Desim join:2001-11-03 Portland, OR
1 recommendation |
to blacksurfer
Re: People with fake keys can't protect from Sasser!Yeah no support for people who stole it.
I know FCK keys were blacklisted, but just before sp1 came out, there were alot of ways to get around it.
And another thing about pirated stuff, IF you goto some Asian countries, its hard to find a Real Copy of a software. Almost all the stores sell Bootleg copies. |
actions · 2004-May-6 7:52 pm · (locked) |
dave Premium Member join:2000-05-04 not in ohio
1 recommendation |
to jvmorris
said by jvmorris: Whaddaya mean, your key has been "compromised"? Is that some sort of euphemism for the fact that you're running a fake or counterfeited version of Windows? Or does it mean what it seems to mean -- that someone else is using your key? Can we put this in plain English, dave?
That reply referred to the scenario in which I am a legal XP owner and am also a firewall user. However, unknown to me, some nincompoop with a key generator has randomly chanced upon my key, has spread the key around, and alarm bells are now ringing in Redmond. So, one day I visit Windows Update to get the latest updates (not in a panic, because I'm snug behind my firewall), and am refused update service because my key is now on some Bad Guys List. OK, that's fair enough. I'll be annoyed, but as long as I can call MS soon and get it sorted out, I'll be content. However, it was suggested that it would good if not only were I refused the update, but my computer immediately (or perhaps in 30 days) gets its networking capabilities turned off, or it shuts down, or something of that nature. The stated reason for doing this is that without the denied update, I am a menace to the rest of the network, because I will be infected and I will spread the infection to others. I reject the 'positive penalty' of having something bad done to my machine (even if it will be reversed as soon as I straighten things out with MS) because neither have I done anything wrong nor am I likely to spread virii. |
actions · 2004-May-6 7:54 pm · (locked) |
|
to Duct tape
Re: People with fake keys can't protect from Sassesaid by Duct tape:
quote: Note: in SP2, all XP keys that don't generate a PID of 640 will be killed, so be warned if you used a keygen.
Was not aware of this. This has direct consequences for both sides of this argument. Links?
You can find a little more discussion of this issue @ » www.neowin.net/comments. ··· num=28.5and at: » techrepublic.com.com/520 ··· =1596989now of course there are already PID changers floating around so where there's a will, there's a way. |
actions · 2004-May-6 7:54 pm · (locked) |
jvmorrisI Am The Man Who Was Not There. MVM join:2001-04-03 Reston, VA |
to Brad Helm
said by Brad Helm:
said by jvmorris: Yep, it's called 'fireproofing'. As soon as the ISPs start comprehensively invoking that policy, their revenues are going to drop rather precipitously (unless forced to do so by some external entity, as we've seen in the past). Hey, ISPs don't exist to secure the public good, they exist to make money!
Last I checked, Microsoft was in it for the moeny as well, not for the altruistic reasons. Why should they have to support people who aren't willing to financially support Microsoft?
Oh, come on, Brad! Thirty days after someone installs the OS, Microsoft either has the money or it isn't going to see it (under the current paradigm). Indeed, Vic's approach makes it more likely that they will get some money. If you really believe that allowing users of illicit copies of Windows to be able to download critical updates (and only for that 30-day period) is even noticeable to Microsoft's bookkeepers, I think you're kidding yourself. Under the current Microsoft strategy, the bogus copies keep on working (and polluting the rest of us) just fine; under Vic's alternative, they don't. quote: The way I read most of Vic's posts, he was advocating Microsoft make its updates available to everyone regardless of their license status. Perhaps I'll revisit the posts to see if I over-looked something.
The way I read my own interchange with Vic in this thread, you get 30 days to provide a legitimate key. If you don't, you're dead meat -- doesn't matter if you bought it legitimately, whether you're a knowing pirate, or some poor guy that got conned with an el cheapo deal. quote: AFAIK, anyone with a legitimate copy of MS Windows can call Microsoft to activate over the phone, at any time during their ownership of license. In fact, I've had to make that call on several occassions when I upgraded my PC's from one CPU/mobo to another. Go through the voice-prompts and either get an activation key or get an operator who figures out why the voice-recognition software fubared. Granted it's a PITA, but in my experience, there is NO reason a person should not be able to authenticate their MS Windows in order to receive the appropriate updates. Unless, of course, their CD-KEY is on one of the lists of known bogus codes....
