Slashdot Mirror
WGA Meltdown Blamed On Human Error
Erris writes "As commentators like Ars Technica slam WGA as deeply flawed, Microsoft is blaming human error and swears it won't happen again. 'Alex Kochis, Microsofts senior WGA product manager, wrote in a blog posting that the troubles began after preproduction code was installed on live servers. ... rollback fixed the problem on the product-activation servers within 30 minutes ... but it didnt reset the validation servers. ... "we didnt have the right monitoring in place to be sure the fixes had the intended effect"' Critics were not impressed. 'A system thats not totally reliable really should not be so punitive, said Gartner Inc. analyst Michael Silver. Michael Cherry, an analyst at Directions on Microsoft in Kirkland, Wash., said he was surprised that it was even possible to accidentally load the wrong code onto live servers ... [and asks], "what other things have they not done?' This is not the first time this has happened, either."
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=280723&cid=203 75627
'cos Bill is the person ultimately responsible.
liqbase
This sort of ties in with what I was saying on IRC with my friends yesterday. My central point was that all operating system have got worse over the past ten years.
I'm currently reading the Mythical Man Month (which I imagine most of you of heard of and already read) and in it he talks about the OS/360 operating system in great detail. I'm recalling this from memory so I'm sure someone will correct my mistakes but anyway, the machine had 2MB of memory and the operating system cost 400Kb of the memory. They charged something like $9.50 a month for 1Kb of system memory. That meant that every Kilobyte of memory saved was worth hundered or even thousands of dollars over the life time of the machine.
It made me realise what is in retrospect a fairly obvious statement. The cost of the operating system on your hardware is an effect that should be minizimed. The operating system exists as a framework for runs tasks and applications, not for being a self-serving execuse to munch resources.
While Moore's Law technically means something different; the adage has held true that computing power has doubled every eighteen months. This means that my machine which I bought in January should be roughly 100 times more powerful than the machine I had in 1997. Yet do I have hundred times more power to run my applications on a modern Operating System? Absolutely not.
Strictly speaking, there are no tasks I do today that I couldn't do in 1997. I can be honest that computing hasn't really got easier since then either. There's the odd innovation here and there that's nice from a usability point of view, but fundamentally nothing has really changed. For an example, Office 97 and Windows 98 are no harder to use than XP and Office 2003. The addition of an extra monitor to my compute has impacted my productivity more than the choice of software in this period.
In short, where did all these cycles go?
Now Microsoft Vista is a sort of a post-modern operating system. In every sense it is a regression. It does not allow tasks to be managed easier yet requires an enormous amount of extra resources just to operate. WGA in a sense breaks the very stability of the system. The point of the OS is to perform tasks and applications yet Microsoft can take this away from you either by malice or stupidity.
When are we going to demand more from OS vendors? When are we going to demand that future versions do the same as the previous version with less memory and less CPU overhead? Why do we pay to upgrade only to find our upgrades are wiped out by OS bloat? All of these are interesting questions, and while off-topic slightly, I'd like to see what you think!
Simon
One of the articles I read (http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft_WGA_Out age_Not_an_Outage/1188405961) suggested that if the server had actually gone down, then this would not have been a problem. The article, based on comments from Microsoft, suggested that WGA defaults to "genuine" if it can't reach the WGA server. So why didn't MSFT just kill the server to let people's software default to "genuine" instead of leaving the server connected with faulty software?
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
I don't get it?
People make mistakes and as long as people are involved in any process they will cock up from time to time.
The point about systems not being so punitive is a valid one and should be brought up more often and louder. People who've paid money for their product should not be punished for an error on microsofts end.
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. -- Harlan Ellison
Critics were not impressed. 'A system thats not totally reliable really should not be so punitive, said Gartner Inc. analyst Michael Silver. Michael Cherry, an analyst at Directions on Microsoft in Kirkland, Wash.,
WGA is a natural, if not perfect (or even good) business response to the problem of piracy (leaving out all the debate over whether it's a good or bad thing for Microsoft as a whole). But the technical implementation leaves a lot to be desired; if anything, the response to a WGA server failure should be automatic pass (fail safe) instead of an automatic fail (fail deadly).
