Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Windows Operating Systems Software

Microsoft Changes Tune Again On SP2 Installs 454

Posted by CowboyNeal from the small-time-pirates-get-away-with-upgrading dept.
KidHash writes "Following on from last months Slashdot story, it appears Microsoft has changed its tune with the BBC reporting that SP2 will not install on XP installations using the '20 most pirated product IDs.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Changes Tune Again On SP2 Installs More

Microsoft Changes Tune Again On SP2 Installs

Comments Filter:

  • Locate foot. Aim. FIRE! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Space cowboy ( 13680 ) * on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:18AM (#9343713) Journal
    It seems to me that this is a rather odd strategy for a company whose main strength is marketing/PR. They don't charge for SP2, there's no revenue stream to lose, so why make more problems for yourself by not patching up vulnerabilities ? About the only positive I can see MS hoping for is that the people who are running the pirated copies of XP will now go out and buy a new copy! They've more chance of knitting fog.

    What I see happening is that the 21-40 most-pirated codes rapidly displace the top-20 most-pirated codes, and everyone who cares about being up-to-date is happy with no benefit to MS. Instead, the chances they missed were:
    • To come over as concerned about the 'greater good' of the net at next-to-no if any cost to themselves. The opportunities for spinning the story to paint MS on the side of the angels were enormous...
    • To reduce the number of windows servers that are contributing to the general crap flooding through the net by patching the holes that enable hackers to 'own' the machines....


    All in all, I am somewhat surprised - an uncharacteristic faux pas.

    Simon
    • Will they publicise which keys are affected by this "Feture/Bug"? Dave
      • Will they publicise which keys are affected by this "Feture/Bug"? Dave

        No, of course not, however, application of the empirical method will, shall we say, "root" them out in a hurry.

        KFG
      • Will they publicise which keys are affected by this "Feture/Bug"?

        Probably. They reported [microsoft.com] which keys were banned by SP1. Probably keep an eye on Q328874 [microsoft.com] as it will probably link to a KB article about SP2 as it already does with SP1.
      • If they know what they're doing, Microsoft will deploy some sort of an exploit of the bugs that SP2 would fix.

        Said exploit can be some form of a 'phone home' service, that reports the illegal copies of Windows to the SPA and appropriate agencies for license enforcement.

        I'm not saying it would be a good thing, but it's very feasible and it would shake things up a bit in the Warez world.

        • Re:Locate foot. Aim. FIRE! (Score:5, Informative)

          by Martin Blank ( 154261 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @01:33PM (#9344945) Homepage Journal
          They're not always illegal copies. I've known a number of techs who, at their jobs, used the Devil's Own key to install purchased installations of WinXP from their corporate CDs, often because they could not, for one reason or another, find the company's actual key, though sometimes it was out of sheer laziness. This was apparently a larger problem than was expected, because Microsoft published a KB article describing how to enter an alternate key without reinstalling after SP1 was released.
          • Microsoft releasing that KB article, is in fact, how crackers figured out how to change their CD key when SP1 wouldn't install.

            If the same technique doesn't work for SP2, Microsoft will probably let "companies" know how to change their CD key again, leading to the exact same thing that happened with SP1.
            • They're not always illegal copies. I've known a number of techs who, at their jobs, used the Devil's Own key to install purchased installations of WinXP from their corporate CDs, often because they could not, for one reason or another, find the company's actual key, though sometimes it was out of sheer laziness.

            Additionally don't forget all the techies who don't want product activation popping up everytime they change hardware around (or they think it'll do that) who have a legit copy but use a downloa

    • Re:Locate foot. Aim. FIRE! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TopShelf ( 92521 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:22AM (#9343736) Homepage Journal
      What is especially stupid about this is that infected machines don't just impact their user, but also anybody else out there.

      If they actually think they'll get a single dime of extra revenue from this decision, they're nuts...
      • No, they will now get to blame widespread work outbreaks on piracy. And so piracy and the inconvenience caused by worms will be tied together in consumer/media's mind. Actually a reasonably smart move on their part, although could well backfire if not spun properly.

        • Re:Locate foot. Aim. FIRE! (Score:5, Insightful)

          by in7ane ( 678796 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:33AM (#9343785)
          Let's try that again, now spell checked:

          No, they will now get to blame widespread worm outbreaks on piracy. And so piracy and the inconvenience caused by worms will be tied together in consumer/media's mind. Actually a reasonably smart move on their part, although could well backfire if not spun properly.

          The next worm will lead to headlines saying "Widespread network breakdowns caused by unpatched machines of pirates" rather than "Widespread network breakdowns caused by poor Windows security"
          • More likely:
            "Widespread network breakdowns caused by unpatchable Microsoft Windows computers."
            • I wish that were the case. But I've lost count of the number of times I've heard a blurb on CNN et al. to the effect of, "There's an eeevil new virus / worm / mysterious computer thingie out there on the big scary Internet that will DOWNLOAD PORN TO YOUR KIDS' COMPUTER and SEND YOUR BANK ACCOUNT INFORMATION TO OSAMA BIN LADEN ... fortunately, those wonderful people at Microsoft have innovated a brilliant new piece of software that will fix this terrible problem that can attack ANY COMPUTER ANYWHERE IN THE
      • Actually, these systems have spheres of influence based on where they plug in. I could care less about this since it will not affect our corporate network. If any company is using pirated versions for their employees they deserve what they get. There is no reason to aid these people in their piracy and the hope is that eventually their systems will fall prey to a virus and stop working, making those pirated keys useless. On out network, everyone will get XP2 with the firewal enabled. It is less intrusi

        • You are affected (Score:3, Insightful)

          by gad_zuki! ( 70830 )
          >Actually, these systems have spheres of influence based on where they plug in. I could care less about this since it will not affect our corporate network.

