main

Microsoft Responds to WGA Circumvention

Steven Parker   on 25 May 2005 - 05:43 · 23 comments & 6722 views

Advertisement (Why?)
Yersterday we posted about a bypass that was dicovered to defeat Windows Genuine Advantage Check and asked Microsoft to respond to these findings.

Below is an email response I received from Jed Rose, an expert community leader at Microsoft.
As software pirates have become increasingly sophisticated, Microsoft has sought to keep a step ahead of them by introducing more advanced solutions, such as WGA. With WGA, Microsoft seeks to balance the needs of easily providing its customers the updates they need while differentiating the value of genuine Windows software from counterfeit software. We expected that counterfeiters would try a number of methods to circumvent the safeguards provided by WGA, so this isn’t a surprise. But to be clear this attempt represents very little threat to Microsoft or its customers because the code generated by the validation tool expires quickly, so it would be very difficult to share. Continued in Read more
View: Yesterdays Article: Bypass found for Windows piracy check


It is important to note that this issue is not a security vulnerability or a hack that puts customers at any risk, nor is it a vulnerability in the activeX control WGA uses to determine if a customer is running genuine Windows. This is simply an issue of users taking a validation code from a genuine copy of Windows and using it on a non-genuine copy of Windows. The threat is similar to that posed by the illegal distribution of software burned to CDs.

Of course a counterfeiter could use this method to steal software for themselves, but because the code expires quickly, it would be useless to share the code with any other users.

Q: Who would benefit from this practice?
A: This method of counterfeiting is only an option for relatively sophisticated users who are running both a genuine version of Windows (from which they would take the code) and a non-genuine version (to which they would apply it). This method only applies to the Download Center, where customers would need to know exactly what to look for, and not Windows Update or the Automatic Updates feature that most customers use.

Q: How does the code expire?
A: Microsoft “hashes” the PID returned from the validation tool (genuinecheck.exe) with a Microsoft.com timeserver time code that is checked by the page logic on the Download Center, which means the code is only valid for a short period of time.

Q: Does Microsoft have plans to change or improve WGA validation to address this vulnerability?
A: With WGA, Microsoft seeks to balance the need to make downloads easily available for customers, while trying to safeguard our IP from counterfeiters. In striking this balance, Microsoft will defer to the needs of its customers to validate their computers as easily as possible so that they can receive the updates they need to stay secure. Furthermore, because the code generated by the validation tool expires so quickly, we don’t perceive this as an issue significant enough to outweigh our customers’ needs for hassle-free downloads.

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 23 additional comments
(5 replies) #1 rm20010 on 25 May 2005 - 06:05
IMHO WGA does nothing but scare off casual pirates.

I have yet to see a person that steals validation codes to get around WGA. Besides, most of Microsoft's downloads allow you to bypass the validation process (but point out a download to me if this isn't the case).
#1.1 Jugalator on 25 May 2005 - 06:57
I think Photo Story requires the validation
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/digitalphotography/photostory/default.mspx
#1.2 Aasum on 25 May 2005 - 08:58
well wat about if you get someone to give you a direct link to the file? wouldnt that bypass it totally or if you know the file name just look it up at filemirrors
#1.3 Ryster092 on 25 May 2005 - 12:15
Thats because WGA is NOT required at this point. This was done to ensure a smooth changeover. Later this year, WGA will be required for all Microsoft Downloads including Windows Update and the download center. Only critical updates delivered through Automatic Updates will be exempt.
#1.4 Skyfrog on 25 May 2005 - 13:16
Even if it worked, wouldn't people simply start pirating the updates and downloads?
#1.5 rm20010 on 26 May 2005 - 00:38
QUOTE
well wat about if you get someone to give you a direct link to the file?


QUOTE
Even if it worked, wouldn't people simply start pirating the updates and downloads?


Both of these are true. Unless the downloads come with encryption that render them usable on systems that pass the WGA check, this entire scheme won't work.
#2 werejag on 25 May 2005 - 07:22
microsoft is always 1 step behind the pirates its sad that they claim they are 1 step ahead
(6 replies) #3 mr_demilord on 25 May 2005 - 07:38
QUOTE
microsoft is always 1 step behind the pirates its sad that they claim they are 1 step ahead


Exactly, m$ should open their eyes. If it is made by human, human can break the code, it's that simple
#3.1 Smigit on 25 May 2005 - 09:13
perhaps they should start hiring animals
#3.2 eAi on 25 May 2005 - 10:57
I think fish would work well...
#3.3 Andareed on 25 May 2005 - 12:13
@3: Untrue. Currently cryptography (properly impleneted) and specifically public-key crypto is infeasible to break.
#3.4 Kushan on 25 May 2005 - 15:42
Infeasible, not impossible
#3.5 werejag on 26 May 2005 - 02:19
its been broken and stays broken since 2 weeks after wga was given birth.

cryptography (properly impleneted) and specifically public-key crypto doesnt need broken its simple jumped around. making cryptography (properly impleneted) and specifically public-key crypto worthless
#3.6 Coolme on 26 May 2005 - 21:34
OMG!! It's Werejag!!
(1 reply) #4 Rudy on 25 May 2005 - 08:22
i dont know why anyone would need to "break" the code, my "legit" copy of WinXP works on WGA just fine without anything
#4.1 dannyres on 25 May 2005 - 09:43
Yeah same with me!
(2 replies) #5 eAi on 25 May 2005 - 11:26
So, someone could set up a site running on a legal XP build that gave out keys to anyone who wanted them and they could just paste them into the box on the site?
#5.1 Ryster092 on 25 May 2005 - 12:20
If someone was stupid enough to do that, their key would be blocked almost instantly by microsoft which would mean no updates for them and no activation if they had to format their machines and reinstall windows.
#5.2 lord_zer0 on 25 May 2005 - 21:11
No way m$ can work out your keys from the ~5 char keycode.

The timestamps are valid for at least several minutes--with such a large userbase m$ is always boasting about, it would be easy to cook up such a site. In fact, I considered it, for awhile: My Rant, but I ended up having better things to do.

WGA is just one more way to annoy the users. I vote set up a bugmenot-like site that enables keycode swapping. Microsoft even provides a no-nonsense tool to generate the keys

-l0

(1 reply) #6 Tokar on 25 May 2005 - 12:05
why does one even need to use WGA to get the softwares?

Every microsoft download, prior to the WGA, lists the filename of the file as well as the file size (and if im not mistaken, the MD5 hash).
All you need to do is take that filename and search for it over at www.filemirrors.com and a link will appear for direct downloading from microsoft. No WGA needed.
#6.1 Ryster092 on 25 May 2005 - 12:19
Once the WGA system becomes a requirement, you will not be able to direct download files from Microsoft. They will have measures in place that mean you cannot connect to the files directly. Similar to way that other download services (fileplanet for example) prevent you from downloading from their premium no-queue servers.
(1 reply) #7 Kushan on 25 May 2005 - 15:45
WHat amuses me the most here is how stupid this is.
I mean if you use a VLK version of XP pro, to which there's a million+1 keygens for that even let you select your PID, WGA thinks that your copy is legit. Most pirated versions of XP are the VLK editions because they don't need to be activated, so all Microsoft is really doing here is making it slightly more inconvenient for legit users. I mean if someone wanted to bypass the WGA protection, It's a hell of a lot easier to just install a VLK than it is to find a legit copy of XP and copy over some file....

That is...or so I've been told >_>
#7.1 whitedragon on 25 May 2005 - 20:07
Yeah it is...er, that is...so I've heard, too...

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.

Advertisement (Why?)