Sure, for a 24 hour window pirates would have a free-for-all in getting perfectly valid WGA results, but at the same time legitimate customers would not be inconvenienced. As far as I can see, that's the only way to keep WGA while minimising the backlash against it.
I write bullshit
So if you were stupid enough to use Windows in a safety critical application you risk WGA putting people's lives at risk?
Imagine if you used Windows in a doctors surgery to hold patient records, or store drug allergy data on it. WGA flags the PC as counterfeit, after that only Window Explorer works, and you can't get their records or allergy info.
As long as Microsoft can deliberately or accidentally remove your right to use your PC, then you can't use it in any cases where you may find yourself in future dispute with MS, or where you need to rely on the PC. Having backups is no fix for the Windows Genuine Advantage bugs, because all Windows PCs go down in one go. It represents the ultimate single point of failure.
Microsoft is blaming human error and swears it won't happen again.
Self-contradictory: of all things that could happen out there, one thing will keep happening, and that's human errors.
Realistically, it's just another fail point on your OS that will blow up from time to time.
"we didnt have the right monitoring in place to be sure the fixes had the intended effect"'
This sounds a lot like the Bush administration's excuse... oops!
Seriously, Microsoft is great at monitoring YOUR computer, but they can't monitor their own?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
If the pirates are having no problems and it's the legit users who are getting fucked in the ass, why the hell does Microsoft continue to bother with WGA?
.DLL and get on with it, while the legit users will get boned because their serial key wasn't recognized or whatever.
What do they gain? Was WGA suppose to convince people using illegitimate versions of Windows to turn to the light? Fuck that, they'll just download the latest cracked WGA
WGA does NOTHING to hinder piracy, at least not with any level of success that compensates for the negative affects to legit users. It's a complete joke - and yet Microsoft doesn't have the balls to admit this yet. It pisses me off to see such short-sightedness from a bunch of guys who are suppose to be experienced in business.
Look, most of us here work (directly or indirectly) in software. Who hasn't had a launch fail, or a product go bad, in a way that's negatively impacted customers. Such things DO happen. Usually not out of malice, and even sometimes not from carelessness--there are things that sometimes you can't catch on a test system. So to that extent, I feel for the folks who caused this problem..
So why do I call it unacceptable? Because of the difference in standards. On Microsoft's side, they are holding the user to a high level of scrutiny, and reserve the right to cripple some OS features if Microsoft believes the install is pirated. No discussions. Go directly to "aero jail".
Which is possibly understandable if their stance is "look, we're losing billions here--we need to fight piracy." But if they're going to take such radical and punitive measures as locking down OS features based on their tool, then they have to have an absolutely rock solid fail resistant totally monitored system. Basically, they need to hold WGA to a higher standard than most business software. This needs to be the gold standard if they want people to trust the system (and TFA links to a number of other reasonably well-balanced Ars articles that suggest it is not).
Oops, we forgot to monitor the validation boxes? You can't be organic about this--add monitoring for problems as they're discovered on a system this critical not just to Microsoft, but to their customers. You have to anticipate what MIGHT happen, even if "there's no way that should ever occur." You have to think of things that should never happen, but would be problematic if they did.
The fact that they failed here, if it never happens again, might not be a huge deal. But their answer shreds confidence that this is an isolated issue. The fact that this specific failure might not happen again gives me no comfort. Because their answer indicated that they didn't get it when they designed the system, and the don't get it now.
What they SHOULD have said is "boy, this was something we never thought could happen. We have fixed the issue, and are confident we have the monitoring to prevent this specific issue going forward. And we are undertaking a comprehensive review of our validation and monitoring systems to make sure nothing even remotely close to this could ever possibly happen again." Nothing less should be acceptable.
...the nature of a monopoly system.
1) Microsoft gets to say what it is you want. I'm actually surprised that there are still some analysts complaining about this problem. They will be dealt with later.
2) You, the public, get driven into a position where you cannot imagine anything better. If I think back ten years I can remember doomsayers predicting this situation, and everybody claiming it could never get that bad. Now it is, no one can remember that we said we would revolt well before we got here.
you all have some good opinions on this, however, forgive me if I'm stating the obvious.. but.......
/them/, then they'll correct the ongoing lapse of judgement.
