Why does this fake product key validate as being genuine (..

[eek8v.7xxpl]

Hello,

Can anyone tell me why the pirated product key "CM3HY-26VYW-6JRYC-X66GX-JVY2D"
validates as being genuine on all Microsoft tests?

As an experiment, I tried installing a Simplified Chinese volume licensed copy
of Windows XP with this key (one of the most popular pirated keys in China)
and to my surprise, it worked flawlessly on all validations.

The following tests all reported it as being genuine:

Windows Genuine Advantage Notifications KB905474 (wgatray.exe/wgalogon.dll)
The update website at http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com/
The update website at http://microsoftupdate.microsoft.com/
Genuine Advantage website http://www.microsoft.com/genuine/valida ... teNow.aspx

Is this key deliberately whitelisted for some reason?

[tom [pepper] willett]

Don't worry. Now that you've posted the key in a Microsoft owned newsgroup,
it won't be around very long.

<eek8v.7xxpl@8dt7g.beu2o> wrote in message
news:upUlf7UrJHA.3864@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
: Hello,
:
: Can anyone tell me why the pirated product key ": validates as being
genuine on all Microsoft tests?
:
: As an experiment, I tried installing a Simplified Chinese volume licensed
copy
: of Windows XP with this key (one of the most popular pirated keys in
China)
: and to my surprise, it worked flawlessly on all validations.
:
: The following tests all reported it as being genuine:
:
: Windows Genuine Advantage Notifications KB905474
(wgatray.exe/wgalogon.dll)
: The update website at http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com/
: The update website at http://microsoftupdate.microsoft.com/
: Genuine Advantage website
http://www.microsoft.com/genuine/valida ... teNow.aspx
:
: Is this key deliberately whitelisted for some reason?
:

[xp guy]

Top-poster and full-quoter "Tom [Pepper] Willett" wrote:

> Don't worry. Now that you've posted the key in a Microsoft owned
> newsgroup, it won't be around very long.

When was the last time you saw any evidence that an MS sys-admin took
any action in these newsgroups? And by the way, this is not a
"microsoft-owned" usenet newsgroup. This is a usenet newsgroup with
"microsoft" in the name of the group. That's about as close as it gets
to having anything to do with Microsoft.

And regarding the chinese XP key, read this:

http://help.lockergnome.com/windows/Val ... 30477.html

[tom [pepper] willett]

Hooplehead net nanny.

"XP Guy" <XP@Guy.com> wrote in message news:49CA3FFE.77F2DD51@Guy.com...
: Top-poster and full-quoter "Tom [Pepper] Willett" wrote:
:
: > Don't worry. Now that you've posted the key in a Microsoft owned
: > newsgroup, it won't be around very long.
:
: When was the last time you saw any evidence that an MS sys-admin took
: any action in these newsgroups? And by the way, this is not a
: "microsoft-owned" usenet newsgroup. This is a usenet newsgroup with
: "microsoft" in the name of the group. That's about as close as it gets
: to having anything to do with Microsoft.
:
: And regarding the chinese XP key, read this:
:
:
http://help.lockergnome.com/windows/Val ... 30477.html

[eek8v.7xxpl]

XP Guy <XP@Guy.com> wrote:
> And regarding the chinese XP key, read this:
>
> http://help.lockergnome.com/windows/Val ... 30477.html

curiously, only three of the keys on that list are supposedly "Genuine": the
one I posted already, and these two:

MRX3F-47B9T-2487J-KWKMF-RPWBY
DP7CM-PD6MC-6BKXT-M8JJ6-RPXGJ

All the others are either blocked outright or just "geographically blocked".

Makes me wonder what's holding Microsoft back from blocking these three.

[don phillipson]

"XP Guy" <XP@Guy.com> wrote in message news:49CA3FFE.77F2DD51@Guy.com...

> . . . by the way, this is not a
> "microsoft-owned" usenet newsgroup. This is a usenet newsgroup with
> "microsoft" in the name of the group. That's about as close as it gets
> to having anything to do with Microsoft.

.. . . exept that its source is msnews.microsoft.com viz.
an item of intellectual property and business law, property
of MS Corp. which is just as free as you or I either to exert
direct control or leave it alone.

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

[xp guy]

Don Phillipson wrote:

> > . . . by the way, this is not a "microsoft-owned" usenet
> > newsgroup. This is a usenet newsgroup with "microsoft" in
> > the name of the group. That's about as close as it gets
> > to having anything to do with Microsoft.
>
> . . . exept that its source is msnews.microsoft.com viz.

This is a usenet newsgroup. It has no source. It is a transport
mechanism for messages. The messages are hosted on servers. People
access the servers to read and post new messages. The servers
communicate with each other and pass the new messages to each other.
It's a distributed set of peering servers. No single server is
authoritative for the material or the transport mechanism.

