BleepingComputer.com: Windows 7 update KB971033

Just heard about this on the radio, KB971033 will be coming soon. http://lauren.vortex.com/ has more on this. From my understanding M/S will with this KB the ability to monitor your legal copy of W7. This in it's self is what is done when you buy and install W7 and other other operating systems. With KB971033 they will be able to monitor your system with W7 for ever and if M/S decides later down the road that they don't like your legal system it can be shut down. What do you all think about this. I'm legal now, bought and paid for from my local Intel store. What about a year from now? I understand that a company doesn't want there product pirated but if it's legal now why would not be legal 6 mouths from now?

Apparently this update is purely voluntary, AND the need to monitor piracy is valid, but this begs a larger question. If the need to prevent piracy is THAT important....then why make it voluntary. And therein lies the answer.

Making the update VOLUNTARY is a way for MS to introduce a potentially distasteful feature by transferring to the user, the AUTHORITY ( thereby absolving itself of the ultimate RESPONSIBILITY) of having installed something that can later be morphed into something with more onerous consequences.

Thanks for your quick reply. You are correct it is voluntary and as I understand it can be removed if you so desire at this time. I think the point is that most people don't come to B/C and see this kind of information, they should. Most people I know just put updates on auto and let it go do what M/S wants to. I would bet millions of legal systems will get this KB and the owner will never know it until maybe later down the road when M/S might change there mind for what ever reason.

Here is my question; how long will it take for the malware community to use this patch to their advantage by modifying your system so it triggers the patch to identify your system as non-genuine? Any bets? I give this patch 2 months before it blows up in the face of MS and they have to pull it.

Well...this is the way I've always seen this hypothesizing which takes place regarding Windows and Microsoft.

I have a degree in accounting, worked in business for 8 years or so until I sickened of it.

I believe that the developer/manufacturer of a product...or a provider of services...certainly has the right to sell/license such product or service...as he/she likes to.

Apple has a right to sell their computers for what I think are overpriced values.

Microsoft has a right to license the use of ALL its products, using whatever terms of use suits them.

Prospective buyers like us...make the same decision in regard to such instances...as we do when we drop into a local bakery. If we don't like the terms of sale governing said product or service...then you should not buy or unnecessarily denigrate the value of the property/service which you covet to use for your own "very special" usage.

It's not the same as pulling up to the pump...to fill your vehicle. No one needs to use Windows today, it's a choice.

Every purchase I've ever made, I did willingly and with a full understanding of what was transpiring.

Users of Windows...need to stop posturing...as if they have god-given rights...to use products/services which are the fruit os someone else's brains and labor.

Louis

I just did another post on this same subject, moderator feel free to delete mine!

"Very interesting W7 article!"

Phil

hamluis, on Feb 12 2010, 11:17 AM, said:

True

hamluis post= said:

True

hamluis post= said:

True

hamluis post= said:

Except that most people have enough understanding of bakery products to accept or reject the product. And there are numerous alternative bakeries to choose from. Many do not have the expertise to understand much of what goes on at a deeper level of the IT market and there are precious few alternatives. Many "services" provided by commercial offerings have less to do with the efficacy of the product and more to do with control of the "computing arena" which is their right...... as is the consumer's right not to use the product / service as you correctly mention.

hamluis post= said:

You can walk, take public transportation, join a carpool, work from home, buy an electric auto. There is choice. As regards using Windows, the infrastructure that has been developed and accepted by the consumer is such that today's enterprise users cannot easily CHOOSE another option even if they DO understand how it all works. Too much enterprise data has been encrypted into proprietary commercial formats.

hamluis post= said:

If you can teach this to the consumer, you will have done a great service.

hamluis post= said:

Are you referring to the numerous fruits of someone else's brains and labor that MS has claimed as their own?

Layback Bear, on Feb 12 2010, 05:32 AM, said:

I found this artical very informative!

Thank you for sharing this with us Layback Bear

I can't stand people that think they have some right to use(pirate), download or share,software whenever they want,just because it's on the net.I just ask them if it's ok if I hack into there bank account and take what I want,of course they say no way,you thief !