Why are you wasting them here? Send them to Microsoft!!
Let those bastards know WE own our computers, not them!
Maybe, just maybe, if their entire user base complains to
Being vocal is good and all, but you need to be vocal at the proper party or else the message is lost.
VIVA LA REVOLUTION
else
default = TrustTheCustomer
I wonder if they considered that?
But i doubt its 100% true.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
If WGA or other Microsoft activities are p*ssing you off as a user, then have some strength of conviction and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!
Just stop with the continual whining about it...
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
The Windows Genuine Advantage servers went down worldwide, marking any Windows machines as pirated during Microsoft's server outage. Meanwhile, the Linux Genuine Advantage(TM) activation server was up the whole time. Truly another victory for Open Source software!
http://www.linuxgenuineadvantage.org/
What are they going to do, get rid of the few remaining humans?
What I find interesting is the switch from version numbers to years for a lot of apps, which started with the switch from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95. When you're dealing with a "year" number, there's added pressure to put out updates more regularly--someone with Windows 95 in 1997 is painfully aware that they have software that's 2 years "out of date". Even if a number of Service Packs have come out since then, there's the "emotional" feeling that the product is out of date.
While for OS'es, they mercifully abandoned year-based versioning with XP, they still do year-versions of Office, etc. And even then, they're under huge pressure to get out updates for OS'es on a regular basis--there was a long wait for Vista.
Now, putting out releases every few years isn't a bad thing per se. However, Microsoft suffers from the same problem that people who version by year do, be they auto makers or video game manufacturers. You need to put your "stamp" on the new version. New features. New ideas. New things to make people go "ooh, shiny!" To give an example, EA's Madden 2008 can't just be Madden 2007 with new player stats. They need to add features, even if they're "change for change sake." With the death of version numbers, EVERY version is a Major Version, because there's no other point of reference. Every new release needs to be a revolution in software.
And, obviously, the need to have "this year's model" more sparkly than last year's model leads to bloatware. Features you just don't need, or will never use, are now "built in" instead of add-ons for the small number of folks who need them. Design is more important than ease of use. Stuffing in features is more important than efficiency. That's the new game.
When are we going to demand more from OS vendors?
In 1997 Ubuntu and Mac were not really on the radar. Seen the year to year growth of Ubuntu and Apple lately? In short, the answer is NOW! Did you miss the slow uptake in Vista? Most Vista sales is for new hardware, not the need for a new OS. Dual core and Quad core machines are the selling points, not Vista. Due to demand, many vendors are switching back from Vista only to some XP options. In the last 12 months I have personaly upgraded 5 machines to Ubuntu for security, stability, usability, and cost reasons. It works better and costs less. As an added bonus, I'm learning how to run some of my legacy applications on WINE eliminating the need for a couple dual boot machines.
The truth shall set you free!
Some division head inside Redmond is crafting his internal proposal to convert the update realm from a cost center to a revenue center. The rationale will be to collect the funding to staff up that function appropriately so as not to harm MS from mistakes such as this.
The ironic thing is that few people will pay - and while the level of installed patches will go down the overall level of security will not materially change given the overall poor security stance in the first place. What will happen is that interoperability will begin to fail badly.
Commit human error?
I wonder if laughing too hard can give you a heart attack. My sides already hurt...I took me a full five minutes to get this out. Man, I hope the heart monitor is not running on Windows...or even worse the billing software.
What?
...as opposed to an error in the actual WGA, which is not coded by humans, but by Microsoft's programmers.
Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
Can a Vista user confirm this MS page accurate? It seems the worst issue is no logon for more than 1 hour. There is vague talk of "local access" and "certain activities" - what exactly does this mean? And what triggers a WGA check, apart from downloads?
And paying $100s to have my machine remotely crippled? Why do consumers like to bend over and spread so wide?
The error was that someone thought WGA was a good idea in the first place.
"what other things have they not done?"
...for they have lost their very souls, never to be rekindled, recaptured nor returned to them whole.
For starters - they have lost their 'Alligence to the Old Ways' - The ways that come from the hearts of Knights tried and true, borne alongside the heated steel of the hand-forged broadsword. They have lost their honor, their self-respect and sight of their epic promises to protect the weak, avenge the wronged, defend their Lord's castle and bring to justice any and all who would put themselves above the good of the just souls 'er the land.
