Microsoft Misrepresenting WGA's Functionality?

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."

Comments

Un-American

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a very UnAmerican story. We know that

"P.J.": Runs the pro-Linux hate-site "Groklaw". His true identity is a secret, known only to the inner-circle of Linux hackers. His contributions to the Linux computer program are also a secret.

.

We also know that Linux is a European consipracy to attack our computers.

This story was probably planted by GOOGLE, the America-hating empire.

Bill Gates is a true patriot who has spread the American Way of Freedom and Capitalism around the world, and he is clearly far cleverer than this mysterious "P" "J". Friends, don't let the democ-rat lies stop you from getting the facts ;-)

Re:Un-American

[caryw]

Unfortunately your sarcastic comments have more truth in them than you suppose. America these days certainly isn't "for the people" but "in protection of big business." Yes, the economy would take a serious hit if Microsoft, ExxonMobil, and other major players were suddenly replaced by free alternatives, but in the long run the economy would be much better off. America needs to INNOVATE and discover brand new ways of doing everything instead of relying on the safe, profitable methods that they're used to.

If ExxonMobil figured out how to run a combustion engine on water (seperating the Hydrogen and Oxygen obviously) do you really think that they would share it with the world? Of course not! It would ruin their current business model.

What these super-companies can't fully comprehend, however, is that any little startup business with an innovative can change everything. Innovation doesn't come from big business anymore, it comes SOLELY from the little guy. And is slowly becoming less and less American.

Every business is futile to innovation. There is no stopping it, only delaying. It must be embraced.

Sorry, /rant
--
From Northern Virginia? Check out Fairfax Underground.com. Includes free database of arrests by the the Fairfax Police

Re:Un-American

[Anonymous Coward]

I built a combustion engine that runs on water. I call it a motor boat.

Re:Un-American

[slashflood]

You know that http://www.shelleytherepublican.com/ is satire? If not, you should have read the "meaning and purpose" page. It is gone now, but you can still find a lot of references here.

Re:Un-American

[dprohics]

Innovation doesn't come from big business anymore, it comes SOLELY from the little guy

You saying ALL innovation is coming from the little guy? Dam that little guy must be good.

Big business spend an incredible amount of wealth on R&D campuses around the world. If they weren't delivering, you can be rest assured they would be downsived in an instant.

Why punish legit users?

[pawstar]

And what can us consumers do about it? If we refuse it, we don't get updates. This is punishing us the legit users, while pirates will still be laughing at M$'s latest attempt at stamping them out!

Re:Why punish legit users?

[FudRucker]

RE:"And what can us consumers do about it?"

swich to something better, nobody is forceing you to use microsoft's product http://linux.com/

Re:Why punish legit users?

[mattyrobinson69]

install it
disconnect from the internet
open task manager
kill the process 'wgatray'
rename the file c:\windows\system32\wgatray.exe to something else (wgatray.exe.bastard, for example)

There is also a file called wga.dll, or similar, but i didn't do anything with that, if anybody could shed some light on that, it'd be nice. I did the above on a machine that was wrongly reporting as 'pirated', and it worked fine.

Re:Why punish legit users?

[zcat_NZ]

There's many ways to get rid of WGA. Here are the two easiest;

Option one:
Start in safe mode and find the file /WINDOWS/System32/WgaLogon.dll. Edit the
file properties and remove the execute and write permissions for all users
including System. The daily checkin and the WGA System Tray tool are both
started from this DLL so making it non-executable kills the whole WGA
Notification system. Making it read-only stops windows update from 'repairing
it' and installing future versions.

Option two:
Download and burn Ubuntu Dapper Drake or order a FREE CD from
shipit.ubuntu.com (downloading is quicker). Back up your important documents and
completely replace Windows.

Personally I chose option two many years ago, but I continue to watch Microsoft's antics with a degree of detatched amusement.

Re:Why punish legit users?

[peragrin]

no MSFT bypasses windows hosts file when calling home. This is known. On one side it's a good thing, as windows update will always point to a MSFT based server allowing for clean updates. (can you imagine the problems if every infected windows machine couldn't get a patch)

On the other side is that MSFT could solve a lot of their problems just be creating an easy, basic way to enforce security. Unix did that years ago on Unix you have basic file system level defaults seperating users. Then you can use other programs to create an ultra fine grained control.

Under Windows all you have is a very complicated fine grain control system that a massive percentage of the apps break if you use it.

Kill off Active X and add a simple yet effective file seperating on the Filesystem layer and the majority of windows viruses problem will vanish. It won't solve all things. it won't solve stupid users installing things they shouldn't, but It would stop most of those problems instantly.

It's also the one thing MSFT won't do. Not even with Vista. They are keeping activeX and while they are trying to use their fine grained permissions control as a basic level they are finding that it doesn't work well. (just look at all the reviews on the vista Beta, 7 steps to delete an icon?)

Re:Why punish legit users?

[thrillseeker]

Why punish legit users?

Because Microsoft has never been punished for doing so.

Re:Why punish legit users?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd had the idea of moving to Linux floating around in the back of my mind the last few years and this finally provided the impetus to get going.

Wow.

After spending the last hour rooting around reading info and checking out distribution sites I am stunned at the amount of work it would take to make the move.

I'm not saying it should or even could be easy to get a new system running in a different OS, and I acknowledge that Windows is not different. But I guess my point is it was easy to overlook that I've already invested all that time and effort once, and now I'm really doubtful I want to or even have the time for a do over.

I guess at this point I'm feeling like when you're 10 years into a so-so marriage. Sure you might like to leave and try something better, but when you step back and look at all the effort that will go into getting divorced and setting yourself up in a new marriage and then wonder if at the end of the day you'll just be trading one set of problems for a new, different set of problems with someone else.

Re:Why punish legit users?

[ozmanjusri]

I am stunned at the amount of work it would take to make the move.

1. Download Knoppix iso
2. Burn iso to CD
3. Reboot computer with CD in drive
4. Use Linux
5. If you like it, open a shell and type "knoppix-installer" to make it permanent
6. ???
7. Profit

Re:Why punish legit users?

[amavida]

" RE:"And what can us consumers do about it?

swich to something better, nobody is forceing you to use microsoft's product "

Well actually we _are_ being forced to use M$ pretty much.

