Is Microsoft Readying A "Kill Switch" For Windows?

[Ed Hansberry]

<a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=84">http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=84</a><br /><br /><i>"Two weeks ago, I wrote about my serious objections to Microsoft’s latest salvo in the war against unauthorized copies of Windows. Two Windows Genuine Advantage components are being pushed onto users’ machines with insufficient notification and inadequate quality control, and the result is a big mess. Guess what? WGA might be on the verge of getting even messier. In fact, one report claims WGA is about to become a Windows “kill switch” – and when I asked Microsoft for an on-the-record response, <b>they refused to deny it.</b>"</i> <i><span>(Emphasis added)</i></span><br /><br />A week or so ago, I wrote about how <a href="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=49274">Windows Genuine Asininity (WGA) phones home daily</a> to see what it needs to do, a "feature" they have recently removed via the June 27 WGA update. Now though, it seems MS is forging ahead with WGA to the point where the system may essentially revoke your license if it sees fit to do so. I actually hope they push ahead with this at 200mph. Then, I am going to sit back and wait for the Wall Street Journal headline where some Fortune 500 company had a mission critical server disabled by WGA and is in the process of filing a lawsuit against MS for the financial cost of the downtime. I am trying to think of something stupider MS could do here and the only thing I can think of is to collaborate with their hardware partners to put a credit-card swipe mechanism on the front of the computer that the user has to swipe at least weekly before logging in, renting more Windows time from Microsoft.<br /><br />I guess Windows Mobile is somewhat shielded from this. We often can't get legitimate updates for our devices because they simply don't exist. MS probably isn't worried too much about illegal ones. Yet. :?<br /><br /><img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/hansberry/newspin.gif" /><b><span style="color:red"><span>Update:</span></span></b> <a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=88">Microsoft officially denies Kill Switch technology.</a> <i>Microsoft anti-piracy technologies cannot and will not turn off your computer.</i> :clap:

[IpaqMan2]

I have always foreseen the time when I would have to move strickly to a linux system in my home. Whether one OS is better than the other one is not the point. I enjoy windows because of all the software available, from games to business needs. But with Microsoft now trying to take so much control of the users system, I just see Linux as my next move, and I am saying this a person who has legitimate copies of Windows. But it's ok.... If Microsoft does this it will be the beginning of their down fall and a mass migration of Linux will begin to happen from businesses, to govrnment office, to those people who are too cheap to by windows.

[Pdaholic]

Well, folks, I haven't tried this out yet, but I plan on doing so today:
http://www.torrentspy.com/torrent/781725/Windows_Genuine_Advantage_for_Windows_XP_Remover_exe

There's always going to be someone ready to fight back.

[paschott]

This was discussed quite a bit on SlashDot yesterday evening/early this morning. Seems the original rumor was just from a front-line support person. While MS may not deny the rumor, the general consensus is that this will pretty much bring down MS - not quickly, but it will tick off enough people that they will seriously consider the possibility of moving to a Mac.

(While I like the freedom and potential that Linux offers, it also doesn't really offer a good desktop experience for Joe User. Install an app - sure, just untar this file, compile with these exact switches, then chmod the resulting file to do .... It's getting better, but there's still just a little too much of this in Linux for your average user.)

You joke about the Credit Card/Time thing, but I seem to remember that MS is actually working on this or already released something like it for people who don't spend most of their day in front of a PC. It bills you per time used on the PC and when you've paid the amount that Windows is worth, you're unlocked and charged no more. If that works, I can see that as a pretty decent alternative to buying an upgrade outright (wouldn't work for me as the first bill would be for the total amount).

Anyway, most of the more serious posts just touched on the usual points. If this became reality, the only people actually affected would be the legal users who get false hits on this WGA stuff and MS after it affects a mission critical workstation(s) at a really large company or in the government. Pirates will have a crack/patch/workaround within a day. Kind of sad, but I've heard enough of the stories from people who have legit copies of windows and are forced to buy another copy because something goes wrong with activation after upgrading a piece of hardware or just wanting to change boxes completely because the old one is dead.