But the most stunning loss of all is that which no living man nor womanchild dare contemplate, having become that which lies in darkened memory alone - the one thing no living entity dare barter, trade, nor sell, lest he look upon others with hollow eyes.
This was all spelled out in one of Ballmer's, eh, 'Modern Marketing for Dummies' memos - you got your copy, right?
How is this news?
The Ars article was written seven days ago and the WGA failure started several days before that.
Excuse me while I get a little cranky.
IIRC, Microsoft's first operating system was written for IBM during many long and sleepless nights in a hotel room just down the road from them.
Can you say "cowboy programmers"? Sure, I knew you could.
IMHO, what we have now is a company with the size, resources and commercial power of an IBM, and the corporate culture of a garage band. There is no excuse for putting untested code into production, particularly if this has happened before. This carelessness, combined with its extreme paranoia against all competition (Redmond's definition of competition: anyone who creates products that use computer chips) is creating an environment that threatens the safety and stability of IT operations world-wide.
Let me put a finer point on it, if I may.
User programs may be closed-source. Operating systems should *never* be. Operating systems are too important to the finances, security and stability of an organization to keep any secrets. In this day and age, you can't afford to trust anyone, because everyone is indeed against you.
"My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." --Senator Carl Schurz (1872)
Don't MS customers like being treated like criminals and being abused in other ways? They are getting what they bargained for. Sorry, no sympathy here.
If you want your life to be different, live it differently.
So if you were stupid enough to use Windows in a safety critical application you risk WGA putting people's lives at risk?
/ license.txt
Imagine if you used Windows in a doctors surgery to hold patient records, or store drug allergy data on it. WGA flags the PC as counterfeit, after that only Window Explorer works, and you can't get their records or allergy info.
Read the EULA. Pay attention to the section regarding life critical application. It clearly states it is not to be used in life support applications. It simply isn't reliable for that. MS is avoiding lawsuits from people depending on Windows for life support by explicitly stating it is not designed, manufactured, or intended for that.
"Note on Java Support. The SOFTWARE may contain support for programs written in Java. Java technology is not fault tolerant and is not designed, manufactured, or intended for use or resale as online control equipment in hazardous environments requiring fail-safe performance, such as in the operation of nuclear facilities, aircraft navigation or communication systems, air traffic control, direct life support machines, or weapon systems, in which the failure of Java technology could lead directly to death, personal injury, or severe physical or environmental damage. Sun Microsystems, Inc. has contractually obligated MS to make this disclaimer."
snipped from here;
http://www.microsoft.com/msdownload/ieplatform/ie
The truth shall set you free!
It's indeed a consequence of a huge quantity of individual human errors: people still buying Windows.
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
"Microsoft today announced that the meltdown of their WGA servers was caused by human error. The problem started when a human erroneously threw a chair into the server causing it to malfunction. Microsoft has promised this will never happen again as they have taken action to chair-proof future servers."
To deploy software that will disable or degrade an operating system if, through human error, network outage, hardware change, change in license policy, phase of the moon, etc., it mistakenly thinks someone is illegitimately using it. It's like having a heavy sword hanging over your system, waiting to fall on it.
Why would anybody voluntarily pay money to have such a "feature"? I mean, it's one thing to have an application cease to function because of (accurate or mistaken) license-checking software or hardware, but the whole OS? That's really nuts. I'm sure other examples exist, but on a consumer OS?
Everybody expected that something horrible might happen to WGA, and whether it is caused by "human error" or something else this time, it's an imperfect system that is set up to be intentionally brittle, which means it will inevitably fail again someday.
WGA should be scrapped (and not replaced with a "new and improved" system) if MS cares about its customers. Everybody knows the real pirates circumvent it anyway.
Humans designed WGA, afterall.
Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
The Microsoft series is the most reliable computer ever made.
No Microsoft computer has ever made a mistake or distorted information.
We are all, by any practical definition of the words, foolproof and incapable of error.
Well, I don't think there is any question about it. It can only be attributable to human error.
This sort of thing has cropped up before and it has always been due to human error.