Sure. I thought that was one of the options, but all my Windows boxes do have Internet access. At this point, I don't give a damn. You can have spent the $200 to license Windows XP Pro; you register it or you kiss your money goodbye -- after the 30 days, it's not just no updates, it's no OS! . . . . |
actions · 2004-May-6 7:55 pm · (locked) |
vic102482 Premium Member join:2002-04-30 Upper Marlboro, MD 1 edit |
to dave
Re: People with fake keys can't protect from Sasser!said by dave:
said by vic102482: Better than giving them unlimied days to run around getting every virus known to man and sendnig me 50K emails per week lol.
What makes you think that not-installing-the-update leads to getting every virus known to man?
I happen to have the update, but (a) I'm safe from all email viruses due to sophisticated wetware, and (b) I'm safe from worms, which is the issue here, by virtue of a cheapo nat box.
So let's say I go to Windows Update, and it turns out my key has been compromised. On what grounds did you want to disable my network access? Just because I might be clueless?
Dave comeon now, we dont have very far left to go in this debate if my grammar and spelling is going to come under attack.:( I reject the 'positive penalty' of having something bad done to my machine (even if it will be reversed as soon as I straighten things out with MS)So what is going on with denying updates from Windows what is that? A negative penalty? because neither have I done anything wrong nor am I likely to spread virii. This is what I have been saying the whole time, innocents are going to be caught in the crossfire in any instance. |
actions · 2004-May-6 8:10 pm · (locked) |
|
vic102482 1 edit |
to Brad Helm
Re: People with fake keys can't protect from Sassesaid by Brad Helm:
said by vic102482:
That is a self defeating statement said by "Microsoft guy". If one of the "benefits" of ownership is protection, then why must I be bombarded by someone that cant update their own system? Should I recieve 10,000 Netsky viruses from teh same IP because someone cant update their stolen software?
Who is really paying the price here is the question I have.
Rather than lay the responsibility on Microsoft, why not lay the responsibility on the users and their ISP's? I believe most ISP's have a clause in their user agreements which states that the ISP can terminate a customer's service if that customer's connection/usage becomes detrimental to their network.
So if a person neglects to maintain their computer, have their ISP's shut them out of the internet. Of course, there is always a chance that the cheap-arsed, software pirate may simply be using a hacked commection to the internet and not paying for that either, so this solution would help the fiscal viability of both software manufacturers AND the ISPs....
Excellent suggestion, then it doesnt matter if you are pirated or not. I agree with that one right there!:) BUT I dont think the responsibility should lay with the ISPs, they should be free to do it on their own accord:). |
actions · 2004-May-6 8:14 pm · (locked) |
vic102482 |
to Erwin_D
Re: People with fake keys can't protect from Sasser!said by Erwin_D: Getting back to the car anology...
The problem isn't maintenance, it is a defect. Microsoft basically put a defective product on the market, and it needs to be repaired.
If a thief stole a car and went driving it into town, and then ran over some people becuase the brakes are defective due to a design/construction fault, the car manufacturer is damn well responsible and accountable for the damage, even though the car was used by an unauthorized person.
Makes you think...
Excellent point as well. Just because something is stolen doesnt mean that a manufacturers defect is simply discarded in the case of injury. |
actions · 2004-May-6 8:15 pm · (locked) |
BlitzenZeusBurnt Out Cynic Premium Member join:2000-01-13
1 recommendation |
to blacksurfer
Re: People with fake keys can't protect from SasseI have no sympathy for those running stolen software.
Why in the hell should you have help people who stole from you?? As long as your legit there is no problems.
Its not a stupid move, don't these idiots realize they can just use a firewall to protect themselves, or are they just too lazy to enable the xp firewall, if not install another free firewall on the system running pirated software. |
actions · 2004-May-6 8:18 pm · (locked) |
|
to blacksurfer
Re: People with fake keys can't protect from Sasser!I wonder why so many people even bother pirating Windows XP.