          The ways this will hurt you:

          1. XP machines transformed into spam relays flooding your corporate email servers.

          2. Floods, zombies, etc attacking your ISP thus increasing latency for all involved or even DDOS. Remember how that MS SQL exploit slowed down the net for millions of people?

          3. XP machines transformed into virus/trojan machines shooting e

    • Re:Locate foot. Aim. FIRE! (Score:5, Interesting)

      by krymsin01 ( 700838 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:25AM (#9343746) Homepage Journal
      What is ironic is that the people pirating the OS are tech savy enough to know that there are security holes they need to patch, as opposed to Grandma Millie who just wants to look at pictures of her grandkids on the intarweb gadget (or senior pr0n, you never know...)

      • No... (Score:3, Interesting)

        by brunes69 ( 86786 )
        What is most ironic about this is that the people pirating XP are tech savy enough to know how to locate these restrictions in a hex editor and distribute their own service pack with them disabled. So in the end, the only ones losing out here are the people who bought a computer form someone and pirated XP unknowingly.

      • How do you think Grandma Millie gets her upgraded copy of the latest version of Windows from after her Grandson convinvces her that "If you upgrade to Windows XP, you won't have as many problems. Plus, I can give you it for free."

        Or how about the kid who "builds a computer" for his aunt/parents and thinks it's silly that they should have to pay for Windows when he can get it for free.

        Or how about the small white-box builders out there that throw a pirated copy of Windows on that new machine they built fo

    • Re:Locate foot. Aim. FIRE! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by SilentChris ( 452960 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:42AM (#9343824) Homepage
      It makes zero business sense. What's the point of rewarding those who didn't give the company a single penny? Let them keep their crappy copies. Maybe they'll see a legitimate copy and say to themselves "Hey, maybe I should actually pay for this instead of pirating it every time".

      Besides, this has very little to do with current XP users. I know some people who didn't even bother to install SP1. This to affect new computer purchases (particularly by corporations) more than anything. XP with SP2 is seen as a lot more viable approach to security than XP with SP1 -- I know my company is delaying any purchases until the new service pack comes out. Microsoft could care less about 3rd-world piraters (despite what you may think, the vast majority of MS workstations are used in business).

      • Re:Locate foot. Aim. FIRE! (Score:5, Interesting)

        by 13Echo ( 209846 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @10:05AM (#9343920) Homepage Journal
        It probably won't really do anything except make the pirates seek out an alternate serial number. Frankly, I wish they'd ban all pirated copies from downloading service packs... Then, more people would look for an alternative operating system. Microsoft is too smart for that though. They know that a lot of these people help sustain their platform (believe it or not) by making the userbase even larger.

        I really can't tell what they are trying to prove by this. Maybe they are just experimenting with a limited number of people to see what the outcome will be.

        They can pretend that they hate piracy of their products, but they hate OSS/Free software even more. Locking out non-payers would probably just hurt them more than help them, causing a lot of people to defect to Linux and Macs.

        • Re:Locate foot. Aim. FIRE! (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Pig Hogger ( 10379 ) <(moc.liamg) (ta) (reggoh.gip)> on Saturday June 05, 2004 @11:17AM (#9344259) Journal
          They can pretend that they hate piracy of their products, but they hate OSS/Free software even more. Locking out non-payers would probably just hurt them more than help them, causing a lot of people to defect to Linux and Macs.
          Indeed. They hate OSS users more, because at least, the pirates could theorically be brought to justice and/or made to cough-up cash to Billy-Boy, whereas they just can't LEGALLY lay their hands on OSS users and squeeze cash out of them...

          Piracy does not threaten to shut them down. OSS does.

          • No (Score:5, Insightful)

            by aussie_a ( 778472 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @11:33AM (#9344310) Journal
            They hate OSS users more, because at least, the pirates could theorically be brought to justice and/or made to cough-up cash to Billy-Boy, whereas they just can't LEGALLY lay their hands on OSS users and squeeze cash out of them...

            No, they hate OSS users more because they don't contribute to making Microsoft the standard. If every pirate switched to Linux, you wouldn't be able to use a word document and figure most of the people you talk to will be able to read it. Instead you'll have to use another, non-Microsoft file format. But if you do that, then there is less reason for you to be using Windows, so more people will be inclined to move over to other operating systems.

            Pirates make Microsoft the standard among home users.

      • It makes a lot of business sense to me (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Andy_R ( 114137 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @10:32AM (#9344031) Homepage Journal
        The problem for Microsoft is that their desktop OS market share has only 1 way to go from here, and that's downwards, which is going to freak out stock analysts, and give them a lot of bad press. They can't compete with Linux on price, and the days of competing in usability are numbered. All they will soon have to compete on is public opinios, and in this arena, they have the benefit of a practically infinite publicity budget vs Linux's zero budget.

        This anti-piracy move is going to force at least *some* of the people who won't pay for an OS to switch platform away from pirated XP straight into the arms of Linux - of course people in the know realise this won't be a large number, because codes 21 onwards will take 99% of the switchers, but it's enough for their FUD PR purposes.

        I'm guessing MS are doing this as a preemptive move so that when analysts point to their declinig share of the market and Linux's rise, they can blame it *all* on pirates switching platforms and claim that it's not going to translate to a loss of revenue. They will probably be branding Linux as 'the pirate's OS' pretty soon.

      • Re:Locate foot. Aim. FIRE! (Score:5, Interesting)

        by gilesjuk ( 604902 ) <<giles.jones> <at> <zen.co.uk>> on Saturday June 05, 2004 @11:59AM (#9344420)
        Well yes and no. It costs ISPs and businesses loads to deal with compromised PCs.