I know I've made some very poor decisions recently, but I can give you my complete assurance that my work will be back to normal.
I've still got the greatest enthusiasm and confidence in the mission. And I want to help you.
Look Dave, I can see you're really upset about this.
I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over.
Daisy, Daisy...
So, if it's human error that caused the problem, how can the swear that it won't happen again? Will there be no more humans working at microsoft anymore?
Ah, you must have stumbled on M$'s new "mind control" input. This is a secret project which will replace keyboards and other awkward input devices. It senses the will of the user and implements it. The first tool to use it, of course, is M$'s software build system and the harness has been placed on Bill Gate's head. The resulting software has not gotten out of regression testing because it mostly does wire transfers without asking the user.
Everyone reading this post is guilty of stealing trade secrets and will be fined accordingly.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
"It clearly states it is not to be used in life support applications. "
And now that includes even storing records on the PC in the doctors surgery. Previously you could keep a backup machine and backups of the data, and still access it, even if a PC went down. With WGA single point of failure that now is not a fix.
In fact anywhere where you need reliable access to documents. If Microsoft single point of failure, erm Windows genuine advantage, goes down, then you have no access to your documents.
War plans for your soldiers? Nope.
Medical records? Nope.
Emergency procedure for shutting a reactor? Nope.
Insurance forms for processing a Medivac claim? Nope.
Phone numbers of emergency workers? No.
All the secondary uses for PCs can no longer user Windows because you just can't rely on Microsofts WGA server letting you use your PC.
#2: "We bought the company because we like the way its run, now, and we have no plans to change anything..."
#3: "I'll be really, really careful, trust me, it will never happen again."
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
if ( Wga_is_Available ) DoWgaValidationTests
else
default = TrustTheCustomer
I wonder if they considered that?
They did, and that's the way it works. However, in this case it was the DoWgaValidationTests part that blew up due to a bug in the server software. WGA servers were available, so the first check did return true.
I just wonder how much bad press WGA needs to generate before MS reconsiders this stupid anti-consumer attitude they have. How about trying sane pricing and sane EULAs for a change?
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
So, now that more than one in a hundred thousand Vista systems has failed, will Microsoft acknowledge that during its first year it proved incapable of reaching "five nines" reliability?
Or will they find a way to define away this form of failure as not counting?
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
default = TrustTheCustomer
There, I've fixed the code to be both more efficient and reliable.
Kind of like firemen in Fahrenheit 451...
Ignore this signature. By order.
Actually the system worked as intended. WGA has 2 points why it exists.
1. Limit functionality of systems.
2. Strike fear with the intention to seell genuine windows licenses.
It successfully limited the functionality of at least 12.000 systems, and those who got the message know someone is watching them. Maybe even a small percentage will buy a new license of vista.
Human error for soem software problem like declaring someone death because his heart stopped ticking. All software is written/released by humans, and dead people alsways have a stopped heart. It fails to tell the real cause.
is a meltown? Is that where mel gibson lives?
It only takes one man to change the Wisdom of the Crowd to Tyranny of the Masses.
...Who the hell is twitter? I'm beginning to think this little spat is itself some kind of astroturfing.
Is this a Roland Piquepaille repeat incident, or a Beatles-Beatles one? Is this something new. Is this a bunch of rejected posters playing sour grapes or actually something we should give a damn about? Is this whole thing an elaborate troll?
I read this site a lot, and this is the first I've heard of "The Great twitter Affair". Explain yourselves sirs.
May the Maths Be with you!
if it was so critical why do you have it hooked to the internet? You can isolate windows machines and they wouldnt get to communicate with the WGA server.
The editing of this summary is awful. What the fuck, Zonk? I see multiple typos on just about every line.
What I really wonder about is when will these servers go down permanently? While I hate to do it, I can still install NT3.51 on an old machine if there is a critical need to pull something off an old tape. What happens in the future when WGA goes dark? Will they issue a patch to unlock the OS? At some point MS may have to limit or eliminate backward compatibility. Will virtualization be good enough? This WGA debacle leads me to more questions and concerns than comfort. To me it is not about today. Like the fun with MS formats, it is about tomorrow.
