Microsoft swears it's not coming for your data with scan for old Office versions

Microsoft wants everyone to know that it isn't looking to invade their privacy while looking through their Windows PCs to find out-of-date versions of Office software. In its KB5021751 update last month, Microsoft included a plan to scan Windows systems to smoke out those Office versions that are no longer supported or nearing …

[Ball boy]

Strange way to respect user privacy

Running a scan to see what out of date (or soon to be out of date) versions of their software users might have doesn't strike me as 'respecting my privacy' that much. I bought it and if I choose to continue to run it well after it's outside their support time frame is surely my business and none of theirs.

As to 'keeping the data on secure servers'? Well, we all know how well that often works out. The less personal data out there, the smaller the vector for exposure. I'd argue there's no conceivable need for Redmond to store this kind of data - and if they don't intend to use it for anything, why do they propose storing it anyway?

[Dimmer]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

When are antivirus companies going to provide a tool for blocking and removing applications that do telemetry?

I see very little difference between MS collecting data on me and a hacker doing the same.

[jake]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

"When are antivirus companies going to provide a tool for blocking and removing applications that do telemetry?"

No need. Linux and BSD exist, and last time I checked you can configure them to suit yourself.

[Sp1z]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

Oh cool I'll just go and reinstall 2000 PCs with Linux over this weekend and suddenly have no industry-standard software applications for all of the employees to use, and no ability to centrally manage users, policies, restrictions etc. I'll then spend most of my time pissing about with randomly broken dependencies whenever I try and roll out out any updates, and look into my crystal ball every so often to determine when drivers for a perfectly usable device are going to stop working. Not to mention the man-hours, money and lost-productivity spent training the users and helpdesk.

I'm very pleased that you can do everything you need to do without Windows jake, but you are in a very small minority in the real world I'm afraid, however much you are about to protest it in your reply. Yes the world would be a better place if Linux was more mainstream, but it's nowhere near usable for anything larger than a small business and won't be for a long time.

[OhForF']

Industry-standard software applications

suddenly have no industry-standard software applications for all of the employees to use, and no ability to centrally manage users

In a few years the "industry-standard software applications" and user management will all be in the cloud allowing us to use any operating system/desktop as long as it has a supported browser.

For a big company it is probably a bit too early to roll out linux this weekend though :)

[Dagg]

Re: Industry-standard software applications

In a few years the "industry-standard software applications" and user management will all be in the cloud allowing us to use any operating system/desktop as long as it has a supported browser.

Yep, no cloud access from one of several faults means a nice single point of failure. In my long life I've seen this happen too many times. A major retail store that I was involved in actually got to the stage that each till (PC with scanner and draw attached) could standalone. Backed up by the whole shop being able to standalone.

[lockt-in]

Re: Industry-standard software applications

"Yep, no cloud access from one of several faults means a nice single point of failure"

One of many examples where cloud isn't a risk: I installed a cloud based critical medicine distribution system in many hospitals 10 years ago, these had offline functionality at the device level, so even without any network/WiFi they would still work. As it happens the devices were hassle-free Chromebooks, they could have been Windows or iPads or Android tablets. I suspect that you would have used Windows devices.

[Dagg]

Re: Industry-standard software applications

I suspect that you would have used Windows devices.

Mix, the tills were windoz the back end paired store servers were AIX boxes with mirrored databases. Cloud is still a risk if you can't access the cloud, little things like a backhoe cutting the fibre cable.

[Julz]

Re: Industry-standard software applications

Is that going to be before or after we get fusion power?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

"suddenly have no industry-standard software applications for all of the employees to use"

That is a valid concern, for the cases where you have some users who do need those particular applications, and it is an important one.

But not everyone in every workplace necessarily needs those apps. In many cases, alternative but comparable programs do exist. It all depends on how deeply an organisation has found itself trapped in the data format lock-in quicksand.

In my workplace, we have a three-way split between Windows, MacOS and Linux. It's not an equal three-way split, but much closer to it than you might think, maybe 50 : 30 : 20 (not including servers), and most of the specialist apps that are in use here (including some that are commercial software) are available for all three.

"and no ability to centrally manage users, policies, restrictions etc"

Nope, various Linux computer management systems exist.

