Linux Passes the Microsoft WGA Test

Wil writes "Here's a good one for the Linux fans -- running Wine on Linux and attempting to download a Windows Genuine Advantage protected file from the Microsoft website works just fine. It seems that Bill Gates has a soft spot for Tux after all, or at least isn't bothered about him downloading updates."

Comments

Unnecessary

[phpm0nkey]

"Here's a good one for the Linux fans"

Does that prepositional phrase really narrow it down on Slashdot?

Re:Unnecessary

[Eightyford]

I know that was a joke, but I bet many slashdot users (like me) are still more than likely just fans of the idea of linux, than the actually software.

Re:Unnecessary

[DrHanser]

This is quite true. Most slashdotters don't actually use Linux. Read the "Operating Systems" portion.

Re:Unnecessary

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if the numbers are skewed by the sheer amount of people who get bored at work and check slashdot from their company mandated windows PC

Re:Unnecessary

[syousef]

I don't know where to begin on this one. I'm not advocating Piracy here.

I just had to get hold of the latest windows installer for a bank I'm working at. Windows Genuine Advantage doesn't work through their firewall. The copy is absolutely genuine.

Now that stupid part is running windows update automatically gets you the installer without WGA kicking in. BUT I need the installer redistributable not a single installer. So I had to go to a third party site, and virus check etc. instead of going to the Microsoft web site.

This like every other piece of anti-piracy technology I've seen tends to inconvenience legitimate users, while pirates etc. find a way around it.

Absolute bulk stupidity.

Got to suck to be Microsoft sometimes.

[Ph33r th3 g(O)at]

If the WGA check works under WINE on Linux, then Microsoft gets made fun of. If it doesn't, they're accused of anti-trust violations, malfeasance, and generally being bad.

Re:Got to suck to be Microsoft sometimes.

[EndlessNameless]

OK, I'm calling bullshit here.

First, the list prices are not in the $200-$300 range. Maybe the first Windows license would be in that price range, but after that you would be looking at upgrades rather than full licenses. The upgrade version of Windows XP Home is $99 MSRP, and can be found cheaper online. The OEM full version of XP Pro can be bought at newegg.com for less than $150.

Second, half of those are not paid upgrades. For instance, you could download an update bundle or request a CD from Microsoft (at no charge aside from shipping) to update your Win98 install to 98SE. That takes $200-$300 off your inflated pricing.

And who in their right mind would upgrade to both Win ME and Win 2000? Why are these both on the list... it should be one or the other, not both.

A more realistic representation would be:

• Win 95
• Win 98/Win 98 SE
• Win ME/2000 or Win XP

I see three realistic purchases in that time frame. Now for a real comparison, how many of those OS X point releases would be realistic purchases? Was 10.0.1 good enough to merit $129 over the initial release? What about the upgrade from 10.0.1 to 10.0.2? I'm not saying that Microsoft would come out ahead in a comparison with Apple, and the purpose of this is to point that you're not representing the situation in a reasonable way. I'm not sure what would be a reasonable upgrade path for Mac users because I've never been one aside from a few stints in school where the lab machines I needed to use were all Macs. Being more accurate in portraying the situation will lead to more acceptance of your views. Anyone serious about computers would notice how obviously you misrepresent the upgrade paths on the Windows side of the comparison, and that makes your argument look bad even if you happen to be on the mark when everything is laid out and tallied up.

Wine shows up as Win98

[FlameboyC11]

Wine (as mentioned in one of the links) shows up as Windows 98 to microsoft, which, as far as I know, isn't even supported anymore. So, I guess since it isn't supported, it won't be validated or not validated and just lets the user pass through as if it was.

WINE Piracy

[chucks86]

I wonder if a pirated copy of Windows could use Cygwin running WINE to bypass the WGA...

Re:WINE Piracy

[paranoidgeek]

Just enter this into your broswer URL bar ( one line ) :

javascript:document.cookie='WinGenCookie=validatio n=0; expires=01 Jan 2999 00:00:00 GMT';

This has worked for ages.

From a FAQ on WGA

[Anonymous Coward]

Will systems running WINE pass WGA validation?

WINE is a Win32 emulator which allows Windows applications, such as Office, to run on top of X and UNIX. When WGA validation detects WINE running on the system, it will notify users that they are running non-genuine Windows, and will not allow genuine Windows downloads for that system. Users of WINE should consult the WINE community for WINE updates. It is important to note that WINE users, and other users of non-genuine Windows, can continue to download updates for most Microsoft applications from Microsoft application-specific sites, such as Office Updates.

http://www.microsoft.com/genuine/downloads/faq.asp x

Nothing to see here...

[glowworm]

This isn't new, it's a known exploit. WGA only cares about XP and 2K3. If GenuineCheck.exe is run on a 2000, ME, 98 and 95 system it will generate an authorization code and allow you to pass onto the download.

When I spoke to MS about it last week they said it was "By Design".

Using the same technique if you download GenuineCheck.exe with a pirate copy of XP and set it's compatibility to Windows 2000 or Windows 98 you will also get a valid code and can then use it to proceed to download.

I think that, more important than ways to defeat WGA, is that the user experience for Firefox people is harder and more dangerous than those using IE. For example if you use IE and elect to use the ActiveX control you just have to press one button. If you use Firefox you are forced to use GenuineCheck.exe every time you want a download. This requires a download, a run of the program, a copy paste a button click and then you are free to download. Firefox people should bombard MS to write an XPI or better yet scrap this stupid scheme.