Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> Mark on Tuesday
>> High Plains Thumper wrote:
>>
>>> I see a Vista-less future for me.
>>
>> BadVista.com
>> http://badvista.fsf.org/
>>
>> DefectiveByDesign
>> http://defectivebydesign.org/
>>
>> Microsoft's DRM and SPP enforcements is a torture chamber.
>>
>> A Microsoft rep told me one time: 'Microsoft is about big business
>> spending large amounts of money on Microsoft's software. End users are
>> not of any concern.' I always believe what he told me after he could not
>> wait to leave a demo of Windows XP in Micro Center.
>
> It is a form of taxation that one cannot vote on or decline. Whether it's
> your workplace or the OEM, Microsoft software costs are already deducted
> from your wallet/wage.
The tax I do not like is the intrusive nature of these type measures,
which in essence is reminiscent of industrial espionage. They do not
need to know what all hardware one has installed on his/her system,
what all browsers, software they are using. What is to prevent the
software from also identifying what partitions one has installed, what
other operating systems one has installed, and what other software one
has installed?
I found this article interesting:
http://www.heise-security.co.uk/news/86294
<Quote>
Report of 06.03.2007 18:00
WGA notification just doesn't stop
As announced, Microsoft has updated its Windows Genuine Advantage
Notification. Microsoft uses the tool to "convince" users to buy
original software if the WGA check finds that a stolen Windows
activation key is being used. But the tool also calls Redmond if the
user cancels installation.
</Quote>
Well, I cancelled a couple times. Last time I cancelled was when I
was installing a second system with another copy of Home XP Ed that I
had purchased for my home network, a couple years back. System kept
insisting on phoning home through the modem, even before I got the
antivirus and personal firewall installed. I was trying to get it to
communicate through my home network. Next thing I knew is it had a
pop-up window, that only gave me 3 days to authenticate before it
would cease to function. Huh?
I ended up telephoning Microsoft's authorisation center. First thing
I was asked was whether it was a legal copy. What in the blazes am I
doing with another box of XP in my hands with? A hot version? Okay,
I assured the technical help it wasn't. Then I read off the some 20
to 30 characters of diagnostic string that read like a software key.
Then I received back about the same amount of letters back from them.
I inputted those, and then was up and operating.
They are certainly doing a good job of convincing me of going full
time to Linux, that is for sure.
<Quote>
Network sniffer Wireshark casts some light on the matter: the update
rats on users who do not want to install the software to the server at
http://genuine.microsoft.com/. Users are not informed of this on a
standard Windows installation, however.
In addition to some confusing, apparently encrypted data, the WGA
Update Installer also uses the XML tag UGD to transmit the value
stored in the registry as a string for SusClientID under the Windows
Update branch. In addition, the data transmitted contain information
about the version of the WGA Notification Tool, Windows, and the
language of the operating system. Furthermore, a cookie containing a
GUID is also used to contact the server. It may be possible to
identify individual computers by these means.
</Quote>
--
HPT
|
|