"I'll then spend most of my time pissing about with randomly broken dependencies whenever I try and roll out out any updates"

Huh? Distro repository managers and software management tools such as apt-get take very good care to manage updates safely; I gather that even in the rpm world yum can do a good job of this nowadays. And besides, you do test updates on test systems first, right?

"determine when drivers for a perfectly usable device are going to stop working."

No, that's definitely Windows (and to some extent, MacOS) you are thinking of ("We've changed something, and sod old code.").

On Linux, a device either just works (usually because commendable manufacturers have provided good documentation or have led or assisted with driver development) and, once got working, is very very very unlikely to stop working in later releases; or half works because it's compatible enough with an older driver; or simply doesn't work at all at the current time (cos shitty manufacturer even whose Windows drivers are also rather thrown-together, fragile, and barely work), and in that case at least there will usually be someone trying to make it work (at which they may or may not have success, but good on them for trying - and in the meantime, just don't buy that crap).

"Not to mention the man-hours, money and lost-productivity spent training the users and helpdesk."

None of Windows, MacOS or Linux are that different for end users (not admins, and untrained users shouldn't be doing that in a work environment) nowadays. It's the random UI changes to some programs (eg, MS Office) that are much more confusing for everyone. People can cope with their smartphone or tablet not looking like Windows, I think you are doing people a great disservice by assuming they can't cope with relatively minor differences.

And a competent support team should, where appropriate, have at least some degree of knowledge across all three mainstream OSes. Of course, if you just want to be a peanut-paying gallery of Windows monkeys, that's up to you, I guess…

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

"pissing about with randomly broken dependencies whenever I try and roll out out any updates,"

FWIW, that's actually more rare than Windows breaking systems with their fixes these days. Other than that minor niggle, you're pretty spot on with the rest of your comment :-)

(FreeBSD user here. I can't remember the last time I had a dependency issue either from package updates, system updates or minor/major version upgrades)

[An_Old_Dog]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

Oh cool I'll just go and reinstall 2000 PCs with Linux over this weekend

Do you believe you could go and reinstall 2000 PCs with a newer version of Windows over the weekend with no problems or issues?

Both sorts -- both Windows and Linux -- of installations/migrations need advance pre-planning and conferences with departments and users, and pre-rollout testing if they are going to be successful. Things like device and driver compatiblity checking, testing whether or not a department's home-grown Windows app will run on the new OS (or on WINE), etc.

(Icon for "Think these things through first." )

[43300]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

"Do you believe you could go and reinstall 2000 PCs with a newer version of Windows over the weekend with no problems or issues?"

Clearly not, but it's not a valid comparison as you can run Windows versions alongside each other with the same programs running, so far more workable.

Also, I can push out Windows 10 to 11 upgrades using Intune - currently testing it. Once it's solid will push out to a trial group of users. How do you do that with Linux?

What so many on here don't seem to get is that while Linux might be an option for small companies (particularly those in the IT sector, where tech skills are likely to be high), it's really not for many ordinary organisations - there is no single desktop OS called 'Linux' so it's a case of choosing a distro, then all the testing, then what about software? Even where systems are hosted (e.g. finance and CRM databases) they frequently have Excel plugins which are absolutely required for some work. Then there's user familiarity, management tools such as Intune, etc. In the real world Windows is unfortuinately often the only real option in many cases. No matter how much some IT types would like to pretend this isn't the case, that remains the reality.

[stiine]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

No you can't. You'd never get the budget to deploy 2000 new pcs alongside the existing machines, to say nothing of doubling the size of the network infrastructure.

[43300]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

You can't what?

I wasn't suggesting running separate machines - I was pointing out that it's pefectly possible to run Windows 10 and 11 alongside either each - which is likely to be necessary once deployment of W11 starts because some machines can be upgraded and some can't. The older ones will therefore remain on W10 until replaced. It's not ideal running two versions of Windows for quite a while (in the past I've upgraded everything over a period of a few months), but it's not a massive issue especially if W11 is operated on via Intune to make it look as close to W10 as posssible (left-align the taskbar, uninstall Fake-Teams, etc).

[An_Old_Dog]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

it's not a valid comparison as you can run Windows versions alongside each other with the same programs running, so far more workable.

I may be a bit current-MS-Windows ignorant here, but when you write "alongside each other", are you talking about some sort of VM setup, or simply turning a PC into a dual-boot system?