The M$ company has acheived an almost 100% monopoly through glossy marketing and predatory business practices.
Hardware manufacturers are coerced into preinstalling nothing but M$.
M$'s monopoly business software is deliberately engineered to have undocumented file formats to frutrate attempts to work with them on anything _but_ M$ software.
The peripherals manufacturers now almost invariably provide nothing but M$ compatible device drivers & refuse to provide documentation to enable porting of their drivers to any other architecture.

I run a small international company.
I am foraed to use M$'s OS & ome of it's apps because we have so little _real_ choice.

*Take note, I am talking about choice in the business sense, not as in the sitting in my mothers back bedroom pontificating type choice, ok?

Re:Why punish legit users?

[TheNetAvenger]

It's also the one thing MSFT won't do. Not even with Vista. They are keeping activeX and while they are trying to use their fine grained permissions control as a basic level they are finding that it doesn't work well. (just look at all the reviews on the vista Beta, 7 steps to delete an icon?)


This is already outdated information and partially incorrect. ActiveX is severly disabled and limited even in WindowsXP at this point. To install an ActiveX control after SP2 takes the user to approve it, and that is if ActiveX is even enabled.

Secondly, the UAP in Vista is 'still' changing, even the Beta2 of Vista does not fully represent the level of protection.

UAP throughout the beta cycle of Vista has been a 'big' work in progress due to the strict enforcement of the NT security model that applications were never forced to adhere to on XP, as they probably should have been even if would have made a lot of applications fail to run properly.

Your information about the 'amount of clicks' to delete an icon is also outdated and wrong. You can find videos at www.microsoft.com that demonstrate the changes in the UAP even since Beta2, and no longer are 'several' prompts required to do anything, in fact UAP is less annoying than 'admin' or 'root' prompts in *nix or OSX at this point. Also since there is no user equivalent to a 'root' account AT ALL on Vista, it offers even a higher level of security past the older *nix model.

As in XP and past version of NT, Administrators were semi-equivalent to root in the *nix model; however this has changed, and even the highest level Administator account still does not have uncontrolled 'root' access. (This is why in earlier versions like Beta2, there were several prompts to confirm operations that required root level access.)

Also everyone here that is not familar with the ActiveX locks and protections introduced with SP2, should look this information up if they are dealing with customers or working with XP at all. As WindowsXP stands now it is harder to get an ActiveX control to install and run than it is to fake a MIME type to get something to run on OSX and several *nixes.

ActiveX is truly not a problem since it was locked down with SP2. Calling for it to be abandon is also not an intelligent way to address the issue, as there are still viable uses for it in corporate environments and where users need more than browser level functionality. In this regard it is NO different than Plug-in technology that everyone here uses in their browsers on other platforms, and not that it has to be user approved and installed like a plug-in is not any more dangerous.

(In the past, I agree that ActiveX was dangerous as it could self install or applications could elevate ActiveX permissions, but this ended with SP2, putting it on the same level of any other downloaded application or plugin type of technology.)

It is easy to pick on MS for not enforcing the NT security model for application compatibility with Win2K and WinXP; however, to pick on MS about Vista because it is 'too' secure is stupid.

In your post alone you argue that MS is not being secure enough and then in the next paragraph you are arguing that they are too secure. Pick a reason to hate them and stick with it.

Re:Why punish legit users?

[HoboMaster]

Yes, because switching operating systems and being able to use everything you need is as simple as just installing it. You don't have to find programs or anything, everything just magically appears.

Switching OSes takes hours of work and it will be weeks before you have everything working properly and the way you like it. Add on top of that possible hardware issues (I never switched to Linux because every time I mess around with it, I am reminded how terrible ATI Linux drivers are and that there aren't drivers for my Broadcom chip wireless card).

Re:Why punish legit users?

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

Kill off Active X and add a simple yet effective file seperating on the Filesystem layer and the majority of windows viruses problem will vanish.

Statements like this indicate that you don't undersand how viruses work. A virus can do plenty of damage running as a normal user. Your home directory is probably far harder to replace than the rest of your OS, but no special privileges are required to wipe it out. You don't need root to become a spam zombie, to install extensions or plugins in Firefox, or to steal all of the confidential information that is invariably lurking in your cookies, bookmarks, web cache, and personal documents.

At no point does an email virus require root access. And if it did, it could just ask for the root password - you can bet that at least 50% of users would give it up without a second thought.

Believing that permissions solve the virus problem indicates that you don't understand the amount of damage that can be done even with a limited user account.

Re:Why punish legit users?

[amavida]

"Once Linux (globally) accepts the OSX style application installer..."

Typical of Linux there actually _IS_ hehe :)

It's a distro that emulates the OSX fat binary style of packaging along with (also mac like) a rationalised file system layout that makes sense to mere mortals. It's called Gobo Linux (http://www.gobolinux.org/).

Typical of Linux, all other distros ignore this innovation & continue with their own individual psychoticaly complex packaging schemes instead.

Also typical of Linux the Gobolinux maintainer has adopted a puritanical aversion to not including _ANYTHING_ that isn't open source thereby guaranteeing this distro will wither into obscurity...

Somewhat obvious.

[Transcendent]

I gave it some thought before I installed it earlier. I knew all it did was report to MS that I had a legal copy of Windows, but the bad part about it was that it seemed I had to install it before I could download any other critical updates.

It's a damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don't situation...

Re:Somewhat obvious.

[Kasis]

Although I do own various versions of XP it's simply more convenient for me to use pirate copies.

I had no problem with Windows Update, just used a well-publicised trick to gain entry and then told it not to install WGA and not to mention it to me again (there's a check-box for that purpose).

Re:Somewhat obvious.

[WhyCause]

It's not entirely true that you have to install it.

If you choose the 'Expert' installation option, you have the option of not installing the WGA update, Windows Update then asks if you'd like to turn off notification of that particular update.

That is, of course, what I did.

Of course, for all I know, WU goes ahead and installs it anyway.

Just stay away from Microsoft.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know why this is even an issue these days. People, do yourselves a favor! Stay away from Microsoft!

For most needs, Linux, Mac OS X, Solaris, and BSD are more than suitable. And far cheaper!

If you depend on software that only runs on Windows, petition the developers to create a Linux/Solaris/BSD/Mac OS X edition, or a port to those platforms. Say straight out that you do not want to use Windows, but you do want to use their software. Give them an alternative they can contemplate.