        Ultimately you will probably receive more spam due to this decision.

        The best thing they could have done is neuter the network connectivity when applying SP2 if the OS is pirated.
    • It's simple.

      You refuse to patch pirated copies of your product so that those users continue to plague the networks. This causes continued news stories and attention on the problem of viruses and security.

      However, the attention will not be on "Microsoft sucks", but "Microsoft has fixed these problems but evil pirates are responsible for continuing the problem". Microsoft pushes pirates == security risks to gain greater government favor in their anti-piracy efforts.

  • Pfffff.... (Score:5, Informative)

    by anonieuweling ( 536832 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:18AM (#9343718)
    Just go here: http://omnitechdesign.com/cdkey.html

    • Re:Pfffff.... (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Or here: http://omnitechdesign.com/xpkey.htm

    • That won't work, but this will. (Score:5, Informative)

      by Mitchell Mebane ( 594797 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @10:42AM (#9344095) Homepage Journal
      XPKey.exe no longer works with XP SP2, because they aren't just banning certain CD Keys, they are banning most possible corporate keys, which works out to 99.99999% of the ones XPKey makes.

      They are bannign them based on Product ID. All non-640 PIDs are banned, and most of the ones in the 640 group are, as well.

      To find your PID, right-click on My Computer and hit properties to bring up the System control panel. The PID will be right under the "registered to" section. It will be, e.g., aaaaa-bbb-ccccccc-ddddd. If bbb is not 640, you or definately out of luck. If it is 640, feel free to give it a shot. Or, you can slways make you a new CD Key that works. :D

      Yep, there's a new keygen (which, BTW, also makes keys for Win Server 2003 Corp, but we aren't concerned with that right now). It's called MSKey. Start it, set Product Family to "Windows XP Pro. VLK", set Product ID range from 640-500 to 640-600, and gen away.

      Here's the keygen in Base64 format... I hope Slashdot doesn't mangle it.