Many Linuxes have automated installation systems ("Kickstart" is one). Combine it with booting via PXE, and you can target selected machines to have Linux installed "along side" (dual boot with) Windows.

As to application software, see the above post by AC Saturday 4th February 2023 15:08 GMT.

There are remote configuration and management programs for Linux (Progress Chef, nee Chef, CFEngine, Ansible, and Puppet come to mind).

As to Excel, and Excel plug-ins, WINE may possibly be a solution (though a better one would be to quit using spreadsheets for any-and-all end-user data manipulations, but that's a separate can of worms).

As to "user familiarity", if a business is staffed by non-retrainable monkey-drones who know only "click here, then here, then there, and magicly the report appears", and get confused if an icon's background color is changed, then that business already is on shaky ground, even if it stays with MS Windows.

If a business has fallen into the tarpit of vendor lock-in, it will have to spend time and money to free themselves from that. If they continue with Microsoft and "business as usual", they will pay in time and money when changes in Windows version n+1 breaks their some of their current application software, or moves it to that app vendor's "unsupported" category. (App vendor "solution": pay us money and upgrade to our newer version, which works differently and will require retraining your staff. Or worse, "Upgrade to our newer version, which will be available Real Soon Now™." )

Linux is not a no-brain-required, drop-in replacement for MS Windows. It requires business management to CHOOSE to climb out of their vendor lock-in tarpit, and to exert the internal political will to make that happen.

[43300]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

No, I simply mean that if you have 100 Windows 10 computers, you can upgrade 50 of them to Windows 11 and leave the other 50 (which may be to old to support it) on Windows 10 until they are replaced - running exactly the same software as the Windows 11 ones, and with the same policies, etc, applied. Most businesses have absolutely no need for dual booting, or for VMs on the client side.

I'm afraid you are demonsrating the typical attitude of some on here that business processes should be expected to fit around IT, rather than the other way round! Using a selection of tools to manage things is vastly more problematic than just using Intune (none of them have its level of integrated functionality). WINE - really? If you are going to all this convolution to run Office that way then why move away from Windows at all? And of course it may well be fraught with problems, depending how the addins work and communicate.

"user familiarity" - are you for real? Your response demonstrates that typical arrogance seen in parts of the IT world, which looks with contempt on anyone who isn't an IT expert. The fact is, most people aren't, and a proportion need to be taught step by step how to do things. Make major changes and you've got a load of retraining and user support to do - you need a very good reason if you are going to do this. Sure, a Windows upgrade can break things so you need to test it - but the reality is that it generally doesn't.

I'm no Microsoft fan - I particularly don't like thier subscription push, and the constant stream of under-tested updates, but it remains that case that for most businesses their operating systems and office software remain the most practical option.

[Peter Gathercole]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

As long as you have a suitable access policy, installing updates on almost all Linux systems can be managed remotely pretty much out-of-the-box. Unattended upgrade methods exist on all Linux systems that I know.

How you manage groups of systems is down to you, but I can think of a number of ways of doing it. So it's a non-issue.

If I were doing a Linux rollout in a company, I would out of necessity, choose either one distro, or if there were a valid requirement, a small number of different distros. Once you have made this decision, you treat the systems as much of a muchness, and upgrading them becomes much easier. And if you want, you can use one of a number of available management tools to help you.

In a corporate roll-out, you would also control access, so users would not be able to make significant changes to their systems. This means that you should not then have any unexpected gotchas, at least if you've done the pre-release testing properly.

I cannot answer about specific software issues. If you have users locked into Excel, then you've no alternative than to use a Microsoft offering, and if you actually found one, I would not be surprised if MS took it away from you at some point to leaverage their control over you and what you run. That is not an issue with Linux, it's distros or the community. Microsoft could provide something like Excel for Linux, but the choose not to.

[43300]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

"How you manage groups of systems is down to you, but I can think of a number of ways of doing it. So it's a non-issue."

Except its not a non-issue, is it? It's actually a major piece of work. I've not come across anything in Linux which has the functionality of group policies / Intune, to anything like the same level. Not saying there definitely aren't any, but I've never encountered them - would be interested to know if you are aware of any.

[43300]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

Rather than thumb-downing, why don't those of you who disagree address the point - are there any Linux management systems which have the functionality of group policies / Intune?