There is no need to become a victim to Microsoft, especially when they put the security of your data at risk. This WGA nonsense is the sort of thing that businesses just shouldn't have to deal with. And thankfully they don't. Between Solaris, Linux, BSD and Mac OS X, there are many alternative, professional operating systems out there for them to use.

That's interesting

[Poromenos1]

I had never thought of that. I just assumed that it's within a company's power to give people updates to ensure they've paid for the software, but come to think of it, the ones who have paid for it shouldn't have to put up with anything they don't want to, and the ones that haven't, well, they're probably not going to.

Isn't this a violation of spyware laws?

[plasmacutter]

well?... last time some software package was reported doing this it was labelled spyware and the company was prosecuted..

Re:Isn't this a violation of spyware laws?

[agent dero]

You're right, a company can be prosecuted for this.

Microsoft is not a company, go to any state building or federal building in the nation, and find out what they're running. You're talking about a corporation that has settled antitrust lawsuits with licenses and lockin.

If Sony doesn't get it's ass handed to them for rootkits, why would you think Microsoft would receive any punishment at all?

huh

[Anonymous Coward]

do we really need a play-by-play commentary of some jackass installing an update? 17 pages of ads and shit.

Re:huh

[BrynM]

do we really need a play-by-play commentary of some jackass installing an update? 17 pages of ads and shit.

Agreed. I won't even read content from ZDNet at all anymore. 17 pages is insane (thanks for letting me know how many I avoided). Even with blocking the ads and repaginating the article into one page, ZDNet assumes that the format is acceptable to users because the article generates hits. They won't change it when they think "it's still working". I've tried to complain to them as a (now former) print customer of their periodicals for years and a web user. They don't respond, so I assume they don't care. Calling them just leads to the phone-forward-runaround of "I'll connect you to...". They used to be a good company with good content, but now they are just ad whores (like most consumer computing sites - TOM!). /rant

It's Spyware by any definition

[Anonymous Coward]

the question is when are the anti-malware community going to step up to the plate and provide protection from this software

the fact its made by Microsoft should be irellavent, just analyse the behaviour of the application and judge it on that

communicates unique information at any time to an American based advertising company (msn anybody?) with you the user having no idea of what data and what the implications are of giving this company that data

can your business really risk an application like this on your systems ? are you prepared for the consequences of letting this program run unchallenged inside your companies infrastructure ?

Re:It's Spyware by any definition

[ClamIAm]

the question is when are the anti-malware community going to step up to the plate and provide protection from this software

Or you could just use Zonealarm, or some other third party firewall. I just hit 'decline' when wgatray tried to access the network, and that was that. I haven't had any problems with Windows Update, either.

Re:Sad...

[plasmacutter]

but they are not allowed to misrepresent its nature or what it does to consumers, that is called fraud.

Re:ok

[nuggetman]

It's not the fact it's there, it's the fact Microsoft is not properly disclosing everything it does. This has nothing to do w/ the anti piracy isuse.

How to Disable the WGA Add-on

[Digital Vomit]

If you want to be able to disable the Genuine Windows Advantage Add-on for IE (accessible via Tools|Manage Add-ons... in IE), you might be surprised (or not) to see that Microsoft will not let you do so. It gives you some sort of stupid "disabled by Administrator" message, even when you're logged on as Administrator (I guess MS thinks it's the administrator for your computer).

To enable the radio button that allows you to disable this worthless add-on, follow these instructions I found:

1. Open Group Policy Editor (gpedit.msc) go to User Configuration > Administrative Templates > Windows Components > Internet Explorer > Security Features > Add-on Management.
2. Double click Add-on List and select enabled.
3. Click on Show then on Add.
4. In enter name put {17492023-C23A-453E-A040-C7C580BBF700} .
5. In enter value put 2.
6. OK, Apply, OK.
7. Now you can disable/enable the add-on.

Re:How to Disable the WGA Add-on

[WWWWolf]

Now, I have one purely academic question related to this.

Can it work on reverse?

In other words, suppose we have a piece of spyware that installs itself as an IE extension. Can it mark itself to have same sort of "stickiness" as the WGA add-on?

If so, it might be a bit of a headache for spyware-cleaner types...

And a practical corollary to that academic question, and a follow-up to your instructions: Exactly how long before there will be a tool that allows you to nuke an IE extension from the orbit, no matter if it's WGA or not?

Damn that stupid icon.

[Vegeta99]

That stupid icon has been bitching at me to install the new WGA Tool for days now. Considering I ALREADY installed it and verified my installation, I figured the reboot wasn't worth it and have not installed it yet. Guess that was a good thing.

Why would I need to re-verify my installation anyway?

I don't understand...

[Donniedarkness]

...why they have to install a piece of software to determine whether your copy of Windows is legit or not. Why not just run a check online when you're doing updates? There's GOTTA be more to this...

Windows not HIPAA compliant? 1234567890

[Anonymous Coward]

Since Windows is sending information home, and the user has no control over that messaging with regard to timing or content, it seems to me HIPAA-compliant systems (and other systems requiring security) cannot be built on Windows.

What an opportunity for the open source world!

Re:Windows not HIPAA compliant? 1234567890

[ImaLamer]

Oh and you were doing so good too!

Millions of vets and active duty soldiers had their identities stolen recently, and they were probably taken from well patched, completely up to date Windows machines."

The information was stolen from an analyst's laptop, in his home. It might have been a window they got through, but I'm pretty sure then went throught the doors. On the other hand, the analyst was reported as having obtained a MCSE recently.

Bypass & Disable Genuine Windows Validation Ch

[Digital Vomit]

How to bypass and disable the Genuine Windows Validation Check (from http://www.mydigitallife.info/2006/03/07/bypass-an d-disable-genuine-windows-validation-check/):

1. Open Windows Explorer by clicking Start -> All Programs -> Accessories -> Windows Explorer.
2. Browse to C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\Windows Genuine Advantage\data folder.
3. Delete (or backup or move to another folder, if you want) data.dat file.
4. Create a new empty data.dat: You can create a new text file by (make sure you are at the right folder at above) clicking File -> New -> Text Document or right clicking on Windows Explorer window then click New -> Text Document. Then, either rename the file to data.dat. The original .txt extention of the text file need to be changed too. You can disable the hiding of extension of known file types, or follow the following steps to create a new file out of the text file:
   • Open the text document you just created.
   • Click on File -> Save As.
   • Change the Save as type to "All Files".
   • In the File name, type data.dat
   • Click Save.
   • Go back to the Windows Explorer, at folder C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\Windows Genuine Advantage\data, check that data.dat exists.
   • Delete the text file you created previously.
5. Set the attributes of data.dat to Hidden and Read-Only. Attributes can be set by right click on the data.dat file, and then click on Properties.
6. Windows Genuine Advantage (WGA) validation check has been disabled.