Interesting post and I'm hoping that it really does just boil down to rumor. Vista is a whole 'nother story. I've read some rumors circulating about Corporate VLK "Authentication" servers to periodically authenticate your VLK copy of Windows. I can see the same problem there. Extended vacation. Pick up the laptop at some point to surf the web. Windows doesn't work because it hasn't/can't check in with the corporate server. Not a pretty picture there.

-Pete

[capo]

I find WGA patches to be an annoyance in much the same way all Windows patches are an annoyance. Maybe a bit more so because they're so frequent and (from my perspective) useless. That being taken into account, I'm not too worried - as I recall, a lot of people freaked out when MS first added a requirement to activate Windows and Office. Having had to re-activate assorted copies of MS software when I switch computers (I tend to do that a lot), I've found the process to be mostly painless. I've never gotten the third degree from any MS tech. (would that I could say the same for some other software vendors whose licensing is even more convoluted and annoying than Microsoft's) On the other hand, if Redmond ever did decide to get heavy handed, there are other OS options available. I prefer Windows, but I'm not allergic to Linux or OSX...

[IpaqMan2]

hat being taken into account, I'm not too worried - as I recall, a lot of people freaked out when MS first added a requirement to activate Windows and Office. Having had to re-activate assorted copies of MS software when I switch computers (I tend to do that a lot), I've found the process to be mostly painless. I've never gotten the third degree from any MS tech. (would that I could say the same for some other software vendors whose licensing is even more convoluted and annoying than Microsoft's)

Well, it's always nice to hear about the 1, 2 or even a hundred thousand people who never had a problem re-activating Microsoft's software, until it the one time it happens to you. A laptop with a presentation you have to show in the next 4 minutes or you'll be fired. A server that has stopped responding which now has brought down the entire company. A student who can't email their home work that is on the computer and thus gets a failing grade.

I am sure the above examples would be remote from the stand point of millions of users, but the fact that it can happen and does, is just not acceptable to legitimate users who legally paid for the use of their software. The only downfall to the people above was that they were honest law-abiding consumer of Microsoft's product or they just used Microsoft's product in the first place. So which is the greater evil here?

Sure the above situation is hypothetical, but with Microsoft's history of releasing buggy incomplete software coated in the attitude of "Everything is done My Way Only", it'll only be a matter of time before stories like the above will overshadow any good or success Microsoft might of done.

[Kevin Daly]

To be fair, Microsoft is an American company, and thefore is undoubtedly influenced in its assumptions by the behaviour of the American public.
So they no doubt quite reasonably assume that if you'll swallow the whole Homeland Security Fear For Profit Show you'll swallow anything.

[BugDude10]

Hmm... maybe Microsoft is following Sony after all (at least in the corporate stupidity department)...

http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=63757&amp;sid=4dfc0090d5350b1cc3451a26b6306d42

[unxmully]

While I like the freedom and potential that Linux offers, it also doesn't really offer a good desktop experience for Joe User. Install an app - sure, just untar this file, compile with these exact switches, then chmod the resulting file to do .... It's getting better, but there's still just a little too much of this in Linux for your average user.

Have you tried Ubuntu? Add/Remove programs works with network repositories so there's no downloading, untarring, building unless you choose to.

[onemorecoder]

I preface my comments by noting that I disagree with most of the replies to this post. Please also note that I am not a Microsoft employee, nor have I ever been a Microsoft employee.

Microsoft is a for-profit business. As such, they do have the right and responsibility to protect the value of their product. They also protect and defend their product through their agreement(s), the End User License Agreement(s), which each consumer who installs their product agrees to prior to installation.

If a business has installed a product that cannot be validated by Microsoft, then there is high probability that the product is counterfeit. As such, Microsoft is merely protecting and defending their rights under the their respective agreement(s) with the consumer. They are merely using all of the tools at their disposal.

Please remember these things the next time you choose to install a Microsoft product, and read the EULA. If you disagree with the EULA, don't install the software, and please don't complain or whine about the consequences.

As for Service Packs, select the custom install option. Do not blindly accept whatever is sent to your computer by Microsoft, or by any other software provider that provides a push feed. The options are there for the configuration by the software user. Microsoft does not install software blindly, as in the case of Sony.