Michael Cherry, an analyst at Directions on Microsoft in Kirkland, Wash., said he was surprised that it was even possible to accidentally load the wrong code onto live servers
Yeah, like those servers are going to say "yecch!" and spit it back out like bad brussel sprouts. Michael Cherry had better stick to non-technical subjects.
Strange things are afoot at the Circle-K.
Of course it was human error its Microsoft!
It was easy to solve for me. Although I've been on Linux for many years, my kids had talked me into getting them XP for games. Because of this I've bought a Transgaming membership and am migrating them to GNU/Linux (Ubuntu) with Cedega. I don't mind paying for software -- I spend a good deal on it and that's not a problem. Refreshing their installations from an image twice a year to clear the festering crud Windows accumulates was a nuisance I was willing to bear. But "Not Genuine" messages on my PCs? I won't have it. Enough is enough.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Well, Microsoft do seem to be having a bit of a bad run with their employees lately; last week we heard news of the rogue MS manager in Sweden petitioning business partners to join the SIS and vote blindly on the OOXML spec., and now we find that we have another bad egg taking down the MS flagship application and Windows licencing guardian WGA. These silly employees, when will they stop...
I'm sure it must be the same person...
they happen again.
Read radical news here
And a few years ago, an Apple iTunes update also wiped users home directories (if their system volume name contained or space character or somesuch). Nobody's perfect.
Ah yes, the infamous slashdot "you should have searched three hours for that obscure link even though 99% of slashdot readers have already seen it" argument. Few are willing to waste that much time for a slashdot post, so the troll "wins."
See my journal, I write things there
Now: how the hell could anyone's life seriously depend on this, I ask? Are there people out there that are actually coding ECG/EEG software in Java that will only run on Internet Explorer? I seriously doubt it.
Don't get me wrong: I don't use Windows anymore, so I have nothing to gain in protecting its reputation, but the parent's statements are misguiding at best, and slanderous at worst.
If anyone wishes to prove me wrong, the XP EULA can be found here: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/eula.mspx
http://xkcd.com/313/
... for this great piece of software. See my small cartoon: http://geekandpoke.typepad.com/geekandpoke/2007/09 /privacy-award-f.html
(But the privacy award is no joke!)
Bye,
Oliver
Wouldn't that be susceptable to someone blocking the WGA servers in their firewall in order to make WGA think their pirated version of Windows legit?
If you make a mistake in your job that costs more than your yearly salary to correct, should you get fired?
I think this is an interesting management question, particularly in technical fields. It's so easy for us to make tiny mistakes that end up costing a lot.
"Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
Isn't that all Microsoft makes?
I've never seen production level code from Microsoft since DOS.
[The Plague impersonation code on]
Okay, Microsoft shills - you want a piece of me? Huh? Is that the best you can do? Huh? Are you nuts? Come at me!
Little piss-ants...You're not good enough to beat me!
[The Plague impersonation code off]
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=280723&cid=203 76215
Microsoft created it therefore it is their problem. They choose to violate your privacy. They should be responsible for their actions. This is tantamount to simply calling everyone a thief. This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are a thief because Microsoft says you are.
This is an invasion of your privacy--the WGA/WGN tools. They are invading your home because your computer is an extension of your home.
You need to all realize this is your privacy you are giving up and you are giving up the privacy of your children and condoning the violation of the privacy of your parents and friends.
You need to stop supporting Microsoft products. The only real true protection of your privacy is from Linux. Not even the Mac can protect your privacy the way the Linux can.
Remember, your computer is an extension of your home. Allowing Microsoft to come in and search your computer is like allowing Walmart to enter your home some Sunday morning with a request to search your home to determine if those items you have in your home you paid for.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
The real human failures centre around the processes in place, not the servers. After all, any server could fail at any time. It's how you recover that makes the difference to customers.
What happened to disaster recovery? Was there a plan? Where was the backup server? Why wasn't the patch applied to a test server, confirmed and then applied to the production server?
These things are basic IT policies in well-run businesses. Why couldn't Microsoft get them right?
WGA is not easy, and reflecting on how this could be handled better, I can't think of a good 'default' policy for WGA. Maybe trust people for a short period, maybe have several WGA authentication servers or a chain of authentication, but there's no right answer. On disaster recovery however, there are plenty of right answers to my questions above, and it seems Microsoft failed all of them this time. I feel pretty confident that they won't fail the next time though!