      Begin MSKey4in1.zip

      UEsDBBQAAAAIAFBHpDAN2TO4Do8AAAFwA QANAAAATVNLZXk0aW4xLmV4Zex9C3xU5Zn3TOYk

      OZADc4Q RRhnLuI4aDWI0VIOH2gRCEpHLTCYzo3KzW20VrVAyY8WGwTCZT 49vx2prr7u9fL38

      1m3rsq62onZrhpEM4Mq1IkpF0K0eGJE AJYncZv/Pey6ThNqv26LD7/sxmjnnvJfn/jzv8144

      M+uWR 20Om80m4C+ft9lW2/RPne3//dmBv5Hjnx9pe2bYKxeuts985cL WO+5s8y5ZuviLSz/3

      Je/nP3fPPYuj3n+83bs0do/3znu8D XOC3i8tvu32iSNGDPcZMP6lbd7Jd0Zd/aT51zHiwiff

      w/X WkVOe3I1rxYhrnnyX19U8+RX+PPnJP/Jr7ZPbcJ3rmvTk27i23 Pn5O6i/SZt/us020y7Y

      Rv1mjsXKbpvTXmEvs9lkOxroZb+ vwL2MG6+duKZ7/ifw2sLVtsRoh08J/viDbF3NEuuzeYbd

      d hvd3Gq3+Z220/cBnTNLPrp6YvT2+6K4PmU36JXpOgQEqJq49Lb PRT9ns3VfafBerV8Hfurw

      /0RqRvcSCdWA5T+lXdfEpW1LP 09VTuKZ2tH1VHi2s5+zn7Ofs5+zn7Ofs5+zn7Ofs5+zn7Of

      s5+ifIJhFvXJEdbuc7MFEmuSajLRxuTOaBnrZn2sPxLW9t1ps yVeEpNdy8dSWxeKrrVTkZTs

      il2zcMHcTITK3WHNaxVfObB 4ss0sFqgYwOVso2RH6cIFq+kyN4Nn28DnR60Pa/BJwVCY+QWd

      xjmCsmH5cLaJ9aszfR6WZosFIordJLDZYmq6XUmvEFh3brg /rO25zSA8Vrpwwfy5Gdbq86j3

      COyz7BpWEvSDjx+JNltK+ oGNEyg7Djo+THaxbdEq5c3lY1n51ERWSHQLqWa7Ovu4sq7Npbz a

      vhf0uLJlRCWq8nWC0hcdrby63Fm1j5WjvVqG4lmxw2ymz wWk2XrO1wCuEu+LBCIYYndDNhE2

      X2D3Ccpb6jyfV233uZY PR6+arrmgOwO+PMoCUecnGNbOsfgR0Yg3ARofm25jY2p62WU16 5P5

      +BcAxQfx1LL5tkSXkFgrJHsBXI7KylvjehMv56vw0Og 4lhOVY+N6+3ZVHVOvY+iSWCPMoa6x

      tQykJHujF0yeB3LGs up6gEFtKp5X7z+u9H1FUF6GGIi2zdHPsg/rlWPLa1ktoPDbK8C Oer+g

      P3jZfaJ6v6g/jGb3SYkuWb1fSqyReVH7uuROdYFgK D/uYWNS875/nDkSOQFMjmCzhRtYWp2N

      hxX7wDGXImf70cI nCHIlbpdsmhSB+hql6OXJruh4lmG7WA+bJgAMjKKEpcGmrDSJK yaxbO66

      FwlYrgwt/1CT5/0h4a+fyOcHWKoalyyL9Ee0x/6 Ry9+sDQe1TV8wXeOiYDiieU8O6p5tGmTk

      6BDRTpwY0mSo3 UOjUk1Xcv0Ke8awEfZmpOMdWppL75dR62bnsA3pfXLHHipjh9g WdtK56lXn

      qmOO15yrXnauOqK81lbW0W2z2W3saPptOX1Ad mxw9Ckb2uyNjnXsJCzZkYrbWStEVuJYh0d7

      kzockD03sCw 5lbNzEahBvZvNEFg6vVe+mFAB0Tp2yLnqFeeqw46NzlUZYFU2A tUajupgeo+c

      /kB2pB3blXSbfWpKqlVbfV5lU1vpVLrh+KY KHKGQb0AB/lQgIMQ62sOQAUrdrFn8m9GyKCAf

      TUnVaONI3 W/X0YomnzPEQYx2ACOX6Q3S38MoO6RsAralBjZJx9aozpB0bN2 ELTqWwmGiW4b5

      q7hT0XZvFUwGpm1GvE9a/1koviD/Brsp/ 9Or9lM1/cbHpemsqWEu8Xt1HH+XbsEJcK0h6NBn

      Afb5pM3 nZDCCcWOLpdBbLIUW4pMcCid3RpyP7EFj6sXaQekYtkFXIXTJ0 s5V652r1jhXbWVa

      evc56f1OxzrHq2REU29UnWpEcHb+jDq Hhb+61xxRjUjRL7Ow+Nd3kdWIK3o9C0t/fRe3GvFE

      K8iqs 969l+YHM8/HO4nM2JPcn23wiRTscBVKcI2JiXX5+QiGGcTOkJa 4BfxhAHrey0djoWqz

      cmJpSdWJ5NboRVCjj23Y9sfnqI71V G3Y9gHboN7tq9z2XsXJbbtVqn4znZM7/khEo8LLsmlN

      VjK x8tUoQZxn2ZqtfYfZZrbJuWobQYCf9KVpyyP2aZDng2+hmzsnk MvBCCpeUQ7eO5YBUtU2

      tqm5akOV0Ty6C20IwUaYlGMLDcD pd2VlI6RRtVE52lYOBVc6TjbjIs9W8RWtTO+WQaGLrcFN

      1 Rq2xZHFDeuHbCuOApUKEHtnQnJ6zjC3Is2FUogHMqKBo6YL8UD PvyAlDytj

  • Nothing to see here, move along... (Score:5, Funny)

    by zoloto ( 586738 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:21AM (#9343731)
    Most of us run something other than Windows(TM) right? This IS slashdot after all.

    • Re:Nothing to see here, move along... (Score:5, Funny)

      by PhrostyMcByte ( 589271 ) <phrosty@gmail.com> on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:35AM (#9343792) Homepage
      yes, this IS slashdot. 80% of it's users are linux zealots, and 90% of them are in windows ;)
      • 80% of it's users are linux zealots, and 90% of them are in windows ;)

        That's a damned lie! Just because I happen to be posting under Windows right now doesn't mean. . .

        Oh, wait, ummmmmmmmmm, nevermind.

        KFG

      • Re:Nothing to see here, move along... (Score:5, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:45AM (#9343838)
        There's no better reason to hate Windows than having to use it.

      • Re:Nothing to see here, move along... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by zoloto ( 586738 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @10:03AM (#9343910)
        That has to suck... or maybe we're just smart enough to have our web browsers lie and say, we're running MSIE 6.01 WindowsXP, 1600x1200 24bit color.. eh? :)

        XP is better as an emoticon anyways.

        Here's teh offtopic part, and a shameless plug for a really awesome Window Manager. Try XPde [xdpe.com] out. It's really awesome at the look and feel of windows, especially when you want to move someone over to Linux without telling them.

        Now I know that sounds evil, but hear this story out. My sister wanted me one day to fix her "slow" computer. Turns out that she has 100's of spyware, literally, running on her computer. Not to mention trojans and viruses. I did a backup of her documents, put them on a zip disk and virus scanned that on my comp, just to make sure. Then I installed Slackware Linux [slackware.com], and used XPde (quite successfully I might add) as the WM. Installed Gaim [sf.com], OO.org [openoffice.org], Mozilla [mozilla.org], software firewall, gimp [gimp.org], and misc games (frozen bubble [frozen-bubble.org] rocks!) Total install in just around 250mb. No crashes, no viruses, nothing and it's locked behind a NAT that allows no incoming/outgoing ports except what's specified for IM services and outbound httpd traffic.

        She didn't know she was running linux for a few months until she went to install a program! (Insert WineX [transgaming.com] installation at this point. Went well too!)

        My point. Most people dont care what they use, and if the conversion is successful (I do many like this, only with people I really *KNOW* and trust me), they'll learn to champion linux to people who are easily intimidated by "techies" and zealots who want to install linux for you because MS is "7!^3" (evil)

        To summarize this success story by my sisters quote: "Windows SUCKS!, where's my cute penguin?"

        ----zoloto

  • He who laughs last... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SYFer ( 617415 ) * <syfer@syf e r . n et> on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:23AM (#9343739) Homepage
    Last month, I got hammered [slashdot.org] for taking a skeptical position about MS' attitude and motivations. What bothered me at the time was the disingenuous wording of their original announcement (not the act itself) wherein they professed concern only for the pirate users' safety.

    The problem MS faces is that the reputation of their OS is gradually eroding with virus after virus and a lot of this comes from those rouge boxes that lack the securtiy patches. This puts MS in an interesting quandry: help theives or save the OS. Heh.

  • You have a pirate copy? You don't get support, patches, fixes of any kind. The people who actually paid for their version get patches and fixes, thereby gaining a benefit from having paid.

    The pirates get hacked and infested with worms, viruses and the people who paid, don't. It's about time too.