Note: The data.dat that are replacing the original data.dat can be blank text file or empty, or you may type whatever you want there.

With this hack (or crack if you want), Windows WGA piracy check will be bypassed and you can now download software from Download Center or apply updates from Microsoft/Windows Updates.

Plus it does not work correctly...

[ehaggis]

Non-admins may get the euphemistic warning of possessing pilferred software,
http://forums.microsoft.com/Genuine/ShowPost.aspx? PostID=370244&SiteID=25/
Notice the MS solution, delete this, open up all permissions on that (good idea?), read, write, execute, delete for everyone! Or pay-up to get your copy of MS Winders to shut up.

Nothing like family (non-admins) and employees (non-admins) thinking they have purloined software. Isn't an unfounded accusation called, "Libel" http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Libel/?

(My SuSE never accuses me with false accusations.)

WGA virus?

[Sathias]

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.

If this is true then it is only a matter of time before someone hacks it and uses it to write some malware which only damages people who own a genuine copy of Windows. Surely Microsoft can't be *that* stupid?

Re:Sad...

[kfg]

Hello, Sir. I represent the manufacturer of the car you are driving. I have just replaced the motor in the vehicle with a treadwheel powered by four asthmatic hamsters. I hope you enjoy the improvement to our car.

Have nice day.

Bwwwwwwwwwwwahahahahah!

KFG

That, OR

[mobby_6kl]

That method sounds good for widescale, corporate deployment, but here's a simpler method:

• Use Autoruns (everybody should have it already) to disable wgalogon.exe on the winlogon page.
  

index.dat, anyone?

[Crazyscottie]

Does anyone remember those annoying little "undeletable" index.dat files that Windows keeps for no apparent reason? Ya know, the ones that log each and every website you've ever visited ? Call me a conspiracy theorist, but with the NSA's recent actions, I think Microsoft would see this as the perfect opportunity to start sending those directly to Big Brother on a daily basis.

It can update itself!

[suv4x4]

When I read this, I thought, this has GOT to be a joke:

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.

Where did WGA come from? Auto Updates. What does Auto Updates do? Downloads executable code and makes it a part of your Windows OS.

"Shocking facts" like those really put Slashdot editors low in my eyes.

Re:It can update itself!

[zoney_ie]

I don't use auto updates, so at least in theory, Microsoft can't do such a thing to me at present.

However, if I install this, I have no choice (leaving hacking it aside) but to give Microsoft that capability. It is not removable (through ordinary means), and allows Microsoft access to your machine in an even less transparent way than fully automatic updates.

This is definitely a large step beyond automatic updates, and is far more sinister.

Get updates without going to Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

It's simple. Just use Autopatcher. They make compilations every month with all of the updates and other tools and tweaks, without having to deal with Microsoft's FUD-ridden update process.

http://www.autopatcher.com/

By the way, Autopatcher will update pirated copies, for better or for worse...

A link for the rest of us.

[Frenchman113]

This "genuine advantage" notifier is remarkably easy to disable. Here's a link that documents numerous ways to defeat it. http://labnol.blogspot.com/2006/04/workarounds-to- disable-non-genuine.html

Windows 2000 looks better all the time

[Animats]

I'm still running Windows 2000 on the Windows machine. I have the latest version of OpenOffice, the latest Firefox, the latest Blender, etc. and they all run fine, which is what matters. And I don't have to put up with whatever new stupid thing Microsoft does on XP, where your machine is a slave to Redmond.

Letting the vendor have a backdoor into your machine is really risky. If you're in a financial institution, is the vendor bonded? If you're a healthcare provider, is the vendor HIPPA compliant? If you're in a law firm, are any of your clients competitors of Microsoft? You have no contractual guarantee that somebody at Microsoft, or elsewhere, isn't using that backdoor in some interesting way.

Even more fun when it breaks

[Ada_Rules]

A few weeks ago, one of my computers started claiming it was a pirated version of windows. Seemed odd since it is more than a year old and has been claiming it was a valid copy all of this time.

I poked around trying to figure out what was wrong.. Didn't see anything. I clicked the "get legal" or whatever it says button at login but nothing ever happened. I eventually remembered that this particular computer had locked up on reboot the week before on a Tuesday and thought perhaps it had something to do with the latest updates from MS. I uninstalled the last few updates I could find. Rebooted, reinstalled them and eventually everything came back to normal and no more complaints about an illegal copy.

I hope this never happens to aunt Tilly. I wonder when XP will really be ready for the desktop.

Re:Even more fun when it breaks

[pimpimpim]

I hope this never happens to aunt Tilly. I wonder when XP will really be ready for the desktop.

And if it happens to aunt Tilly, you'll be the one spending part of your free time to fix it. Is this taken into account for in the Total Cost of Ownership studies of Microsoft? XP is not ready for the desktop. From windows 98 it "advanced/regressed" to something that has less direct stability issues is more complicated to maintain as a whole. Furthermore it has lots of amazingly distracting features, just these pop-up balloons that mention if a network cable is plugged/unplugged, an upgrade should be installed or whatever. Most non-tech people I know really start panicking when these things occur. Actually a friend told me once that out of nothing she got a pop-up saying that an update had been installed, and the computer needed to be rebooted. I tried to find out afterwards what it could have been, it might have been a malicious website, program, or something legitimate. Normal "desktop users" have lots of troubles handling all this crap, and even the techies have.

I don't own OS X, but from what I've seen of it it's probably the closest to "OS ready for the desktop" as you can get. The most elegant thing of it all is how you can combine easy and consistent GUI interfaces with command lines for solutions that need more coding. Genious!

Re:Better...

[hackwrench]

I wish people would quit acting as if anything was unqualifiably better. Life consists of trade-offs but to hear some people talk, life would just be a bowl of cherries if one were to just do this or that... Sheesh... Yes, Linux is better in some ways, but there's that trade-off thing at work there.

Critical Security Vulnderability Reported...

[iluvcapra]

A Critical Security Vulnerability has been reported for all x86-platform PCs.

