M$ changes key algorithm for SP1 in Windows Xp Corp

vbimport

#1

UPDATE:

From: "Allen Nieman[MS]" <allenn@microsoft.com>
Newsgroups: microsoft.beta.xpsp1.general
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 12:35 PM
Subject: debunking SP1 volume licensing key rumors

Hi all,

Earlier this week there was an internet posting about supposed changes in
activation that is entirely untrue, but unfortunately is being picked up an
parroted by some folks without validating with us. I'm hoping to enlist
your help with some FUD-busting and provide you all with the straight scoop
on this nasty little internet rumor.

Here's a link to the original posting that people are parroting:

http://www.betaone.net/archives/00000060.php

Here's the deal: There is no truth in this rumor. We are not changing the
way volume licensing customers install or deploy Windows XP. We are not
issuing volume licensing customers new product keys. Volume licensing
customers are not impacted by any of the changes we are making to
activation in SP1. The only folks impacted by the changes we are making in
SP1 are people with illegal copies of Windows.

We are planning to completely discuss and document what is changing in
activation to address crack and pirate issues as part of the overall SP1
comm planning and included in that will be a technical marketing doc I am
writing that explains exactly, detailed, what the changes are, how they
work, and why we are doing them. Our goal here is to be completely
transparent and forthcoming - fully open kimono if you will. As soon as
that doc is complete (early to mid next month) I'll post it here.

As always, if you have any questions about activation or Microsoft's
licensing technologies don't hesitate to post them here and someone from MS
will get you the answer.

Thanks,

-Allen


Allen Nieman
Lead Product Manager
Licensing Technologies

Illegal XP owners beware, Microsoft has quite a suprise planned
Microsoft is planning what could end up being quite a shock for the Windows XP warez world, and what currently looks to be one of the most amazing moves made by Microsoft since Windows Product Activation was introduced.

Currently, Microsoft is in the works of completely rewriting the algorithm for the way Windows XP Corporate keys are generated, and is rewriting the code for Windows XP to recognize this new algorithm. This new code will be an added ‘feature’ of Service Pack 1 due out later this year.

At the present moment, an upgrade to Windows XP SP1 from Windows XP with no SP installation will not give any problems or errors about an invalid CD-Key on a corporate version of Windows XP. This is because the new algorithm feature has been switched off in SP1 upgrades. To get to see this new feature, you would have to slipstream SP1 into the Windows XP installation media and setup Windows. Once you’ve reached the CD-key, no current Corporate Windows XP key (none of the 75 that we’ve tried) will work, as they are all invalid. Even if a corporate key is managed to be found, the chances of it working when SP1 final comes out are slim to none, as Microsoft is rumored to ‘still be working on the algorithm for SP1 for Corporate customers’.

source: betaone.net


#2

You must own a lot of companies, having 75 Corporate keys :slight_smile:

So, if i install XP with a fake key and let SP1 run over it while installing, my key does not work ?

If i install XP with a fake key , reboot and add SP1 there is no problem ?

And what about the legal corporate keys that were distributed before the SP1 ? They all become obsolete and Mickeysoft hands out new keys ?


#3

Hehe, nice work Microsoft. This seems like a nice challenge for all those crackers out there. :slight_smile:
This thing is like a magnet to these guys. Like a bee drawn to honey. Irrestible. Everyone loves a challenge! :o

Anyone wanna place a bet on how long before it is cracked? I put 50 dollars on 2 weeks. :cool:


#4

Why would I ever want to install SP1?


#5

Originally posted by Airhead
Why would I ever want to install SP1?

Because WinXP still doesn’t work like it should?

Although that is my opinion. I have been using WinXP for some time (yes, I do own an “official” version) and found out that my old Win2k is still way better.

About the change in algorithm: somehow I think this is quite hard to accomplish. MS would have to redistribute all corporate serials all over again. Once 1 serial leaks out (and that will happen) the new algorithm has proven it’s worthlessness!


#6

> Because WinXP still doesn’t work like it should?

This is a reason to use a real working OS, such as Win 2k, but not to upgrade to something which probably has workarounds for Antispy.


#7

Originally posted by alexnoe
[B]> Because WinXP still doesn’t work like it should?