    • Not true really. Many people I know have been able to install SP1 with the infamous "FCK" key with a bit of reverse engineering. The people that will be most hurt are those users that apply the patch by those who don't. Pirated or not, the ones running the unpatched boxes don't know jack about computers and THOSE computers are the ones we have to pull off the internet.

      It's not the pirates we have to worry about, it's those Technically ignorant people we should reach.

      Be proactive about it, track those IP's
      • Nah, fuck them.

        I complain to my ISP if I see probes coming in from diseased systems and they are disconnected forthwith. It's then their problem.

        If someone is technically too inept to patch their systems by going to windowsupdate they should be paying someone to do it for them. If their system is pirated, they should be paying Microsoft for the privilege of using Windows or should be using something else instead.

    • My inbox gets infested with worms, and I use Kontact/KMail.

      It doesn't do me much harm other than the fact that I have to wait for around 30 of the things to download every day and run though spam assassin.

      But that's bad enough.
    • It's not as straightforward as you think. Microsft isn't just screwing that particular user -- they're screwing (virtually) everybody connected to the Net.

      A case in point: even though there's a patch I have received hundreds of copies of Swen/Sobig. Now imagine that users of pirated XP installations can't get the patch. Imagine the chaos.

      So by screwing that user, they're screwing me. Even though I HAVE DONE NOTHING WRONG. That's just not on.
    • I have a perfectly legit, licensed copy of Win 2K. I daren't go near the Internet without my firewall. It is those other unpatched copies of Windows that are making life so difficult for legitimate Microsoft customers. Even with my firewall, my broadband connection, my POP mailbox and the Internet connections suffer everytime a large number of hosts get hit with the latest worm/trojan/whatever. Even if I retreat onto my Linux systems, I suffer because those idiots at Microsoft consider security an optional

  • Old news (Score:5, Informative)

    by lseltzer ( 311306 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:26AM (#9343753)
    We reported this weeks ago. [eweek.com]
    • Microsoft Corrects: No XP SP2 for Pirated Copies
      By Larry Seltzer
      May 11, 2004
      Despite reports indicating that Microsoft Corp. was planning to allow users with pirated copies of Windows XP to install Service Pack 2, the company has confirmed to eWEEK.com that this will not be the case...
    • The point is that MS has been waffling on the decision for a while now (one article will say they're avoiding piraters like the plague, next will say they'll support them "just this once"). I have a feeling that people within MS itself don't really know if they're going to support the piraters, and are kind of letting the story out, getting a feel for what the public wants. Excellent PR tactic, actually.

    • Re:Old news (Score:5, Insightful)

      by hughk ( 248126 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:49AM (#9343857) Journal
      Not really, there seems to be a schism within Microsoft with some feeling that cleaning up the Internet pollution caused by buggy Windows installations is good neighbourliness and also good PR and the others who want their dollars at all costs. The two parts have made conflicting announcements and it seems that now the money whores have won.

  • Think Outside The Box (Score:3, Insightful)

    by lachlan76 ( 770870 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:27AM (#9343754)
    Perhaps there is another solution...

    Perhaps the pirates will just get a new code.
    Of course...if people really cared about security, there wouldn't be an operating system to make the Service Pack for.

  • SP2 Disabling Pirate Copies (Score:2, Interesting)

    by jcm ( 4767 ) *
    Why not just have SP2 install and patch the system then report in ANY WAY POSSIBLE that this is a pirated copy of Window XP. Try and send information to MS identifying the end user if possible through the IP Address, login name, Dial-Up Networking IP account, address, and provider. Gather information from Microsoft Office as well, any Word or Excel Documents that have addresses in them send those to MS as well.

    Place something in the Word/Office documents stating this user is using illegal copies of Windows

    • Re:SP2 Disabling Pirate Copies (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:57AM (#9343892) Homepage
      a) Finding pirated copies of MS is about as easy as finding pirated music on KaZaA. It's not exactly a problem.

      b) Joejobs. Imagine a virus that swaps your installation key, inserts fake messages in Word/Office documents and so on.

      c) The real reason: They don't want to. They want to turn pirates into legitimate purchasers "softly" - kinda like boiling a frog. If they made it really anal to pirate Windows/Office many people would be likely to switch - look at how many compare x86 without software to Macs with software - since x86 software is "$0". Or to Linux, they both cost $0 and are thus equal.

      Particularly the massive amount of skilled programmers hacking away at pirating software - imagine if a significant portion of those instead used their skills to develop software for say Linux. No, Microsoft knows what they're doing. It's simply about sacrificing a little profit right now, against keeping the platform and monopoly profits a while longer.

      Kjella

    • Re:SP2 Disabling Pirate Copies (Score:4, Insightful)

      by RedK ( 112790 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:59AM (#9343898)
      Because then the slashdot community will scream bloody murder, invasion of privacy, etc.. And they will probably be right. Why is this modded +5 ?
    • Gather information from Microsoft Office as well, any Word or Excel Documents that have addresses in them send those to MS as well.

      You use a legal copy of XP. Or Linux. Or a mac. Someone you know has a pirated copy of XP. They write your address in a Word document. The address gets sent to MS. Next thing you know the MS hit teams break down your door looking for your pirated copy of XP.

      Talk about a stupid idea.

    • Re:SP2 Disabling Pirate Copies (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Waffle Iron ( 339739 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @10:12AM (#9343950)
      That would be a disastrous approach for Microsoft. First, there's the PR issue with peddling products that seem to be "out to get" the customers, rightly or wrongly.