Short description: By retailing a piece of software called an "Operating System" to a computer user, and then using social engineering to promote the installation of this software, a so-called "Operating System Vendor" may be able to execute ARBITRARY CODE on a user's computer.

Severity: Severe. The exploit allows an entity to execute arbitrary code on a machine so compromised. Challenge Vector: Remote or local installation of components, either onto a pre-existing Operating System or onto an otherwise bare x86 PC. Mechanism: A package of executable software, called an "Operating System" is distributed by "Operating System Vendors." These Operating Systems have declared purposes which they fufill with wildly-varied results. These operating systems posess code which may not be fully understood by the user, often these Operating Systems enforce systems of privilege and resource maganement which place the Operating System in a position of "arbitrating" between the PC hardware platform and the user. When the Operating System has been so installed, it is capable of executing arbitrary code on the host system.

MS's defines spyware

[OmegaBlac]

Seen in the groklaw comments thread: Microsoft's definition of spyware:

spyware Software that can display advertisements (such as pop-up ads), collect information about you, or change settings on your computer, generally without appropriately obtaining your consent.

Pop-ups ads? That pop-up bubble is annoying and is just as bad. Check.
Collects info about user? Collecting info about my hardware and my installation without my consent is close enough. Check.
Change settings on my computer? You cannot remove it without some hack. Check.
Doing all this without "appropriately obtaining your consent"? Hell yes check.
WGA is spyware by Microsoft's own definition.

Let's not forget to bash the other bad guys too

[Spiked_Three]

One thing I will credit Microsoft for, is I do not know ANYONE legitimate or not, where windows stopped running because of verification failure.

In 2 personal cases, other products I paid a lot of good money for stopped. First Norton anti virus, after a hard drive failure would not validate and refused to run on the new hard drive.

And second the most evil spy ware in the universe - steam - tells me I have a banned CD key - I'm sitting here looking at a CD, a box, a manual, and a receipt for $50 and I have never given a copy of anything to anybody - and they call me a crook and ban me - I swear if I ever get the opportunity I will do physical harm to someone who is responsible for steam. Then their joke of tech support says they cant offer any help since i have a banned key. Don't cross my path in a dark alley, i'll ban your head from your shoulders, thiefs.

Re:Let's not forget to bash the other bad guys too

[celest]

There was a bug with Steam near its beginning where a bunch of CD keys got double printed, and hence many legitimite users were unable to validate their keys for a few weeks.

I was one such user, and encountered the same response from their support innitially. I finally got transfered up the chain, and was able to send them a fax of the original CD's and my purchase receipt from Best Buy as proof of purchase. They sent me a new, working key the next day.

I was very very angry also. To be fair to them, they apologised profusely and changed their phone support protocols to account for the error for future people. Obviously this should NOT be happening to legitimite customers.

Since them, I've purchased several other Steam based products and have never had an issue. The content delivery system itself is an excellent means of deployment. Don't give up on them because of one fuckup, big as it was.

Re:So, Does it work yet?

[Aladrin]

Yeah, it does. One known-pirated computer that I know of (I used to work at a computer store) used to have WGA report as valid. A few months later, it reported as pirated (which was true.) So yeah, it does a better job of checking now. How good? I dunno.

Bypass WGA

[DrIdiot]

I just bypass it. How to bypass WGA

some of the data reported

[Anonymous Coward]

clientTime, cookie, Ping, PingResult, pingLevel, Cookie, EncryptedData, Expiration, MonitoredServicesResponse, agI0, CustomInfo, DatabaseInfo, ConfigFileExpirationModuloInMinutes, ConfigFileNextExpirationTime, ConfigFileVersion, ConfigFileLastModifiedTime, ConfigFileEnvironmentName, ConfigFileProjectName, ConfigFilePath, RequestContentType, IsHttps, ServicesMachine, ServicesName, ServicesTime, SuccessFlag, ReportingEvent, PrivateData, UserAccountName, ComputerDnsName, ExtendedData, DeviceID, OSLocaleID, OSVersion, BiosRevision, ComputerModel, ComputerBrand, MiscData, ReplacementStrings, DetailedVersion, ServicePackMinor, ServicePackMajor, Revision, Build, Minor, Major, BasicData, AppName, Win32HResult, SourceID, EventID, NamespaceID, EventInstanceID, TimeAtTarget, SequenceNumber, TargetID, ComputerTargetIdentifier, Sid, UpdateRevisionIdentifier, RevisionNumber, UpdateID, ProcessorArchitecture

they say no "personal data" is sent but your logon name and Machine name would probably count as personal as it gets, note it also looks at your cookies status

Trade-offs

[soloport]

but there's that trade-off thing at work there.

Real sorry games means so much.

Otherwise, you're there, right? I understand. ;-)

Re:Trade-offs

[iamdrscience]

It's not just games, I don't play any games and I find Linux totally unsuitable for use on my desktop (unfortunately). Many of the programs I use do not have linux versions nor comparable open source programs.

• Adobe Photoshop - There are people running this with Wine, but I'd have to spend the time configuring it. If this were the only program I needed, I would consider switching. Gimp doesn't cut it BTW.
• Adobe Illustrator - I've heard of people running this with Wine with not particularly great results. Might be worth a try. There are a couple of free vector drawing programs that don't completely suck, but still none that quite compare.
• Adobe/Macromedia Flex 2.0 Beta 3 - This isn't even available for Macs yet (it will be though).
• Toon Boom Studio - No clue if this could be run with Wine, but very few people use it so I'd be totally on my own, unlike with Photoshop and Illustrator where there are a few people who have tried it.
• Ableton Live - ditto

That's not a complete list either, there are a lot of other less essential, but very useful programs I use that aren't available.

Don't get me wrong, I love linux and I try to convince people to check it out if I think it suits their needs (often), but it's just not a viable option for me.

Re:Trade-offs

[Korgan]

A while ago Adobe started a survey asking whether people wanted a Linux port of their mainstream applications (Photoshop/Flash/Illustrator and so on.)

I suggest you get in touch with Adobe and see if they have released or actioned on any of the results of that survey. There might even still be the opportunity to participate in it.

I think Adobe's (and most other dev houses) biggest issue right now is that they don't think there are enough people to justify porting their applications. If enough existing users started discussing it seriously with Adobe, I'm sure they'd be very willing to listen. They actively asked for info in the past.