As a software developer/system administrator/database administrator, I am not in the business of software development for leisure. I am in the software development business for profit. I do have the expectation that the software products I develop will enjoy the same rights afforded to Microsoft.

I also expect that the market will judge the products that I produce in the same manner that Microsoft products are judged, with a critical eye.

Please note that Microsoft still holds a major share of the end-user market. As such, they have created a product which satisfies the needs of the market sufficent for them to make a profit.

[x51vuser]

From somwhere on the net :-)

Bill Gates is hanging out with the chairman of General Motors.

"If automotive technology had kept pace with computer technology over the past few decades," boasts Gates, "you would now be driving a V-32 instead of a V-8, and it would have a top speed of 10,000 miles per hour. Or, you could have an economy car that weighs 30 pounds and gets a thousand miles to a gallon of gas. In either case, the sticker price of a new car would be less than $50."

"Sure," says the GM chairman. "But would you really want to drive a car that calls factory every 5 minutes and crashes four times a day?"

[bk227865]

We live in a universe where murphy rules, Accidents will happen.
If they realy implement this sort of kill switch then you kan bet your live on it that it will go BOOM at a wrong time in a wrong place.

Some IT'er that implements a company software upgrade, WGA chokes on it and the whole company goes offline :devilboy:

gotta love boobietraps.

[Ed Hansberry]

For those following this, MS has now officially denied this. See the link in the first post of this thread. MS's PR machine still isn't working very effectivly on this issue, and they are still being secretive about WGA, but it seems the kill-switch is off the table.

[Janak Parekh]

For those following this, MS has now officially denied this. See the link in the first post of this thread. MS's PR machine still isn't working very effectivly on this issue, and they are still being secretive about WGA, but it seems the kill-switch is off the table.
That PR, though, seems to be a non-denial denial. They couldn't possibly do a worse job. :? Worse, the update Ed Bott posts is worrisome.

--janak

[Janak Parekh]

If a business has installed a product that cannot be validated by Microsoft, then there is high probability that the product is counterfeit.
"High probability" isn't good enough. If Microsoft does eventually deny service to legitimate customers, even by accident, that would be a terrible thing and may very well drive customers away. What needs to be determined is if that probability is low enough so as to balance the gains made against piracy.

Please remember these things the next time you choose to install a Microsoft product, and read the EULA. If you disagree with the EULA, don't install the software, and please don't complain or whine about the consequences.
In addition... it's easy to say this, but Microsoft is a monopoly. As a monopoly, Microsoft doesn't have the right to demand anything they want. There are a lot of people that will use Microsoft software by necessity, not necessarily by choice.

As for Service Packs, select the custom install option.
What are you talking about?

1. Windows service packs have never had a custom install option. The only thing you can vary is whether or not a backup is first made.

2. WGA Validation is required to run Windows Update. It is not yet required for Automatic Updates.

3. WGA Notifications is the one "optional" component, but it's prepackaged and described by MS as a critical update. As such, 99% of users install it without realizing it.

Microsoft does not install software blindly, as in the case of Sony.
True. However, I think people are afraid of what they may eventually do. Is there any details on what WGA components will be built into Vista, for instance? I would assume WGA Validation will be integrated, but maybe I'm wrong.

--janak

[Ed Hansberry]

2. WGA Validation is required to run Windows Update. It is not yet required for Automatic Updates.

It is also required for Microsoft Update, the more powerful update tool that keeps Office and other server products like Exchange and SQL Server up to date.

[lapchinj]

...but Microsoft is a monopoly. As a monopoly, Microsoft doesn't have the right to demand anything they want. There are a lot of people that will use Microsoft software by necessity, not necessarily by choice.
I think that this is a very important point. There are a lot of people who really don't care what OS they run. The applications hosted byt the OS have to work for whatever the user intends to do. Even though MS says there is no kill switch the response goes on to say that they will protect their products. Which sounds to not to be a true denial of a kill switch. Maybe MS will only shoot out the kneecaps of the ofending system.