[Peter Gathercole]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

Quick question. Why do you need group policies to manage the system upgrades?

I would think that it would be possible to have just a plain set of lists of different types of system, which you could then use to manage your estate. Home grown methods can work, we don't all have to be spoon-fed a solution by a commercial entity.

But just google "linux patch management tools", and you get lists of tools that may help. I even recognise at least two of the common ones (Red Hat Satellite, and HCL BigFix). So tools for patch management tools exist.

When it comes to some form of group policies, it is quite possible to set your access credentials system to use an LDAP source like, say, MS Active Directory, so that your group membership on Linux systems is controlled centrally, deity forbid that is what you want. You could then use UNIX/Linux group membership to control what people could do on a system. Remember, LDAP is NOT an MS invention, and although it is relatively crude by modern standards, the UNIX group model is well established. And, although I've not used it, it appears that you may also be able to manage ACLs and RBAC from LDAP.

As I am not a Windows admin. (or even a big Windows user), I'm actually not that familiar with Intune, but doing a bit of research, it appears that this is a grouping of a number of MS tools under one banner, like the original Solaris or Tivoli groupings. I'm certain that equivalents for each of these tools exist for Linux, just not under a single name. I'm sure it's convenient to have such a grouping, but I would hazard a guess that the MS tools are not all regarded as "Best of Breed".

Another thing about MS tools, they're being pushed hard into the Cloud. I'm sure there are organisations who will not, under current conditions, put the essential configuration management into the Cloud, especially if they run air-gapped, or near air-gapped environments.

[43300]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

Group policies, used to target WSUS, gives pretty much complete control over updates to Windows (and some server products such as SQL Server and Exchange). Alas not Office any longer, as that updates as and when it feels like it.

GPOs are also very useful for configuring many other settings in Windows and other Microsoft products.

The main advantage of Intune, now that we (like many organisations) have a vastly increased number of laptops scattered here there and everywhere is that it's one platform which can be used to deploy and then manage the client machines. It can also be used to manage the updates to a degree, instead of Intune - in particular the feature updates, or 10 to 11 updates, where a rule can be set to hold a group of computers at a particular version, or to update them all to whichever version is desired. It can also deploy software and settings to the clients.

[Duncan Macdonald]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

You probably have about as many Linux users in your company as Windows users - they just do not realize it as all Android devices have a Linux kernel.

[43300]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

"You probably have about as many Linux users in your company as Windows users - they just do not realize it as all Android devices have a Linux kernel.

But something locked down like Android is not a substitute for a full Windows OS, in particular it has nothing like the same amount of specialist software. Fine for phones and on a bigger screen for some basic office tasks (same applies to ChromeOS), and when customised for specific purposes (e.g. EPOS systems), but not an adequate replacement for Windows in many cases.

[Plest]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

I 100% agree with you but we're running all 470 Linux boxes using standard builds, standard scheduled patching at the exact same time as Windows servers are patched. We use Active Directory to control all access and using only private ED25519 keys, there are no passwords allowed on our Linux hosts whatsoever outside the root passwords which are changed and locked in the company security "vault". Even Linux user groups are controlled and managed through AD which means we simply define the policies and day-to-day management and access is done by the ops support team, same as Windows.

Granted our Linux boxes are not desktops, so the apps issue doesn't affect us but central management and regular 4 week patching cycles are run automatically week 1 dev, week 2 uat, week 4 is prod. Anything fails to patch perfectly is automatically blacklisted and reported. We use patch monitoring across the board to report when systems have not been patched for 6 weeks tops or if they begin to slip more than X percent out of sync with the latest patch sets. Sure it all takes time but some of your points are 20 years old thinking, MS has done a lot to allow central control of Windows/Linux hosts and allow people with AD knowledge the ability to manage security access to Linux systems.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

I think you'd enjoy IT much more if you weren't so belligerent.

[Michael Habel]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

What of large Data Hosting centers?

[Evil Scot]

The answere is DNS.

It is always DNS...

At home I believe I block MS Telemetry with PiHole. No Doubt there are similar appliances in the commercial world.

[Michael Habel]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

But, nether actually run M$ Orifice natively, and I'm not into Wine....

[jake]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

"I see very little difference between MS collecting data on me and a hacker doing the same."

There is absolutely zero difference. Substitute any other international marketing company for Microsoft and it still holds true.