I understand your issue. The applications you need don't exist on Linux yet. Thats not a fault of the various Linux platforms however. More a case of companies needing to be made aware that there are people who would buy their software if a Linux version existed.

Library hell can be avoided by static linking at compile time. Is kind of like including MFC DLLs with your applications, but a lot cleaner. ;-)

Re:Trade-offs

[Eivind]

Sure there are programs only for Windows for which there's no exact linux replica.

The same is true the other way though. I'm currently for practical reasons running Windows on my laptop (because current employer runs that, and it just ends up being easier overall getting the job done.)

Privately, it drives me nuts, I regret not having made the thing dualboot.

There's no Kphotoalbum, picasa is available from Google, and tries to solve sorta the same problem, but frankly it doesn't measure up. It has lots more eyecandy but much less funcionality. I'm not aware of any other sub-$1000 program even playing in the same ballpark.

Mail clients is a hassle. Thunderbird is barely acceptable, yet fails to manage a lot of stuff I've been taking for granted for years. Simple stuff that mutt, pine and kmail all manage. Yes, it's possible it can be convinced to do something similar, but atleast it's not equally trivial.

Development-tools all have to be installed manually. And they tend to be more opaque than I'm used to. When they fail, they do so with much less information that migth help. Frequently the best advice amounts to "reinstall".

One can install CygWin, but the tools under cygwin are a lot less polished than under a real *nix.

Re:Trade-offs

[Kadin2048]

No, the solution is to change OS'es every 20 years or so.

Seriously: there's no reason why there ever has to be a "one true OS." In fact, I think that sort of thinking is harmful, because it could prevent a newcomer from gaining a foothold. Even Linux makes some basic assumptions about how a computer operates that could be challenged down the road.

This is why I'm a fan of openness in data storage formats even more than I am in source code or operating systems: as long as people have the ability to move from one platform/OS/software-package to another, we're in good shape. It's the vendor lock-in that's the problem, and honestly I think once the dominance of Windows is broken (don't ask me how long that will take, but it will happen eventually) I doubt that such a situation as we have today will ever repeat itself.

If you have openness in data storage, people can change OSes every decade or so without penalty aside from repurchase and retraining. While significant, they're not enough to outweigh a significant benefit in design or technology. However, access to years of stored data would be.

Re:Bypass & Disable Genuine Windows Validation

[Blue Stone]

As of, I don't know when, the above hack is no longer working. I found this out by trying it before following the link to mydigitallife.info, which says, well, what I've just said:

Latest Update: The patch no longer working. For complete listing of more ways to bypass the new WGA update, check it out here.

The stuff about renaming/disabling wgatray also seems to be redundant now.

It's only part fo the issue

[The Evil Evil Muppet]

As I've already posted (http://blogs.itoperations.com.au/chris/general/mi crosofts-fueling-of-the-fud/), this is only part of a bigger issue. Microsoft have a history of trying out new technologies designed to restrict end users' activities. The XBox, Office's activation requirements and so on. We've already had a number of clients who all paid for Windows XP Pro licences coming to us to fix WGA's insistance that their copy isn't genuine. This is another part of the problem - some of our clients don't see why they should pay us to fix the problem, whilst others don't see the implications this sort of "update" has for their privacy.

I had to call MS because of WGA on a legal XP

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

I reinstalled XP recently and my Key decided to "run out of activations" so i had to call up MS. I was furious...

I contemplated installing the various coporate versions and hacked Pro versions that i have on back up just out of spite.

But instead i called up MS went through their automated crap which is a nightmare in stupidity. After it finished it told me "I can not activate my key and to hold on to for an operator"

YAY.

So i get to the operator... I give her the code, she gives me a new key... all is solved...

Not so fast...

I go to install updates... and WGA must be installed first...

OK lets do it...

ERROR.. UNKNOWN ERROR.

What?! What the fuck?

I call MS tech support...

The guy is completely useless and puts me through to a smarter tech...

As i'm waiting for brainiac to pick up, i discover that by default windows XP installs IE with "Custom" security settings which does not allow WGA to install.

So lets recap. WGA wont install automatically on a default XP install because IE is set to custom security rather than "Medium"

Oh the stupid headache...

So i figure it out while waiting and then the guy picks up cause i'm a nice guy i waited to tell him what the problem was...

I tell him and i hang up.

WGA is not only a pain in the ass for legal users... the activation itself in windows is down right stupid. I have to call MS everytime i want to reinstall now.

Which is what? every month?

I made an image of the boot drive install instead. No thanks MS.

Its just too much. I dont care about MS's bottom line, i care about the dollars i spent and its a headache. Too much is too much and that too much was WGA itself.

I have the coporate and hacked WGA versions, I know how to reg hack the WGA dll out and kill access to it and bypass the windows update...

BUT I also OWN my windows... I tried to do the right thing and in the end, yeah it works but it was a big fuckign headache that i'm not willing to deal with any more. Things are only going to get worse as DRM and every other attempt made at taking control of your computer is made by these companies.

I like for it to be known that its just as easy to run the hacked versions with less of a headache... I was on the verge of doing it out of spite...

I only wanted to know why my Key wasnt working and why WGA was not allowing me to update cause i was angry... Thats the only reason i am running my legit copy of XP now.

I'd gladly explore other options next time if it means saving my time and my sanity.

Re:I had to call MS because of WGA on a legal XP

[Nate237]

I ran into this same thing, and like you, pulled my hair out.

I think it has to do with SP 2 not being installed. Most OEM copies that come with machines now have SP2. The Windows Update stuff installs just fine. My legitimate copy of XP is older and is not SP2. I get the error until I either install SP2 or do the security settings workaround like you did. What really stinks is that I don't think you can just download SP2 anymore. You get redirected to Windows/Microsoft Update.

You'd think that this stuff would be QA'd for non-patched systems since that's the point of it all..

Also affects Office 2007 beta

[grotgrot]

After installing Office 2007 beta, I couldn't get it to activate. I did some tracing with Ethereal and found that an https connection was made to Microsoft servers and a blob of data sent. Microsoft servers don't respond and 60 seconds later the connection is closed. After installing WGA, the Office 2007 activation worked fine.

In case anyone is curious, these are the benefits Microsoft claims if you use WGA: http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=39157

What is really funny is that if you click Validate Now on that page and you are using Firefox, it wants to install a plugin for Firefox. Yes, Microsoft has written a plugin for Firefox!

WGA

[mikeboone]

Ed Foster blogged about the EULA a while back. Strange that the software needs a unique EULA at all.