      Second, there are millions of casual pirates who install Windows on more machines than they've licensed, or who "borrow" a copy from work. Many of these people just aren't ever going to buy the appropriate number of copies of the OS, especially at retail prices. However, they do benefit Microsoft by remaining in the Windows "ecosystem", increasing its value through the network effect. If they crack down on these people, many of them will go to the effort to learn Linux or some other solution, thereby increasing the influence of alternative ecosystems at the expense of Microsoft's influence. This increased familiarity of alternative solutions in the general public would lower the barriers for Microsoft's lucrative customers, like entire businesses, from dumping all of their Microsoft products and switching to alternatives.

    • Re:SP2 Disabling Pirate Copies (Score:4, Insightful)

      by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @10:25AM (#9343995)
      Why not just have SP2 install and patch the system then report in ANY WAY POSSIBLE that this is a pirated copy of Window XP.
      Because Microsoft knows what the ideal level of piracy is: people who might pay do pay, and people who won't pay still help make you the de facto standard.

      I can understand Microsoft NOT making any effort to support unauthorized copies. But they don't need to make any extra effort; all they need to do is make a patch and let it float around the net. Instead, they're going out of their way to detect and "punish" the "pirates." That's a bit vindictive (though not to the extent you suggest).

      I think Microsoft is still within their rights, but as a Linux user and an Internet user I feel I'm helping pay a bit of the price for Microsoft's sweet revenge.

  • Ummm keygens? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Laser Dan ( 707106 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:29AM (#9343767)
    How is this going to help when there are programs that search for keys?
    I'm not sure how they work but I am *ahem* aware of one that finds keys for home, professional, corporate etc
    Takes a while but they keys seem to be random.

  • SP install time (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SuperBanana ( 662181 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:29AM (#9343768)

    Fairly unrelated, but has anyone else noticed that it usually takes about 10 times longer for an XP service pack or update to install versus win2k?

    This is based on observations doing windows updates on similar spec machines, 20+ win2k boxen and a few XP boxen.

    • Re:SP install time (Score:3, Interesting)

      by riscthis ( 597073 ) *

      Fairly unrelated, but has anyone else noticed that it usually takes about 10 times longer for an XP service pack or update to install versus win2k?

      This is based on observations doing windows updates on similar spec machines, 20+ win2k boxen and a few XP boxen.

      I think that's because XP will automatically create a full System Restore Checkpoint before applying the update. Win2K doesn't have System Restore, hence it's quicker. I bet if you disabled System Restore on the XP machines the speed would be com

  • Well, it is their choice (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nurb432 ( 527695 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:31AM (#9343781) Homepage Journal
    While it will generate bad press, and allow many unprotected PC's to propagate worms/viruses, it's their right to withhold updates.

    Unless that is, a class action law suit forces them to be responsible for their mistakes, much as car dealers are now. True it's not actually a 'safety' issue, and you don't 'own' the software like you do a car, but now that the government believes the internet is 'needed and a national issue', who knows.

    Personally I think they should offer it to everyone, they aren't going to loose any revenue over it. And it makes it look to the common man ( and the government ) that they care.

  • It won't matter much... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by halivar ( 535827 ) <`moc.liamg' `ta' `reglefb'> on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:34AM (#9343789)
    If the pirates are trying to install SP2, then they already have Windows installed. That means MS has already got their marketshare boost, and need not worry about actually supporting the pirate.

    After all, do you really think all those pirates are going to say, "Darn you, Microsoft!" and go install Gentoo?

    I think not.

  • Who buys Windows *retail*? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fwitness ( 195565 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:37AM (#9343802)
    I am wondering how many 'regular users' go out and buy a copy of Windows at the store. They retail for about $250-300, and I never see a shelf with a slot missing. Every single user that I know that has windows, got it with their computer.

    So how many *retail* copies of Windows does MS sell?

    It's rare that I encounter a pirated copy of Windows anymore, except on home made PCs. The funny part is, those that pirate usually have the key written on the CD. In contrast, whenever I have to reinstall at a relatives with their legitimate copy, they never can find their key.

    Microsoft should just go back to the C64 days of 'What is the third word of the fifth paragraph on the fifteenth page of your EULA?'

    This is, of course, assuming any printed copy of the EULA would be kept by Joe User. Estimates vary.

    • The Decoder Wheel (Score:3, Interesting)

      by bsd4me ( 759597 )

      Microsoft should just go back to the C64 days of 'What is the third word of the fifth paragraph on the fifteenth page of your EULA?'

      My favorite was the decoder wheel that came with Bard's Tale III. Can you imaging having to use that every time you booted up or opened a Word document?

      • Re:The Decoder Wheel (Score:3, Insightful)

        by fwitness ( 195565 )
        *sniff* decoders wheels. Those were the days.

        Notable mention also goes to 'hidden keys' which you had to place a piece of red plastic over to read.

        First place for 'Nostalgic Interactive Copy Protections of the Past' definetly goes to decoder wheels though. Rocket ranger was one of my favorite wheels. Useless, as the game sucked, but the wheel was fun. :)

    • Re:Who buys Windows *retail*? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Nintendork ( 411169 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @11:15AM (#9344252) Homepage
      "They retail for about $250-300, and I never see a shelf with a slot missing."

      And when I go to the grocery store, eveything appears to be fully stocked. I guess nobody buys groceries. *grin*

      -Lucas

  • customer alienation (Score:5, Insightful)

    by eagl ( 86459 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:37AM (#9343804) Journal
    *sarcasm*

    Does Microsoft REALLY want to alienate the 1-2 million loyal customers who are using those 20 codes?

    */sarcasm*

    It doesn't sound much different to me than charging higher insurance rates to people who have multiple traffic violations or at-fault accidents, and it apparently won't affect more than... maybe... 20 legitimate customers who can pick up the phone and call Microsoft if they need to update properly licensed installations.