This is a reason to use a real working OS, such as Win 2k, but not to upgrade to something which probably has workarounds for Antispy. [/B]

The bad thing is, is that in 9 months, there won’t be any support for Win2k anymore. MS is getting rid of 2k… :frowning:


#8

I hope all their hard discs to headcrash for this

I really do not want to have to configure a linux packet filter to block their spy attacks


#9

XP works fine for me, without any service pack… :slight_smile:


#10

How can they stop support for win2k ?
so many companies (mine included) use the product, and its clear that windows XP cannot do the job… replacement perhaps ?


#11

As I understand it, the ‘regular’ SP1 is not designed for Enterprise Editions of XP. SPs for Enterprise Editions will be dealt with separately. I have a Corporate key, so what? I’ll just upgrade with the Company…

I suspect that the problem is about all the leaked Corporate Keys for versions that do not require activation. I can only imagine that the key will be changed dynamically with the SP (is that possible?) or something like it. So if you’re sitting on a leaked copy & key, you’re SOL :wink:


#12

you’re SOL :wink:

SOL ?


#13

Originally posted by Huzzy
How can they stop support for win2k ?
so many companies (mine included) use the product, and its clear that windows XP cannot do the job… replacement perhaps ?

As MS wants everybody to start using MS.NET products, forcing companies to let go win2k is a logical step. Also a bad one, if you ask me.

Many companies/schools etc are still on 2k and NT4…


#14

Originally posted by Huzzy
[B]

SOL ? [/B]

Sitting On Landmines ?


#15

Originally posted by Huzzy
How can they stop support for win2k ?
so many companies (mine included) use the product, and its clear that windows XP cannot do the job… replacement perhaps ?

Easy. It’s called planned obsolescence and is designed to force you to upgrade and thereby contribute further to the bloated coffers of ms.:wink: :Z

Win95 is no longer supported (even though it runs ok with just 32mb of ram and is adequate if all you need is an o/s that lets you run word and excel and connect to the internet from time to time) but, of course, ms doesn’t make any money if soho users continue to use that o/s.

If you’re interested there’s a feature article in this morning’s “The Age” about ms policy on this issue. It will probably appear in the SMH as well.


#16

I expect that Compaq will be giving support for companies using 2k. Compaq also still supports Windows 95. This is also a reason why many companies buy Compaq computers: they can keep on using 95 with support!


#17

Originally posted by philamber

Easy. It’s called planned obsolescence and is designed to force you to upgrade and thereby contribute further to the bloated coffers of ms.:wink: :Z

yes yes yes, i understand how they are going to make something obsolete, BUT my question is what will be the new product ?

eg : windows 2003 ?

please dont say XP trembles


#18

Originally posted by Huzzy
[B]

yes yes yes, i understand how they are going to make something obsolete, BUT my question is what will be the new product ?

eg : windows 2003 ?

please dont say XP trembles [/B]

Nah, it won’t be xp, sold enough of those already. It’ll be some new o/s that doesn’t work properly either.:Z


#19

Replacing win 2k is a bad idea. I also doubt that they will stop giving support. It is way too soon for that, if they provide support for win98 then they should keep their one good OS active as well.


#20

Heres my 2 cents(ok maybe 50 cents buts who counting my emprty pockets).

Microsoft every couple of years decides that hey we have a semi-decent thing and we need to make it better so MORE people will buy the product. Look at all the previous versions of Ms stuff.
Way back in 1994/1995, windows95 was the rage and the pushed it on people. Companies started usinmg the hell out of it because of the more multi-tasking that it offered. Of course win3.11 was also big because lotsa schools, companies, private citizens used it. Then M$ decided to stop supporting win3.11 and dos. Dos was not officially not "really " supported until 97 when win98 start gearing up, now why in the hell did they do that?

Go forward to windows ME. It was one of the worst things M$ tried to do. It had numerous issues, broken divers aspects and tons of other problems. on the other hand NT has and is still around and some companies still use NT because of stablitiy.(sorry bout the spelling)

Now there is windows 2000 and Xp. Look @ 2000 for a second. It is a combinaton of windows98 and NT for stablitiy. The kernel file was rebuilt to make it better. Now there is XP, which was built on win2k kernel, with few extra pieces of junk thrown( the built in cd burning app).

Microsoft does this for money purposes and knows that companies will pay eventually for support in the long run. They keep adding stuff because the computer market changes constantly.

Someone above said planned obselence. That is what it is