What I can't figure out is why MS needs to monitor the legitimacy of your copy of Windows XP in real time. Is a valid copy suddenly going to become illegitimate for some obscure reason?

Re:I am not Pro Microsoft but...

[BCW2]

You are thinking the same way Sony did about the rootkit. In the words from a deputy director of Homeland Security about Sony, "it may be your IP, but it's NOT your computer"! The same applies here, Gates didn't pay for the computer or the electricity to run it, so what's on it is none of his business.
A M$ piece of spyware reporting home in realtime is just setting the stage for remote control over your software choices. Think about the RIAA/MPAA asking M$ to dis-able Limewire on all computers for a big enough bribe. Or M$ deciding that they don't want Open Office to run on their OS. It will happen!
There has never been a reason to trust M$ and I don't see that changing.

wgatray.exe can be used to annoy microsoft

[Joe U]

I noticed that everytime wgatray.exe is run, it's making a quick call out to MS to check for updates. It's not alot of bandwidth, but I imagine it's a special server at MS that is doing the checking.

Now, if, for example, someone were to write a simple program that called wgatray.exe in an infinite loop and had a few hundred thousand people running it, then Microsoft would wind up on the end of a DoS attack. What would happen if the wga server was down? Would Windows stop working?

(When I say simple, I mean simple, as in a 2 line batch file, didn't Microsoft think this through?)
tray.bat
-----------
wgatray.exe
tray.bat

Re:wgatray.exe can be used to annoy microsoft

[ClassMyAss]

Now, if, for example, someone were to write a simple program that called wgatray.exe in an infinite loop and had a few hundred thousand people running it, then Microsoft would wind up on the end of a DoS attack.

The particularly amusing part about this would be the following: as I understand things, Microsoft has failed to report to the end user that this piece of software phones home. This means that if a user ran the program a million times in a row, they could plausibly claim that they had no way of knowing they were even participating in a DOS attack should the Feds come a-knocking! They were simply running a program on their home PC that claimed to be network-silent (although I'm not entirely sure whether or not the EULA admits to making any connection at all...if it does, you'd be screwed). Hence Microsoft's own shenanigans would bite it in the ass.

Not that I'd ever do such a thing myself or suggest it to others, of course, seeing as I've just gone on the record admitting knowledge to the spyware activity of the program.

Re:wgatray.exe can be used to annoy microsoft

[alexhs]

AFAIK "while" structures are not available with MS batch files. You don't need a conditional anyway. Just use "goto" :
label: wgatray.exe
goto label

Re:Why punish monopolies?

[Xabraxas]

you will not find Quake 4 or World of Warcraft on Linux. Gimp is no paintshop killer, and WINE is nowhere near as robust as a real Windows system

I find your remarks a little odd considering:

1. As a previous poster mentioned, Quake 4 runs on Linux natively.
2. World of Warcraft runs on Cedega.
3. Photoshop not only runs on Wine but is actually used with Wine by none other than Disney, who actually contributed to Wine to get that to happen.

If those are actually representative of your needs as a Windows user than you wouldn't have a problem moving over to Linux. If they aren't representative of your needs then get better examples and ask yourself why you chose those examples in the first place.

Take responsibility for your own machine

[chicago_scott]

Just because some piece of software wants to do something doesn't mean you have let it.

Why not just block it with a firewall? According ZonaAlarm the IP that WGA connects to is (or maybe *was*) 64.4.52.189

From WikiPedia:

Windows Genuine Advantage Notifications and Firewalls

Some personal firewalls, though not the basic one in Windows, may alert on the method by which wgatray.exe is started, in the case of Outpost firewall, it is identified as a "hidden process". The wgatray.exe process itself can be firewall blocked, without apparent problems. Removing the reference to WGALOGON.DLL using HijackThis appears to effectively de-install this update, to the point where it will be offered again if it has not been marked "do not show".

And I'm sure there are a dozen other ways to avoid the WGA.

Re:WGA

[karmatic]

Actually, yes.

Got this little gem from my companie's Microsoft rep. There are a variety of "leasing" options available, where a) your volume license expires after so long, or b) you get MS product ala carte (i.e. SQL server for $X/mo, and can scale up as needed - targeted at hosting providers ).

This will allow them to deactivate these machines remotely, even if the user plays games with the clock. The rep also made it sound like there were plans to eventually add support for other Microsoft apps (Office, SQL Server, etc.) as well.

Baby steps -- not cold turkey

[Deagol]

First, try a live-CD distro (like Knoppix). Mess around with it a few times, just to see how it goes. See if your hardware is compatible. If you're missing a few linux-friendly things, treat yourself to an upgrade with linux in mind. :) Worst case, assuming you ditch the penguin forever, is you have a nicer rig to use.

Next, once you're comfortable with configuring a live-CD, back up your data and do a dual-boot install. Use linux as much as you can stand it, then switch back to Winderz for the few must-have apps. If you hate it, dump linux and you'll have a fresh Windows install that may run well for a few months. ;-)

Once you convert to OSS versions of most of your apps, and are comfortable with linux being your primary environment, back up your data then install a 100% linux install. Then, for those few clingy win32 apps, try using Wine (a mostly bitter pill, but it does some stuff well) to run the apps. Failing that, try Qemu. If *that* fails, try VMWare or Win4Lin.

Eventually, a few months down the road (or a couple of years, even), you may decide that the stability and reliability of Linux outweighs the win32 baggage and you either find linux equivalents you really like or you "settle" for something not 100% what you'd prefer.

I began the above transition about 7 years ago (except live-CDs weren't around). Took about 2 years. Games kept me dual-booting for about a year... until a wife and kids took more of my time and I decided that silly free games (nethack and xmame) were enough for the occasional video game fix. Then Quicken and Turbo Tax kept me using VMWare for about a year. I replaced Quicken with GnuCash for a year or so, then I ditched it for a simple spreadsheet checkbook balance sheet. By that time, I was beyond the simple tax returns, and I decided that $200 yearly H&R Block trip was less painfull than the $50 TurboTax and several hours of punching in stuff. (Also, the whole anti-piracy FUBAR for Turbo Tax in the late 90s turned me off Intuit.)

So I've been 100% Winderz free for 5 years, and I'll never go back. I don't put up with DRM or anti-piracy shit any more. If I doesn't run on Linux (now, FreeBSD/amd64), I find something else to use.

