How to remove the Vista sniffer update (KB940510)

[Sharktooth]

It is perfectly legal to choose what updates you wanna keep and what ones you wanna waste. Also M$ practices of installing updates of questionable nature without user confirmation by default is not so "fair".
Since M$ update KB940510 is nothing less than a sniffer, here's a way to remove it: http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1111680&postcount=14

Note: If you're asking why i post this, the reason is i havent vista and will never have it but i hate M$ behaviour. M$ what else are you sniffing?

[JohnnyMalaria]

FYI, this update isn't automatically installed unless you have configured Vista to do so. (Any hacker with half a brain will have disabled automatic update installation)

This particular update has been sitting in my tray for nearly a week and I haven't installed it yet.

I will, though, since I my Vista is legit.

Perhaps I've drunk too much Bil-Aid but I fail to see how something from a vendor intended to detect piracy of their intellectual property is "of questionable nature". What's of questionable nature is deliberately bypassing the activation and licensing. Are you seriously condoning and encouraging such behavior? If so, isn't that verging on a forum violation?

[Sharktooth]

you have the source code? how can you be sure it is not doing something "questionable"?
it is a sniffer... what else is it sniffing?

[JohnnyMalaria]

So it scans the OS for what exactly? Hacks deliberately intended to provide a bunch of thieving bastards an OS without paying for it.

The link you provide EXPLICITLY refers to hacking around activation:

If indeed you’re using a detectable activation cracks or exploits, such as Paradox OEM BIOS Emulator and TimerStop grace period stopper, KB940150 patch will detect the cracks and display a message that activation exploit has been found on the system. Two commonly found exploits are SL07-001 or other SL07-006.

You yourself don't like what MS does and, as is your right, choose to not use its products (and expend an extraordinary amount of energy bashing them) - but posting a link to a site that provides information for would-be thieves is simply wrong.

My fervor in this matter stems from the simple fact that I develop and sell software and I have seen people post cracks etc for my products. They are encouraging others to steal from me.

Your link is nothing but blogged-up incitement.

[Nematocyst]

Note: If you're asking why i post this, the reason is i havent vista and will never have it but i hate M$ behaviour. M$ what else are you sniffing?

I guess we disagree on how to deal with that. Personally, I love that Microsoft becomes more Orwellian with each OS and with each update. Instructing people how to mitigate those issues is, in my opinion, counterproductive if you are anti-microsoft.

[Sharktooth]

@JohnnyMalaria: im not inciting anyone to do anything.
We all know how product activation can be painfull for someone (if you remember old articles posted on the web...) and also i warned ppl to remove a sniffer M$ is deliberately placing in users "house".
Now, you can say what you want but you DON'T KNOW what it is scanning and searching for since you dont have the source code of the sniffer. So your comments about "it scans for hacks" is completely false. you just DONT KNOW. as well as you dont know what else that piece of software is doing...
Also, as i already said, everyone is free to install or uninstall whatever update he wants. I just provided a link to a way to uninstall a dangerous one.

[setarip_old]

@JohnnyMalaria

Hi!I fail to see how something from a vendor intended to detect piracy of their intellectual property is "of questionable nature".Although I am personally vehemently opposed to software piracy and have no "fear" of what might be discovered on any of my systems (All commercial products have been legitimately purchased), I also am opposed to anyone accessing my system.

Your implicit suggestion that software and/or O/S vendors, including Microsoft, "have a right" to access private computers to see if their products flies in the face of everything that users do to protect their systems from "invasion" - firewalls, anti-virus programs, etc.

I believe that a user's refusal to permit such access should be viewed in the same light as the essence of the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment - refusing to incriminate onseself and, more importantly, that such refusal shall not be interpreted as proof of any guilt...

[JohnnyMalaria]

Your implicit suggestion that software and/or O/S vendors, including Microsoft, "have a right" to access private computers to see if their products flies in the face of everything that users do to protect their systems from "invasion" - firewalls, anti-virus programs, etc.


