I don't see how that supports your position. Yes, WGA exists, we have established that.

I like this part;

Hmmmm... where I have heard that before? It sounds like something I said earlier...

 

I am neutral. I support no-one! (and I have no affiliation with anyone relevant!)

You have shown a link that illustrates that Microsoft doesn't care to be pirated from. Nor does any other vendor, I imagine! At least Microsoft doesn't require you to have your "original game disk" in the CD drive whenever you want to run your OS. I think their approach is reasonable, and non-conspiracy-ish (?)

I'd like to see any additional information on how the registry key existence actively interferes with the operation of the anti-virus software. That would be the item of concern in your assertion were it verifiable.

 

I saw nothing about anti-virus interaction in that link either.

 

Also, Please, please, please, do not go deleting random registry keys that you are not sure what they do like this guy is advocating. That's a sure ticket to ending up on this forum asking why your computer doesn't work properly.

Also, ANY TIME you tamper with your registry manually, make sure you have a current back up. It's not a place to just poke around and pretend you know what you are doing. In the same way you wouldn't not open the ECU in your rig and start clipping wires, having just enough knowledge to be dangerous in the registy is just that, dangerous.

 

First off, I profess no computer acumen whatsoever as, while I may be a master/student of several different disciplines, computers happen to not be one of them, but I can read what is on the screen before me and do understand the meaning of the words "disable" and "override" as they would apply to the antivirus and firewall programs that I've installed and the ramifications thereof, as anyone else capable of speaking and having an understanding of the english language could.

So take this advice however you may, but try to understand that it is offered with the best of intent towards helping fellow webbers enjoy their experience online..., no "black helicopters" included.

 

If anything's to be learned from this thread, it would be this... so far.

 

The link was given in response to the demand from WATRD to provide evidence that MS was doing that which I spoke of here.

Other than that, if you were to follow the commands previously given in this thread through your own system registry, you will eventually be lead to the "anti-virus interaction" that I've mentioned herein.

All that I can say at this point is "WOW!!" I never thought that I would recieve such a negative response from the people here for merely pointing out yet another flaw, this time apparently intentional, in the MS Windows program..., does everyone here work for them????

Additionally, I have no grudges against Mr. Gates and have been a long standing proponent of his, but we all make mistakes sometimes as we are all only human and I feel that Mr. Gates is mistaken for having done this due to the potential for system corruption.

Lastly, it is not my intent to tell people that they should delete any registry keys, all that I've done is point out what I have done and the results thereof, nothing more.

 

Don't take our warnings against your theories the wrong way. We're not trying to debunk them. It's just common practice here that if you state something, you should be able to back up your statement with valid proof. If you want to be the test bed in this scenario, please document your findings in their entireity so they can be investigated and learned from.

 

I hope you don't take my comments as being negative to you personally. I was simply stating that I wasn't convinced that the presense of those registry keys indicates the existance of a flaw. I then presented what I thought was more compelling to me personally, which was that the A/V software providers would *never* stand still for a "feature" that automatically disabled their software for all users of Windows XP, SP2.

As far as I'm concerned, and I hope the tone of my messages has reflected this, you are absolutely free to post whatever (courteous) messages you like, and while I may disagree with you, I won't attack you, just disagree with you with my own reasoning. (And with my own run-on sentences, apparently!)

Now I am over my personally imposed limit of posts on a single topic by a *lot*, so I'm going back to work!

 

Thank you for clearing that up Churnd/Scottiac as I was, admittedly, feeling a bit put upon (perhaps rightfully so gauging by the ferosity of a certain members posts and the belittling slander therein), I will take heed and be sure to provide backing evidence for all subjects requiring such in future posts.
Although I will have to say that all that I had left out of this thread initially was the reference to the MS article that was aired across the globe so I thought that everyone one was already aware of it..., it would appear that certain interests, even though they may actually be aware of the referenced situation as well, will endeavor to discount such knowledge until directly confronted with it, huh? (I'll make a note of that as well for future reference)
Other than that, anyone willing to take a look at their own registry by following the commands given would have readily been able to find the same information that I did, &/or validate my comment about the disabling/override commands embedded therein..., just trying to help and thanks again.

 

Slander is spoken, "libel" is written or printed, but for my words to be that, they must be false. You have yet to offer an iota of evidence to support your position, despite repeated requests to do so.

But, I would point out that your "certain interests" speech comes much closer to being libelous than anything I have said...

Anyway, as I have said in other threads, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and you have offered no evidence whatsoever except hearsay and the fact that you found the word "disable" in the registry. In the absence of real evidence, I think folks will figure out what is right...

Until something resembling evidence comes to light, I am done with you.

 

Are you actually denying the overly obvious intended functions of the registry commands that clearly say "AntiVirusDisable", "AntiVirusOverride", FirewallDisable, & "FirewallOverride" and the "Monitoring" key that clearly lists certain anti-virus and firewall products?!?

PS. These "smilie" things are cool.

 

You stated this in your original post;

And I am telling you that you are patently wrong. The purpose of those keys is record the status of various components that the Security Center cares about, so they are preserved through a reboot, nothing more.

There is no "command to do so", you "think" wrong.

 

Perhaps knowing this will help:

Not everything in Windows is to be taken literally. I suggest firing up google and finding out exactly what those registry keys do. Then we'll go from there.

 

Fair enough, I got over 6k hits on that key, including this one;

http://tacktech.net/display.cfm?ttid=348

Hmm...

 

Here's the Google query for anyone who wants to sift through it;

http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...rity+Center%22

I don't see a single reference to those keys being a way for MSFT to tamper with your computer...

 

Is..., is that..., it is! Light I (you) see at the end of the tunnel..., finally?!

 

Those keys have absolutely no control over your antivirus or spyware software whatsoever. They control the security center, which also has absolutely no control of your antivirus or spyware software whatsoever. All the security center does is monitors whether or not your system is running antivirus software. It doesn't even monitor every version of software out there... just the more common ones.

 

Sorry about that, I did'nt mean to turn all facetious and what have you, but it has been a considerable struggle as anyone who views this thread will be able to tell.
Suffice it to say that surely by now you can see that there is some cause for concern over potential system corruption due to the sub-registry command keys.
Also, I get the bit about it's function being to "monitor" whatever anti-viral or spyware programs that we may have as to their status so that the "Security Center" can "notify" us, or not, should they become "out of date" as I can clearly see in the commands in the "Monitoring" sub-folder.
It's the additional commands about "Override" that concern me..., why are they there?

 

Are you not reading the same thread I am? It's become pretty clear that your theory is a crackpot one and there's not one shred of evidence that in anyway supports even one of the assertions you have made.