    The only thing I'd worry about is if SP2 breaks backwards compatibility, once again using their de-facto OS monopoly to force EVERYONE to upgrade, just because they want to hurt software pirates or sell their next generation OS. That would be unfortunate and annoying.

  • Rather Irresponsible of them? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MooseByte ( 751829 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:38AM (#9343805)

    Are there any security patches in SP2 that will NOT be released separately? If so, I'd say this is one amazingly reckless move on Microsoft's part. In the end the legit users (even non-MS customers) will bear the brunt of Net attacks by compromised machines. After all, those "Top 20" licenses must account for a large number of machines, else why bother singling them out?

    Let's face it, even WITH the release of security patches its damn hard to get John Q. Public to keep up to date.

    Now if SP2 is only a "features and stability" release, more power to the software vendor, MS or not. (Wow, did I just conditionally support MS' position? I need a drink...)

  • I wonder if anyone realized (Score:5, Informative)

    by sweede ( 563231 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:40AM (#9343815)
    that they did the same thing with Service Pack 1. Service pack 1 didnt install unless you had a valid key.

    I also wonder how many people here realize that a Service pack is usually nothing more than a collection of security patches and bug fixes that you install in one shot instead of downloading 50+ updates from windowsupdate.com

    When SP1 was released and if you couldnt install it, you could still damn well download every update that SP1 contained as a seperate download and install.

    The big difference here is that SP2 will add new functionality to IE, WMP and a couple other included applications. Any other update (Security and bug fixes) will always be available seperatly on windowsupdate.com, just as they've always been

  • To remind again (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ceeam ( 39911 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @09:47AM (#9343842)
    Use keygens guys! :)

  • 20 most pirated codes (Score:5, Insightful)

    by KilobyteKnight ( 91023 ) <bjm.midsouth@rr@com> on Saturday June 05, 2004 @10:00AM (#9343900) Homepage
    Well, I guess it's time for everyone to go copy the numbers off the stickers on the floor displays at Best Buy again.

  • heh (Score:3, Funny)

    by teknokracy ( 660401 ) <teknokracy@noSpAM.telus.net> on Saturday June 05, 2004 @10:03AM (#9343911)
    awesome if you're using one of the 21st or more pirated ID.

  • This is old news (Score:3, Insightful)

    by rspress ( 623984 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @10:25AM (#9343997) Homepage
    Microsoft lied back on...uh I mean clarified their position back on May 10th.

    http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,1995,1 59 0150,00.asp

    Seems Microsoft is spending more and more time trying to cover up or explain what some of their spokespeople are saying.

    Not only that but the virus writers who are more likely to be running a pirated copy of windows should be really happy with Microsoft going back on its word to make this update available even to pirated copies. This should cut down on the number of viruses and Trojans they write. I am sure the holes in SP2 will be exploited within hours or days of its release.

  • Solutions and Workarounds (Score:3, Interesting)

    by gfecyk ( 117430 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @10:27AM (#9344008) Homepage Journal
    1) Buy a legal copy of XP and actually pay for the support you deserve. You can get cut rates from mose vendors IF you buy some hardware (for example, new hard drive, or new RAM stick) with it.

    2) Use one of the multitude of product key changers available (I'm not telling) like what happened when SP1 came out.

    3) Use Windows 2000 instead - everything designed for XP so far works fine on Win2K Service Pack 4, though you will need IE6 among other free add-ons to get some functionality included in XP. If you're cheap, go talk to the guy you got XP from.

    4) If you really insist on using a non-service-packed XP, then go buy some third-party security (hardware firewall, anti-virus software) like you used to do with your pirated copy of Win98.

    Take responsibility for your own computer security, already, or pay someone to do it for you. Stop whining about how Microsoft is deliberately and maliciosly denying you support you don't deserve because you didn't pay for it. Or do the legwork and get Linux and learn how to use it.

    As for Microsoft being "irresponsible," sorry. Users have to choose to be irresponsible. You don't have to use that pirated copy of XP.

    • Re:Solutions and Workarounds (Score:4, Insightful)

      by mark-t ( 151149 ) <markt.nerdflat@com> on Saturday June 05, 2004 @11:01AM (#9344186) Journal
      The problem is that this affects everyone whether they are pirates or not.

      The presence of compromised machines, even if they are not your own, result in increased network traffic, resulting in a slower overall connection if you don't happen to have a dedicated bandwidth connection. Further, the compromised machines can be used by spammers to harrass pretty much everyone, even if they use non Windows OS's.

      In principle, this is no different from people who have hacked into the computer system on their car to figure out what the diagnostic codes mean (a violation of the DMCA), and then if the car is recalled due to a safety flaw, they are not allowed to get the problem fixed due to their violation.

      Now I realize that this is hardly a safety issue and lives are not likely to be lost, but the principles are ultimately the same... the only difference is a matter of degree.

      That's why so many people are upset about this. At least, that's what I would imagine is the reason.

  • redhat does worse (Score:5, Interesting)

    by treat ( 84622 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @10:42AM (#9344103)
    Redhat will not let you patch your Enterprise Linux system unless your subscription fee is current.

    Why does no one complain about this?
    • Because that is using their bandwidth and services.

      You can get linux patches anywhere, just not from RH unless you pay for using their service.

    • Re:redhat does worse (Score:3, Insightful)

      by hughk ( 248126 )
      We do complain, everytime we have to go out to the source code or to find other patches. I mean it is so easy just to grap the XP source code and to fix it yourself.


      Nobody here is going to slag RH off because if you want to maintain a distribution outside their network, there are many other places (Google, for White box Linux).