That's your implicit suggestion, not mine. My primary point is that Sharktooth posted a link to a page solely intended to enable people to bypass activation. That has NOTHING to do with privacy. Unless you regard someone caught shoplifting in Wal-mart refusing to open their coat because it would be an invasion of their privacy.


I believe that a user's refusal to permit such access should be viewed in the same light as the essence of the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment - refusing to incriminate onseself and, more importantly, that such refusal shall not be interpreted as proof of any guilt... [/Color]

That's just bollocks and only relevant in the US. Phone companies keep track of your phone usage. Utility companies keep track of how much of the utility you use for private use. If I order something online and deny it has arrived (though it has), does the vendor have a right to get the shipping information from the shipper or can they plead the fifth on my behalf?

Your implicite suggestion is that it is perfectly okay to deliberately defeat the activation process and use the software without paying for it. And prevent the damaged party from doing anything about it. Nice.

@Sharktooth - surely you aren't serious about the activation difficulties argument? The easiest resolution for activation problems is to phone MS. Unless, of course, you haven't paid for the software.

There are some really scruple-less people on this forum that hide behind weak arguments to ease their conscience.

[Shinigami-Sama]

johnny we've beaten the CR infringement != theft thing into the ground years ago...

its the same BS as WGA
I don't want it, I don't need it, I shouldn't have to expend effort on making sure I don't have it

[Sharktooth]

exactly. the true illegality is the activation itself.
getting rid of it is not illegal at all. even M$ published an article on how to removei it... go figure...
however sniffing is a different thing... it's even more "illegal" since M$ abuses MY computer making it do unauthorized things.
so, yes, Mr. "i develop and sell", we still OWN our PCs...

[Guest]

Perusal of the linked page does show references to cracks, so the link is therefore removed. That was not Sharktooth's intent, I assume, so no strike is issued.

even M$ published an article on how to remove it

Sharktooth, you can replace it with a link to Microsoft's description if you like.

[Sharktooth]

well, the M$ article is still for XP.. not for Vista and there was no cracks in the arcticle...
just the steps to remove the unwanted update.

[Guest]

The comments at the end discuss named cracks.

[Sharktooth]

ok, sorry, i didnt look at the comments. then here's the how-to without "comments" or any other possible illegal things:
After installing Vista KB940510 and BEFORE restarting the computer (You can check if the KB 940510 is installed or not from Install Updates list), search for all “wgaer_m*” files using Advanced Search. Make sure that you select all local drives or everywhere as searched location, and check the option to include non-indexed, hidden, and system files. You will likely see one or two files starting with wgaer_m. Delete all files found and then restart the computer. All detection will be done, and Vista computer will be working as per normal.

[setarip_old]

@JohnnyMalariaI fail to see how something from a vendor intended to detect piracy of their intellectual property is "of questionable nature"That statement by you is what I referred to as "Your implicit suggestion that software and/or O/S vendors, including Microsoft, 'have a right' to access private computers"...

Your implicite suggestion is that it is perfectly okay to deliberately defeat the activation process and use the software without paying for it. You really should carefully re-read my first post, where I clearly stated, "I am personally vehemently opposed to software piracy and have no "fear" of what might be discovered on any of my systems (All commercial products have been legitimately purchased)"...

[jmnk]

you have the source code? how can you be sure it is not doing something "questionable"?
it is a sniffer... what else is it sniffing?
I seem to recall that in the past you said you were using Opera browser (I do too). But you do not have the source code for it, do you? aren't you afraid Opera is sniffing/collecting/doing whatever?

[Guest]

Moving to PC Hard & Software.

[Sharktooth]

I seem to recall that in the past you said you were using Opera browser (I do too). But you do not have the source code for it, do you? aren't you afraid Opera is sniffing/collecting/doing whatever?
im pretty sure about Opera software since i've been in touch with some of them. even if they choose to not follow the OSS principles they're pretty open minded.