I don't think is about some one trying to get a copy of W7 through fraud. I have as so many others and did it legal. I chose W7 and I think is a good choice. I have honored my contract with M/S as one should. It's like buying a stove; you and the seller (store) made a contract that both parities agreed to. A little while down the road the seller changes the contract. At this time M/S gives us a choice we don't have to down load this KB. Many people use down load auto and don't even know what a KB is. It's kind of like, you should of read the fine print. You chose auto download as recommended. Back to the stove again bought legal. A while later the seller decides that the transaction is not legal and wants you to pay again or they will come and get your stove. If my W7 is legal not how could it not be legal later? If you agree with my last question what kind of game is M/S trying to start.

OP is correct in asking why legal "now" may not be legal "later". It DOES make one wonder what commercial software vendors are up to.

I'm sure most of us realize that there is a push towards "cloud" or SASE computing. IF a software vendor can make it uncomfortable to use software locally, then it is very easy to convince the consumer to utilize offsite software under the impressions that he/she WON'T have to worry about any "unauthorized" installations.

I can hear the ad copy now. "Why worry about the safety of your software installation? Let us provide your OS, apps and data services on our "secure" servers and never worry about the legitimacy of your installation!"

The consumer thinks....."Hey cool, I don't have to mess with WAT (Windows Activation Technology), no more updates, no more activations, no more pop ups"....where do I sign up?"

As for me, I'll keep my personal stuff on my personal hardware, thank you.

Trio3b, on Feb 13 2010, 11:34 PM, said:

In addition to your suggestion, they could be gearing up to having subscriptions - you get your 90 days and they can nuke your system if you don't pay the next instalment.

My predictions are that it'll only be voluntary for a while, then it'll become mandatory and then (unless the market reacts in a way to make Microsoft rethink this) it'll be in the end user licence agreement for their next OS.

Having people "pay per view", "pay per listen", "pay per read" is the ultimate stockholder dream. Many IT and content providers have been and will continue to push this to the fore via voluntary guidelines. If there's little squawking by the consumer, it will become "de rigeur".


Fasten your seatbelts .......

I guess no one hear has any experience with cracks/loaders etc... The Microsoft patch IF installed will peer into the PC and match against any of the possibly known cracks/loaders that Microsoft has on it's record (At this time roughly 70 or so). Their list will grow over time. Which is why the patch is designed to check every 90 days. It uses a type of signature based verification.

The problem for Microsoft is this...The hackers have already found a way to circumvent this easily. They have come up with a way to remove the WAT technology entirely from the operating system and still have the OS show as Activated. Even after the patch is installed. Not to mention if one chooses NOT to install the update it won't help MS either.

Microsoft needs to realize they will never defeat what they deem Piracy. Look at it this way.

If one chooses to purchase a vehicle. Should that person have the right to do their OWN maintenance and use their OWN tools with parts they purchase from someone OTHER than the OEM/Manufacturer?

We all know the answer to this question. The same needs to apply to software.

I predict this patch will bring a flood of problems for MS and they will have to abandon their efforts.

Well I can say that my Windows 7 installation got killed this past week possibly by this update. Last Tuesday evening, my Genuine Windows 7 Installation all of a sudden became "Not Genuine" somehow. I might have chosen to install the update earlier in the week from Windows Update not knowing for sure what it was, or it got installed on the updates which came out last Tuesday. I am not sure what it found on the system to make it think that the Windows 7 Professional that I purchased directly from the Microsoft Store last year was a fake version but it did. So I called the Microsoft Store Support to confirm that my Windows 7 License was genuine (I knew it all along =). They then connected me to Microsoft Technical Support to try to remedy the issue. The Tech tried to activate my Windows via remote console to my machine and he couldn't get it to work. He used my product key and even one that the got from Product Licensing just in case. He determined that the activation files had also somehow gotten corrupted. This would explain why Windows Activation kept giving a "0x8007000D - The Data Is Invalid" every time we tried to activate. I will also add that I had discovered that System Restore had gotten disabled making it impossible to rollback the update. The only way to fix this thing was to do a reinstall.

So to make a long story short, after several days of headaches, a few calls to Microsoft support, and a reinstall, my Windows 7 install is back up and running again. However, I will switch to my Vista install for a little while before I know it's safe to go back to using Windows 7. Nice work Microsoft.