Windows 2000 is a better OS, and you don't run into blacklisted CD keys, registration, and so on. |
actions · 2004-May-6 8:20 pm · (locked) |
1 recommendation |
to jvmorris
Re: People with fake keys can't protect from Sassesaid by jvmorris: Oh, come on, Brad! Thirty days after someone installs the OS, Microsoft either has the money or it isn't going to see it (under the current paradigm). Indeed, Vic's approach makes it more likely that they will get some money. If you really believe that allowing users of illicit copies of Windows to be able to download critical updates (and only for that 30-day period) is even noticeable to Microsoft's bookkeepers, I think you're kidding yourself. Under the current Microsoft strategy, the bogus copies keep on working (and polluting the rest of us) just fine; under Vic's alternative, they don't
My point is that it shouldn't matter whether the software manufacturer is a one-person operation or a large multinational like Microsoft, the principle of requiring a software vendor to support unlicensed softwares is contrary to free enterprise. If the company wants to support unlicensed copies of its software, more power to them. But I don't think we have the right to insist on such support. If you want to regulate anything, regulate access to the internet and the ISP's as communication carriers. Force the ISP's to protect and self-regulate their section of the internet.... |
actions · 2004-May-6 8:20 pm · (locked) |
NerdtalkerWorking Hard, Or Hardly Working? MVM join:2003-02-18 San Jose, CA
1 recommendation |
to BlitzenZeus
said by BlitzenZeus: I have no sympathy for those running stolen software.
Why in the hell should you have help people who stole from you?? As long as your legit there is no problems.
Its not a stupid move, don't these idiots realize they can just use a firewall to protect themselves, or are they just too lazy to enable the xp firewall, if not install another free firewall on the system running pirated software.
Same here, if they really cared (or knew enough), they'd do just that, install a decent firewall. It really speaks about these people in that they expect Microsoft to drop everything and cater to their whims, and they never even think of the possibility of using a firewall to combat this issue. |
actions · 2004-May-6 8:28 pm · (locked) |
|
to blacksurfer
If you are not smart enough to change your cd key you do not deserve patches!
You could also use open source instead of stealing. |
actions · 2004-May-6 8:30 pm · (locked) |
|
OSS is a legal option to software piracy.....I whole-heartedly agree! If you cannot afford a commercial software product, look to see if there is an Open Source solution that you can afford.
There's a world of OSS out there, and a lot of it can compete heads-up with their commercial counterparts. |
actions · 2004-May-6 8:35 pm · (locked) |
Hickerx2God Bless The U.S. Military join:2001-03-04 Franklinville, NY |
to reaver221
Re: People with fake keys can't protect from Sasser!said by reaver221:
Windows 2000 is a better OS, and you don't run into blacklisted CD keys, registration, and so on.
Well, your opinion is contrary to the vast majority. I don't know how you could make a blanket statement like "Windows 2000 is a better OS". It's baseless, wrong, and simply ignorant. I tend to agree with the view that "they reap what they sow". However, it's not "them" that is having all the trouble. The innocent, legitimate person and company are the ones that are impacted by it. It's a pretty deep question. |
actions · 2004-May-6 9:06 pm · (locked) |
B04 Premium Member join:2000-10-28
1 recommendation |
B04
Premium Member
2004-May-6 9:30 pm
Re: People with fake keys can't protect from SasseWow. This thread got big, fast. What surprises me is that many people here, people whose opinions I respect, seem to be purposely ignoring the other side of the argument. Using one example, and I'm NOT picking on BZ -- his is just the last such post that displayed the attitude: quote: Its not a stupid move, don't these idiots realize they can just use a firewall to protect themselves, or are they just too lazy to enable the xp firewall, if not install another free firewall on the system running pirated software.
Folks, I don't think ANYONE here wants to HELP or REWARD scum/pirates/idiots/copyright infringers/chronic mastu..never mind... The argument is that we should combat the spread of worms, and allowing all copies of Windows to be sufficiently patched helps towards that goal. Securing pirated copies of Windows is merely a by-product of that goal. I don't WANT to benefit the jerks, reward them for stealing, etc., etc. I want to keep this worms/spam/crud machines from propagating so wildly... -- B |
actions · 2004-May-6 9:30 pm · (locked) |
NerdtalkerWorking Hard, Or Hardly Working? MVM join:2003-02-18 San Jose, CA 1 edit
1 recommendation |
said by B04: I don't WANT to benefit the jerks, reward them for stealing, etc., etc. I want to keep this worms/spam/crud machines from propagating so wildly...