Microsoft happens to operate a usenet server that is one of many peers
that are carrying this newsgroup. Microsoft has configured their server
such that it only carries newsgroups that start with "microsoft". Once
a post arrives at the microsoft usenet server, they can apply rules to,
say, delete posts made by certain authors, or delete posts that contain
certain content. But that deletion only applies to the microsoft
server. Those same posts will exist on other usenet servers and be
readable by others, and Microsoft has absolutely no influence in that
regard.

I suggest you read about what usenet is and how it works.

> an item of intellectual property and business law, property
> of MS Corp. which is just as free as you or I either to exert
> direct control or leave it alone.

That segment of your post is pure garbage that has no relation or
bearing on the point being discussed.

[tim slattery]

Jay <user@domain.invalid> wrote:

>> I suggest you read about what usenet is and how it works.
>
>This is NOT usenet. Just because a particular group or set of groups is
>FED to usenet does not make msnews.microsoft.com "usenet" OR a usenet
>server. If that were true, then please explain to us how to access
>alt.binaries.whatever from this server.

It depends on how you define Usenet. Is it just the Big 8 (comp, misc,
news, rec, sci, soc, talk)? Is it those plus alt? Is it all NNTP
servers and all groups hosted by any of those servers?

The microsoft.public.* hierarchy exists outside of the Big 8
structure. To that extent, it's not part of Usenet. But at least parts
of it are available on just about any server that carries newsgroups.
Microsoft's server, msnews.microsoft.com, carries only the
microsoft.public.* hierarchy. Many of us get the groups from that
server, many get them from other NNTP servers, many from the web
interface. It's like the blind men and the elephant.

--
Tim Slattery
MS MVP(Shell/User)
Slattery_T@bls.gov
http://members.cox.net/slatteryt

[john john - mvp]

Jay wrote:
>> I suggest you read about what usenet is and how it works.
>
> This is NOT usenet. Just because a particular group or set of groups is
> FED to usenet does not make msnews.microsoft.com "usenet" OR a usenet
> server. If that were true, then please explain to us how to access
> alt.binaries.whatever from this server.

You're trying to split hairs while grasping at straws. You're right, in
the true sense of the meaning msnew.microsoft.com is not a "real" Usenet
news server, why would Microsoft want to host such a server and peddle
pron from the alt.binaries hierarchy on their corporate property? You
don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out.

In fact msnews.microsoft.com is a so called "vanity" news server which
is made available to anyone on the Usenet system. While the msnews
server itself is not a full fledged Usenet news server it still
propagates to other servers in the Usenet system and it still accepts
incoming propagated traffic from other non Microsoft Usenet servers, the
public microsoft newsgroups are available to anyone on the Usenet and
people can post to the groups from almost any Usenet server. Leaving
the hair splitting aside, these public newsgroups are Usenet groups,
they accept feeds from the Usenet system.

John

[xp guy]

John John - MVP wrote:

> >> I suggest you read about what usenet is and how it works.
> >
> > This is NOT usenet. Just because a particular group or set of
> > groups is FED to usenet does not make msnews.microsoft.com
> > "usenet" OR a usenet server. If that were true, then please
> > explain to us how to access alt.binaries.whatever from this
> > server.
>
> You're trying to split hairs while grasping at straws. You're
> right, in the true sense of the meaning msnew.microsoft.com is
> not a "real" Usenet news server, why would Microsoft want to
> host such a server and peddle pron from the alt.binaries
> hierarchy on their corporate property?

First of all, msnews.microsoft.com (if indeed that is the correct fqdn)
is a real or true news server as seen by it's other usenet peers. If it
wasn't, it wouldn't be able to exchange posts with them.

Second, from the POV of end-users, I'm not sure if msnews.microsoft.com
is accessible via port 119. Perhaps another MS machine is. If not,
then it might be hard to make a case that MS is operating a usenet
newsserver in the true sense of the word usenet, in which case the only
access would be via HTTP interface. But even that is splitting hairs.
The messages being hosted by the MS machine(s) are indeed usenet
postings, regardless how users access the MS server(s).

The fact that MS chooses not to carry all usenet newsgroups, but instead
a limited sub-set or hirearchy, is completely compatible with NNTP
protocal and does not take away at all from the "usenet-ness" of it's
functionality. Many free usenet servers (such as the one I'm using to
read and post my messages) do not carry binary groups in order to
conserve bandwidth.

I do indeed find it odd that many people that read and post these
messages through Microsoft's servers take extreme offence at the notion
that they are essentially participating in usenet. They think they are
participating in a closed set of forums being hosted, maintained, and
controlled soley by Microsoft.