Cnet news is reporting that Researcher Debasis Mohanty (bio) has posted a full explanation on how to bypass Microsofts WGA (Windows Genuine Advantage) Check.
A quick search on Google returned this post, originally submitted to the Full Disclosure mailing list, titled 'Defeating Microsoft WGA Validation Check'. Microsoft replied to Mohanty in an email stating "The generated code is partly made up of a timestamp, which would prevent use after a short period". Further testing by Mohanty returned a different result; "However, I checked this on a pirated copy of Windows XP Pro and installed couple of public beta products and tools for testing purpose. They are still up and running since past 1.5 months."
In a response to Cnet, an unnamed representative from Microsoft maintained that this posed "very little threat to Microsoft". The WGA check tool, which is downloaded to the computer and executed is still in testing and won't be fully implemented until around the middle of this year. After that date all Windows 2000 & XP users will be required to 'validate' their copy, before downloading anything from Microsofts websites.
WGA was added to the Microsoft Download Center late last year, and does not require Windows XP to be activated. Microsoft has not yet responded to Neowin on this issue, but we'll be keeping our eyes & ears on the ground for any more developments to this story.
View: Microsoft Download WGA Check Example | About Validation
View: Defeating Microsoft WGA Validation Check @ Seclist.org
A quick search on Google returned this post, originally submitted to the Full Disclosure mailing list, titled 'Defeating Microsoft WGA Validation Check'. Microsoft replied to Mohanty in an email stating "The generated code is partly made up of a timestamp, which would prevent use after a short period". Further testing by Mohanty returned a different result; "However, I checked this on a pirated copy of Windows XP Pro and installed couple of public beta products and tools for testing purpose. They are still up and running since past 1.5 months."
In a response to Cnet, an unnamed representative from Microsoft maintained that this posed "very little threat to Microsoft". The WGA check tool, which is downloaded to the computer and executed is still in testing and won't be fully implemented until around the middle of this year. After that date all Windows 2000 & XP users will be required to 'validate' their copy, before downloading anything from Microsofts websites.
WGA was added to the Microsoft Download Center late last year, and does not require Windows XP to be activated. Microsoft has not yet responded to Neowin on this issue, but we'll be keeping our eyes & ears on the ground for any more developments to this story.
View: Microsoft Download WGA Check Example | About Validation View: Defeating Microsoft WGA Validation Check @ Seclist.org
Components in normal version:
- Default User Interface
- Standard input array
- Standard DSP array
- Album List
- Converter (formerly known as Diskwriter)
- Masstagger
- ReplayGain Scanner
Components in full version:
- all components from the normal version, plus
- ABX comparator
- AC3 decoder
- ALAC decoder
- Archive reader (supports 7-Zip, RAR, ZIP, GZIP)
- Audio CD writer
- Autoplaylist
- CD Audio decoder
- Crossfeed DSP
- Database search
- DUMB module decoder
- DXi MIDI synthesizer host
- Festalon
- Game Emu Player
- OggPreview
- sidplay2
- Utilities
New features (incomplete):
- Improved playlist management: all playlists are editable without being active, multiple playlists with the same name, Autoplaylists
- Field remappings in titleformat scripts: see Titleformat Introduction and Titleformat Reference for details
- Tag merging: combines information from multiple tag formats on the same file
- Cleaned-up preferences
- On-line help system for preferences pages (uses the HA wiki)
- Playback queue
- ...
lets all hope that any one in the beta program looses all rights to sign to any new betas again.
but then again it wont be long before the WGA is cracked.
I am neither praising this article nor denegrating it, I am simply posing a question and a healthy discussion on the whole subject of news reporting, I have no axe to grind either way save for the fact that I am a journalist myself.
I know some peoples immediate reaction will be..."even if nobody reports the news it will still be happening"....which is something that of course is indeed true. After all, if nobody reported some of the evil actions that take place in this world today, would those crimes be any less, or more evil and of course we all know the answer to that question.
As I said earlier, I am merely asking for peoples views and discussion on the reporting of illegal ways of obtaining software. I am not asking for peoples views on actually using illegal software, simply on the reporting of ways of bypassing actually having to purchase the said software through the usual and accepted channels.
Last edited by 16574 on 24 May 2005 - 10:14
I don't believe I'm condoning this anymore than when we reported on Bypassing Windows Activation (which most sites on the internet picked up on, in a very similar manner).
Anyway, at least I researched this a little and gave the reader a lot more url references to look through, which is something I can't say for many others.
Well sadly this isn't true in the instance of the above poster. I pretty much wanted my life to end by the time I finished reading the first paragraph of his comment - or at least I felt I wanted to slap him and shake him very hard and implore him to 'spit out' whatever it was he was trying to say.
If you are a journalist my friend, I pity your readers.
GJ
Edited for grammar
Last edited by 17696 on 26 May 2005 - 23:18
Couldn't you have just said something like "being a journalist myself, I feel that this news story is, at the least, giving creedence to this method, and at the most condoning this means of bypassing the Microsoft Verification Procedures"?
You know, you being a journalist and all....
I was critisizing the way you write. It reminds me of the kid who wants to sound more intelligent than he really is by using big words. On the other hand, I guess you being a "journalist" have the right to critisize the content of this story but I don't have the right to critisize yours...interesting...
Once again, apologies if any of my original comments bothered you but it seems that you might have a slight persecution complex in thinking that everybody is getting at you personally.....
Last edited by 16574 on 24 May 2005 - 11:26
On topic: i like this new piece. Thnx neobond!
If so, then what about us who are not running Windows 2000 or XP, but are interested in the latest stuff? Doesn't compute for me. Maybe I'm naive and missing something, but the fact that it recommended validation for downloading a document made me question the sanity behind the validation.
I run many pc dell with genuine and legal windows xp but for install in network, the easy way is to install using the same serial number. Using a "illegal" copy of xp made the difference, you don't need to register each time you reinstall the os.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.