Then why not take up an approach that doesn't have the effect of securing and further supporting pirated copies of Windows... Using ICF or another free firewallThe fact of the matter simply is that Microsoft isn't going to reward pirates, in any way, shape or form. I highly doubt that they'd suddenly have a change of heart because sasser was released. |
actions · 2004-May-6 9:41 pm · (locked) |
BlitzenZeusBurnt Out Cynic Premium Member join:2000-01-13
2 recommendations |
to B04
I did see both sides of the issue, however I've seen enough users that don't really care until something really bad happens to their system, and they just treat it like a appliance. On certain issues I want things going around like the win32 worm which had peoples computers restarting every minute for being unpatched, or unprotected. I want them to learn their lesson, and actually have to do something for themselves other than thinking its just like their dvd player.
With the amount of pirated software used these days there needs to be more of a real cost to the people using it. If they don't want to pay for it, they need to take extra steps to protect themselves. |
actions · 2004-May-6 9:45 pm · (locked) |
bluebaron2Stuff Happens Mod join:2001-02-01 North of 44
1 recommendation |
to B04
OK B that's a noble cause and it would be hard to find someone that would be against it, I would think.
But allow me the indulgence of a a bit of free flow thought here for a mount if you will.
If, as we say, that it is a relatively simple process for legitimate owners of the software to patch for these vulnerabilities....
and we acknowledge that is harder for the non-legit(?) users to do so.....
and since the non-patched software are the ones some are saying are a contributing force to the propagation of these virii....
then doesn't it follow that in a lot of cases it is the non-legit users who are infecting one another to a large degree?
And I should care about them...Why?
Wouldn't it be better to put more effort and resources into tightening up the security and education of legitimate users rather than giving carte blanc to the purloiners of software, so that they can go on not giving a crap about any one else but themselves ?
Yes there are a lot of unknowledgable users out there ( I just had to help a co-worker get sasser of his machine yesterday in fact) but surely the solution isn't to make it easier for the thief's to keep carrying on with business as usual.
Just a thought. |
actions · 2004-May-6 9:55 pm · (locked) |
Hickerx2God Bless The U.S. Military join:2001-03-04 Franklinville, NY |
to Nerdtalker
said by Nerdtalker: Then why not take up an approach that doesn't have the effect of securing and further supporting pirated copies of Windows...
Well, it's a proven fact that people don't secure their machines unless they're forced to. If people used a simple firewall, Blaster wouldn't have existed. |
actions · 2004-May-6 10:00 pm · (locked) |
mens rea Premium Member join:2002-01-31 Canada
1 recommendation |
to blacksurfer
Re: People with fake keys can't protect from Sasser!The reason why I pay for software is so that I can legally avail myself of that software and the subsequent support provided by its manufacturer. It is generally a contemplated term of the contract that we agree upon, and is reflected in its price. Their acceptance of my money gives me a reasonable assurance that there has been a meeting of the minds and that we will mutually benefit from the exchange.
Perhaps I am selfish, but my sense of altruism does not extend to those who would instead steal what I have paid for. It begins to wane even further when there is a suggestion that I, as a consumer, should subsidize their continued trouble free felonious use of said software. In fact, in my darker moments, I only wish that instead it was a parachute that had engendered this philosophical debate...;)
|
actions · 2004-May-6 10:21 pm · (locked) |
1 recommendation |
to vic102482
said by vic102482:
Lets look at the facts of this sitation:
You have stolen property You have innocent home users You have a software company that disables saftey precautions on a peice of stolen software due to licensing issues.
Microsoft has no responsibility in this situation? I think not.
The responsible party here is the not so innocent home user running pirated SW. |
actions · 2004-May-6 10:22 pm · (locked) |
1 recommendation |
to mens rea
Re: People with fake keys can't protect from SasseOk there seems to be two sides of this, a) microsoft should provide patches to the pirated copies of XP simply to prevent the spreading of the worm. b) microsoft should tell the piraters to kiss off and not supply the patch to the pirated copies.
The simple fact of the matter is if the consumers of legit windows operating systems would patch their systems there WOULD be no spreading of the worm...with the exception of the unpatched pirated copies.
So my opinion stands as orignally posted...Microsoft SHOULD NOT give patches to the users that pirated their software. Users with authentic copies of XP should get the patch so the worm will stop spreading.