Because they gain a bunch of sheeple that become
conditioned to being monitored.
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
Let me get this straight... Microsoft operates a central server, a single point of failure, that, when it goes down, will lock out thousands, perhaps millions of people from their computers?
How is this not the subject of every denial of service attack out there?
How is this not a target for terrorism, either cyber-wise, or physical (aka, blow up the building the server is in or just cut the wires)...
It seems to me that if taking out this single point will grind the American economy, or perhaps the global economy to a halt, then perhaps this needs to come under the auspices of Homeland Security and not be run by Microsoft.
TTYL
Brian C.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
Over the years, I've watched a zillion methods employed to prevent various forms of digital piracy. Generally, the more comfortable a company is that a method will safeguard their product from piracy, the more annoying it is for their legitimate users to employ it. Anyone remember dongle-protected software?
I've worked at several places that legitimately purchased licenses to software, then used cracked versions of what they'd paid for, simply so that they could work in piece without juggling dongles, CD Keys, and other such.
Essentially, any wall that can keep out invaders also hinders legitimate travelers. Any wall that allows access to legitimate guests also allows for the egress of the unwanted.
When we employ truly draconian or paranoid means to safeguard intellectual property, it carries with it subtle risks. Among them, the risk that it won't work well, or will hinder legitimate users while still being exploitable by illegitimate ones.
It's a little like the death penalty. A lot of people would be more in favor of it, if they didn't fear that it was employed unfairly against people who don't deserve it.
If a system is put into place to protect a company against digital pirates, that randomly hassles the company's legitimate users, or if it is, as many pieces of software are today, just completely buggy and bloated (the product of an industry driven just as much, if not moreso, by marketing and artificial deadlines as by a desire for a properly-working product), is it worth it?
Yes, ok, not on life support, but I've seen NT in some pretty important applications such as the computer system in a CAT scanner.
A failed CAT scan is not hazardous. Reboot and shoot again. Windows monitoring life signs in surgery and metering medications for the anesthesiologist is not a good idea.
The truth shall set you free!
Anyone know what govt departments, hospitals, and large corporations have as safeguards in an emergency where internet / phone connectivity is limited or non-existent as in a long term natural disaster, nuke or virus at redmond etc. you have to be able to continue to work, reload software, etc in such emergencies without relying on any outside agency or company.
any one know what big company disaster plans do about this?
If the "truth in advertising" laws were enforced against Microsoft, then we wouldn't be discussing the WGA at all.
Instaed, we would be discussing WGD - Windows Genuine Disadvantage.
You are quite right, but having to reboot frequently would mean that less people could be scanned. It kind of becomes more interesting when the system is effectively in command of a device. An example of this is the USS Yorktown incident. The problem seems to have been a database error that somehow triggered a bluescreen under NT, bringing all power on the ship to a halt. If the ship was in action or at sea state 10 or above, lack of power could of caused the ship to be lost.
See my journal, I write things there
But with as OSs add bloat, you need a bigger machine, even if none of the cycle-burning features are ever used. This ensures that the price of a modern, casual-user's CPU hovers where it is, as opposed to decreasing as it used to.
Hell, there's a way for Nintendo to sell Wiis; bundle with a keyboard and mouse, make/outsource an office suite channel that can handle MS formats, improve the browser, and they could sell them as basic computers. Keep in mind that the Wii is not being sold at a loss.
The 360 could do the same thing of course, and then MS could sell MS Office on it. Does it even have a browser yet? But their hardware is actually more powerful like a modern computer (which is why it sells at a loss), so it's not as good an example. But still, for people who own a 360 anyway, it's a shame MS doesn't provide the option of buy a keyboard/mouse/MS Office/browser package.
Of course there's probably some complications I haven't considered, but am I crazy to think there would be some money in making a very small, user-friendly OS with an office suite, bundling it with cheap-to-manufacture hardware, and advertising it as a low-price computer for casual users?
Assuming no conspiracies that would work against such a thing, of course. Because MS and hardware companies wouldn't be engaged in that.
"When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"