It seems that everyone has heard of someone who couldn't validate a store bought 100% legit copy of Windows by now. And it also seems that because of these stories FUD is slowly taking hold. A very close friend of mine (even though he is a Palm user) woke up one day a couple of months ago and couldn't validate his copy of Windows (a machine bought from Dell within the last 2 years). Worked unsuccessfuly for days to resolve the problem. At the end of the week he went out and bought a brand new intel based MAC 8O . This guy is by no means an anti-anything type of guy. He is a normal, middle aged, highly talented graphics type with a $3000 graphics card, wife, 1 kid, a dog and a house in the 'burbs. All I could get out of him when asked why; 'I needed some fresh air and it will only get worse. I give up'. I think this was a little drastic but he had once happen before and just didn't want the hassle anymore. (Deep down I think he just snapped :? .)

The point I wanted to bring out with this tale of woe is that this guy would have stayed forever with Windows but it was becoming a hassle he didn't need and was able to make a switch. There are enough alternatives to MS and MAC seems to be a no-brainer for a drop-in replacement and it seems that people are seeing the adds and giving the alternatives a try. So for some stupid reason of someone not being able to validate a machine he went to a different company's product. If MS is validating products they should have a mechinism in place to fix these types of problems. They shouldn't leave a person up the river without a paddle.

Jeff-

[desertrat_blog]

While I like the freedom and potential that Linux offers, it also doesn't really offer a good desktop experience for Joe User. Install an app - sure, just untar this file, compile with these exact switches, then chmod the resulting file to do .... It's getting better, but there's still just a little too much of this in Linux for your average user.

Have you tried Ubuntu? Add/Remove programs works with network repositories so there's no downloading, untarring, building unless you choose to.

The question to paschott should really be "have you tried any Linux distro in the past 5 years?". Practically all the Linux distros use a pointy clicky interface for installing software (and of course you can also use the command line interface if you wish).

[paschott]

While I like the freedom and potential that Linux offers, it also doesn't really offer a good desktop experience for Joe User. Install an app - sure, just untar this file, compile with these exact switches, then chmod the resulting file to do .... It's getting better, but there's still just a little too much of this in Linux for your average user.

Have you tried Ubuntu? Add/Remove programs works with network repositories so there's no downloading, untarring, building unless you choose to.

The question to paschott should really be "have you tried any Linux distro in the past 5 years?". Practically all the Linux distros use a pointy clicky interface for installing software (and of course you can also use the command line interface if you wish).

The answer to that would be yes. I have SUSe 10.0 installed in a dual-boot configuration on my home PC. In general, installing software is pretty easy. However, if I run into a problem with dependencies or want something that may not have been nicely packaged, it's more than the average user can do to fix things. Besides, if I want to add a new repository from which I can download software packages in Linux, it's still somewhat of a hassle. Find the correct repository that has the updates. Point to the correct folder. Add that in to (package management program here) in the appropriate manner, then check for updates and dependencies. Once it's set up it's great. However getting it set up is not necessarily quick or straightforward. While I can get it done with some fiddling, your average user won't really bother after the 2nd or 3rd error message.

And I will add the distros like Xandros or Lindows (forget the current name) make this pretty easy, especially staying with just their packages, but anything outside of that is just not easy enough for Joe User. You can't buy a CD, pop it in, then have it just start prompting you to install for most products out there.


I should also add that some programs just don't have a (good/existing) Linux equivalent at this time and don't run too well with Wine from what I've heard. (e.g. Print Shop - something my wife uses a lot, or various Home Design packages) Add in to the fact that games just take a while to port over to Linux and I still argue that it's not quite ready for the average desktop user.

I want to like Linux. I really do. I just think if I were to have my less computer-savvy friends switch over, my support calls would increase quite a bit as things just wouldn't quite work as expected.

Currently, I'm trying to figure out how I can port over everything I like to do to Linux so I'll be ready to completely switch before Vista is pushed on everyone. From what I've seen/read/heard I just don't want to install Vista as a primary OS.

Anyway, I'll be upgrading my SUSe to 10.1 shortly. I'll see how that progresses.

-Pete