If you are going to pirate the software you should be prepared for the consequences...in this case it is a unpatched system. |
actions · 2004-May-6 10:27 pm · (locked) |
CajunTekInsane Cajun Premium Member join:2003-08-08 Arlington, TX
1 recommendation |
to blacksurfer
Since everyone has already given the good reasons for not giving the update I won't add any.. I'll just say NO.. no pay, no play!! |
actions · 2004-May-6 10:34 pm · (locked) |
SnowyLock him up!!! Premium Member join:2003-04-05 Kailua, HI
1 recommendation |
to blacksurfer
Re: People with fake keys can't protect from Sasser!I ask those who feel MS should patch bootlegged copies of their software this question. "If an MS patch should break something on a pirated MS OS should MS be responsible for fixing it?" |
actions · 2004-May-6 10:43 pm · (locked) |
|
to blacksurfer
Hmm, I'm guessing that most people here don't realize a great deal of the "pirated Windows" are corporate versions that update just fine. |
actions · 2004-May-6 10:44 pm · (locked) |
NerdtalkerWorking Hard, Or Hardly Working? MVM join:2003-02-18 San Jose, CA
2 recommendations |
to BlitzenZeus
Re: People with fake keys can't protect from Sassesaid by BlitzenZeus: I did see both sides of the issue, however I've seen enough users that don't really care until something really bad happens to their system, and they just treat it like a appliance. On certain issues I want things going around like the win32 worm which had peoples computers restarting every minute for being unpatched, or unprotected. I want them to learn their lesson, and actually have to do something for themselves other than thinking its just like their dvd player.
With the amount of pirated software used these days there needs to be more of a real cost to the people using it. If they don't want to pay for it, they need to take extra steps to protect themselves.
I don't think you could have put it any better, and I share all those opinions. I for one am sick of people who are completely ignorant when it comes to even the most remote aspects of network security. They get their computer, connect it to their broadband service and forget about it. Then, after a couple of hours, when it stops working, they whine and fuss and complain. Not to mention they probably are unknowingly serving as a spam relay, or one of these machines spewing every worm known to man, effectively wasting the time of thousands, perhaps millions of other people. For the same token, I don't believe these are the people with fake CD keys, simply because your average "Joe User" doesn't even know what a CD key is, much less how to circumvent Windows XP's copy protection schemes. Basically, the people who are really contributing to this worm mess aren't people who have fake XP cd keys, because they should posses the expertise to know to turn on ICF. The people responsible for this whole mess are the millions of "Joe Users" out there, who posses no expertise, and don't know what a firewall, much less Windows Update is. |
actions · 2004-May-6 10:45 pm · (locked) |
dave Premium Member join:2000-05-04 not in ohio
1 recommendation |
to blacksurfer
Re: People with fake keys can't protect from Sasser!Rather than all this talk of morals, it occurred to me I have a better answer. I am moderately competent at software design, and I know that simpler architectures are almost invariably more robust.
I therefore strongly prefer "you didn't pay for it? then you don't get updates" to "well, maybe you didn't pay for it, so we'll let you have an update, except that after 30 days it might not work, except that if you call us we might re-enable it, except that...". |
actions · 2004-May-6 11:22 pm · (locked) |
MagicDevThey Mostly Come Out At Night, Mostly Premium Member join:2001-01-08 Oakley, CA
2 recommendations |
to blacksurfer
Just because he stole your car doesn't mean you need to give the azz your keys so if he can get in the truck for the spare tire when he gets a flat;) |
actions · 2004-May-6 11:26 pm · (locked) |
antiseriousThe Future ain't what it used to be Premium Member join:2001-12-12 Scranton, PA
1 recommendation |
to blacksurfer
Re: People with fake keys can't protect from Sasse ... I can't find a reason to compel M$ to update pirated software - much as I'd like to see worms stopped, It would be a titanically stupid business decision - and whatever you think of M$, they're NOT that stupid ...
... sooner or later it's gonna fall to ISP's to start shutting infected users down until they learn what the hell they're doing ... but after reading this thread I can't see M$ patching pirated software as a solution - I'd wager most users of pirated software KNOW it's pirated ... I think the 'innocent victim' defense is a very small minority, outside of known abusers like China ...
... f w i w ...
|
actions · 2004-May-6 11:38 pm · (locked) |
|
to blacksurfer
Re: People with fake keys can't protect from Sasser!Duhh, I gotta little solution for bill gates, simply make the software more affordable like lower the price or what about installment plan? If I ain't too hungry, I won't have ta steal |
actions · 2004-May-6 11:52 pm · (locked) |