Freedom... indeed!

Re:Baby steps -- not cold turkey

[modecx]

Personally, I highly suggest that it's not a good idea for your average linux newbie to go about trying to dual boot with Windows. You can go to a used computer store in any metro area and pickup a secondhand machine that will most likely be 100% compatible with Linux for less than $150, and it will still be more than powerful enough for anybody interested in Linux to screw around with, and actually do useful stuff with it, too... Heck, if said linux newbie is experienced with building computers for his gaming habit, then he's likely got nearly everthing he needs to build a whole 'nother box to mess with. Furthermore it's not like Linux or X11 or the shells that run on top of those bits can tolerate older and slower computers with less memory and less storage than Windows, now is it? For example, I have everything I need to build a decent machine that would do well with linux just laying around including an 800Mhz Duron with motherboard and 512MB RAM, a Geforce2 GTX and a 40 GB drive, 17" monitor, and an old CD drive. The only thing I'm missing is a case with a cheap power supply, and I can get that at MicroCenter or CompUSA for $40.

The bonus is:

1) He still has his Windows machine to fall back on in case he needs to go and read documentation when he biffs his linux installation, play games, or do other windows specific stuff without having to shut down and start up and shut down and etc.
2) There is no need to fret about screwing up everthing on his Windows machine because there's no need to format or partition or anything.
3) He can experiment with using a network to make his two computers get along and do stuff that he just couldn't do before, and learn tons about both operating systems in the process.

With the crap most geeks keep around another computer could be had or built for little to nothing... It's stupid to dual boot unless you're trapped on Antartica where you can't get a few measly parts in the time available (?), or you're so desperately poor that $50 means the difference between having a roof over your head or not.

Re:Baby steps -- not cold turkey

[blackest_k]

i think a cool way to go is ubuntu and vmware. Ghost your existing windows setup unpack in a virtual disk in VMWare run windows when you have too (in a window or full screen ctrl alt to switch) Dual boot could still be useful if you really need windows for gaming. Personally I don't find I need windows very much on a day to day basis.

Re:Better...

[killjoe]

Yes. You trade off some functionality and eye candy for freedom. Any takers?

Re:Why punish monopolies?

[stinerman]

World of Warcraft runs on Cedega.

Better yet, it runs on straight Wine with a few patches.

It DID happen in the past!

[Newer Guy]

M$ actually modified Windows 3.1 (as an update) so suddenly it would not run with DR-DOS. They got sued and (eventually) lost (read: a minor slap on the wrist for them). BUT the damage had been done.

windos like games

[Tom]

For many years now, it has been more convenient and hassle-free to run cracked versions of games, even if you did buy the original (I know I downloaded quite a few no-CD cracks for games I had bought in the store).

Looks like windos will be next in line for that attitude.

Oh yeah - last I checked, the whole multi-million dollar copyprotection software did exactly zilch for the level of illegal copying in the games world...

To Who's Advantage

[macaroo]

The M$ WGA program reminds me to the electronic wars that took place on the US highways in the 80s between the "Guardians of the Law" and the average Joe Six-Pack driver. First there was the Police Radar to detect speeders. Then, the Radar Detector. Next the Police detector to notifiy the police that a car had a Radar Detector on board. Finally the Radar Jammer. M$'s paranoia is unlimited. They are a company that just does not get it. They do not just produce a product to be used, but want to own the individual and his equipment that use it. I disable and hide the "Nag" updates on all my customer's computers and warn them about installing it. If they do, I tell them they are on their own. I also monitor and use all the latest disabling patches that the hackers develop to counter act this travesty of individual freedom. I am a dye in the wool Apple Mac user, however work on Windows machines for a living. If it was not for Windows, I would be out of business!

Virtualization?

[Balthisar]

I have several, legal licenses to XP. Yet, I *always* use a borrowed, corporate serial number. Why? No activation. Why do I care? Aside from the principals involved, my XPs always run in virtual environments -- VirtualPC, VMWare Workstation, and of late Parallels Workstation. I've not tried Bochs, etc.

I'm not trying to debate the licensing (I know I'm supposed to use my own numbers; I don't care, though) or the multiple machine issues (I've got all the licenses I need legally; convenience is the issue). Instead I bring questions:

How does activation work in a virtual environment on multiple, physical machines? Sure, the virtual machine "footprint" is going to change between using VMWare, VPC, and Parallels. But what bearing does the host machine have on it? If I take my legally activated product (the non-corporate version) disk image from physical machine to physical machine, is there a tie to the real, physiscal hardware? As far as I know, processor ID, MAC address, and so on are all virtualized, but is there something else in the activation checksum that these commercial VM solutions tie to the physical hardware?

I don't know enough about the license (who really does?); to me the "machine" is the disk image, so I have no moral qualms about moving it from physical machine to physical machine as long as they're not used at the same time (etc. etc.).

Oh, so why don't I try it? I just don't want to "burn up" any of my serial numbers. Meaning, invalidate them because now I look like I've pirated the number because I'm installing onto too many machine. VMWare for Windows and Linux, VPC for Mac and Windows, Parellels for Mac/Linux/Windows... I'm a big time pirate trying to install a single serial on *seven* computers, ya know?

Tinfoil hats ON

[FoamingToad]

Hang on - given the amount of identifiable information sent out and that MS has a process capable of auto-updating and arbitrarily executing code on your system do you really want to try to use their tool to annoy them?

In MS:
"Bill, the WGA upload server has just gone redline. What do we do?"

Cue the sound of breathing over a Vader mask
"Change the script to rd /s c:\"

Tinfoil hat now OFF.

I'm so glad I checked the writeup on that update before installing. I believe my key should validate, but am not happy about a process whose sole purpose is to consume clock and memory, that auto-respawns and that has no documented uninstall process. For shame, MS.

I have fresh installs that don't install WGA

[gelfling]

Curiously this is not an unknown problem. MS is aware of it at any rate - machines that for whatever reason CANNOT successfully install WGA and therefore are screwed out of all subsequent updates. Did I mention these are fresh installs? These are machines that were scratch rebuilt mere weeks ago and are completely clean of spyware, virii and have relatively few applications installed? Did I mention that MS has ZERO response to this? No answer at all whatsoever. I have asked if there is a way to download and install WGA on its own.

I suspect they are silent on that point because there's a flaw in WGA which would verfiy any machine you managed to intall it on.