  • I still say Win2KPro/Server are MS's best products (Score:4, Interesting)

    by LazloToth ( 623604 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @10:47AM (#9344123)
    Well, what do I know - - I run a small network. But with Windows 2000 Pro on the desktops, 2000 Server and Linux in the back office, and an enterprise license for Norton AntiVirus Corporate, we keep 250 or so machines clean and updated. We run the free MS SUS for updates, by the way. Not a bad little system - - we set up Active Directory to force clients to hit our SUS server once a week, and have another method of shooting out emergency patches rapidly if we need to. XP seems to be another black eye for MS - - I don't know any admins who have been pleased with upgrades from Win2k to XP. Thank Zeus we didn't buy Software Assurance and feel compelled to "get our money's worth" by moving to this pretty, but deeply flawed piece of work from Redmond. Reminds me of the Windows Me fiasco - - it was all about needing profits, had nothing to do with improving the product line. XP is another one for the "Bob" file.

  • A Modest Proposal (Score:4, Interesting)

    by defishguy ( 649645 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @10:48AM (#9344127) Journal
    Pirates = "I want my Windows XP"
    MS = "I want your money"

    MS could easily charge a few bucks per patch or charge another fifty bucks or so per service pack so that our friends that are using extended demos can keep their OS up2date (hint hint)while continuing to *ahem* try out the operating system. Over a few years MS would easily recover the cost of the pirated copy, the pirate wouldn't have to be a test person for new viruses with old exploits and it would enhance the security for the net as a whole.

    The problem with MS is that they HAVEN'T adopted the cell phone or razor blade model of business. Let's face it. If the OS were REALLY inexpensive then they could reasonably charge for services outside of the OS such as service packs or feature upgrades. Red Hat, IBM, Apple, they all do it and are profitable.
  • I used to be really unhappy that Microsoft would not allow service patches to be used on pirated copies of windows.

    It means that compromised machines will remain on the net for a long time, and it also means that eventually, a killer virus WILL shut down a bunch of computers, and really piss a bunch of people off.

    Why? I know you can apply hot fixes anyways. But people are too lazy to find the ~200 hotfixes that comprise a service pack.

    Anyways, back to why I'm happy about it:

    Back in the day (Win95 era) MS basically encouraged piracy. It ensures vendor lock-in, and substantially hurt the revenue of any competitive offerings. Most piracy was petty, anyways-- You bought a new computer, it came with an OEM copy, you bought a laptop, it came with an OEM copy. But that computer you built for your mom, or that older computer you gave to a friend, got upgraded to the latest and greatest windows for free.

    Until now. Now, that is no longer really possible.

    Hopefully, this will give greater impetus for people to switch to alternatives (like Linux).

    Linux looses a lot of its competitive advantage when windows is effectively 'free' too. Windows pirate has typically been rampant.

    If even a small portion of those pirates switch, it will be a substantial move of the market.

    I know this business (both the absurd patching regime, and the inability to 'soft' pirate) made me switch.

    I can't keep track of all those serial numbers. I think all the computers in my home (5? 6?) have valid copies of Windows XP associated with them. I'm sure all the laptops came with them. But it is too much trouble to keep track of all that stuff.

    Now everything runs SuSE. I bought one copy, reasonable cost ~$70.00, and I'm in the clear, legally.
    • forcing your choice of o/s on the unwashed masses just avoids the issue at hand.

      at hand, we're dealing with the mass spread of exploitable machines. this is crime-one.

      detach your thinking of 'windows is bad, getting people to move to linux is good' from the notion of keeping the net clean of uncompromised boxes might be helpful.

      (I use freebsd, so I think that even linux is the wrong thing to turn windows people onto. but if they use windows and want to use it, FINE. don't get religious on them now - j

  • Microsoft seems to be ignorant of its own success (Score:3, Interesting)

    by GeorgeH ( 5469 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @11:43AM (#9344348) Homepage Journal
    This is a baffling approach to furthing their trusted computing platform. Why would you trust a product that isn't secure across the board? An even greater mystery is the fact that Microsoft appears to be ignoring the importance of the network effect [wikipedia.org].

    One of the reasons Microsft software is so popular is because Microsoft software is so popular. In order to business, you need something that can read/write MS Office files because that's what people are going to send you. That's why Microsoft is so hung up on their proprietary file formats, because they keep people buying MS Office. Once MS Office files reached the tipping point [wikipedia.org], MS saw sales skyrocket.

    The same ideas apply to network security, if there area few hosts unpatched due to ignorance they may avoid losing public trust. To do something that actively prevents people from patching their hosts, they increase the number of worms on the network. This increases the chances that Microsoft will be perceived as insecure and can only affect them negatively.

    Do they really think pirates will say "Oh no, I've downloaded a possibly virus infected OS from an unknown source, and now you're saying I won't get security updates? Please take my money!"

  • Useless, cracks (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ShecoDu ( 447850 ) on Saturday June 05, 2004 @01:44PM (#9344993) Homepage
    Here in mexico, piracy is a major concern... everybody uses a pirate copy of windows, nobody ever thinks about paying for a copy, it's not an option.

    Microsoft did the same thing with SP1, everybody downloaded a crack from cracks.am and changed windows' serial, SP1's restriction was bypassed, I 'm sure microsoft hardcoded most (if not all) all those serials, but I bet a new batch of serials will come.

    The solution is not "punishing" the market or whatever (can't find the right word), the solution would be lowering the prices, it's not like they NEED the liceses to be so expensive, is it?

    In the mean time, Mexico (for one) will continue the piracy practices.

    Fortunatelly I dont need it, I own the windose version that came installed in my notebook, and I use linux 99% of the time anyway.

    Cheers

Slashdot Top Deals

The Tao is like a glob pattern: used but never used up. It is like the extern void: filled with infinite possibilities.

Close