town (Score:5, Interesting)
Now they know that they really do have the world by the balls, and they've decided to squeeze.
Let's face it -- the MS fans will bitch and whine, then they'll do as they're told. This is going to be a very good bottom-line move for Microsoft.
Parent
Re:BULLSHIT! (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not saying it's impossible but consider the source.
Parent
Re:BULLSHIT! (Score:5, Funny)
FUCKING bullshit!
Parent