[razorfishsl]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

LOL you are really funny......

AV programs are the biggest offenders of Telemetry....

Go see the amount that their cloud front end offers , every false positive & every file scanned that has malware is squirreled up into their cloud , including the users name...

when a virus is found a complete path is uploaded to their cloud.. which includes ur name folder and path... such as "big coloured girls" as was recently seen on our cloud av solution... along with the directors name...

So much for the rule for our stock market listing requiring all security risks files to be identified to the board & CEO in writing in a monthly report........

sometimes i really love my job..

[mIVQU#~(p,]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

They hijack every dns request too.

[Dimmer]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

Re: razorfishsl

Can't agree with you more. The intent of the post is the faint glimmer of hope that some antivirus or better yet individual will see $$$$$ in the opportunity. I would pay for that service.

Awaiting the glorious day I can stick it to them, I will have to get by with a script that changes the gateway when the screen saver is on and back when it is not. Not the best but I can at least monitor what app is trying to claw its way out.

Maybe an AI on the local network or desktop would do the trick.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

Nadella: "How may users are we going to piss off if we break previous Office versions? We need more revenues to pump up my stocks and bonuses!!! But if they are too many and in the wrong places it could backfire."

<some VP>: "We don't know, but we can use a forced update to count them - some may complain but we will shove that down their throats anyway.".

[Code For Broke]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

I'm preparing myself for the downvotes as I type... Ok... Here goes...

Who here would say that older versions of anything M$-written pose an increased security risk?

And would you say this is often even more true for the Office suite of applications?

And when some kind of highly publicized security event occurs, do they not usually name the software that appears to have allowed the event to occur in the first place, including the name of the company that wrought it?

And when most people read that, for instance, "Microsoft Word responsible for enormous data breach..." they do not care or consider which version of "Word" was involved, even if it was a version released 20ish years ago?

And so then, would SatNad (not sure this rises to his level, honestly, but "M$ leadership") not have a keen interest in the reputational risk that exists within their commerical landscape?

Just sayin'.

[Jimmy2Cows]

Re: Just sayin'.

More like just missin' the point, entirely.

It's fundamentally unethical to bang on about how much user privacy is respected, while planning to trawl every user's machine looking for out-of-support Office versions. The reasons behind the trawl might be noble (but come on, the only reason for this trawl is see how many legacy users they can try to foist O365 onto), but the act itself is a complete and blatant invasion of user privacy.

Hence MS scrambling like mad to try not coming across is the privacy invading data fetishists they provably are.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Strange way to respect user privacy

"my business and none of theirs."

But, but, but, how else is poor struggling MS going to work out who to target with upsell adverts on the Windows 11 start menu?

[jake]

There is "No, thank you.".

And then there is "Hell fucking no, you nosy fucking marketing bastards!".

This one deserves the latter, from all and sundry ... but perhaps with a trifle more vehemence.

[Winkypop]

But, what could possibly go wrong?

[Extra paper available if required]

[Paul Crawford]

If they have nothing to hide then why not make the 'patch' (i.e. spyware) open sourced so we can look at what it is actually going to do?

[John Brown (no body)]

Yes, because who better than MS themselves ought to be able to target only the specific registry keys related to not only their own apps but this very tiny sub-set of apps. Possibly just semantics, but there;s no need to "scan the system" for these 3 or 4 apps. If they don't trust their installer to have removed old and no longer used registry keys from previous versions that are no longer there, then again, who better than MS to be able to check for those very specific and unique files that should be in a certain place if the app is still installed.

[captain veg]

open sourced

As an additional bonus we could then compile it ourselves and not have to trust the frankly terrifying assurance that it has been virus-scanned. I'd be much better disposed to run it then.

Hold on, that's mad.

-A.

[chuckufarley]

Ofc my version of Office is not supported...

...because it's FOSS.

[gerryg]

If you don't like it...

..do something about it.

If you don't want to do something about it (beyond moaning about what bastards Microsoft are) you are not that upset, stop posturing.

[Ken Hagan]

Re: If you don't like it...

Such as?

The claim is that the search will be run only once. I didn't see a note that it would not run after a certain date, so if I want to block this I need to switch off "updates for other MS products" and never switch it back on. That puts me at risk, since MS will presumably continue to publish their monthly compendium of vulnerabilities in "other products" and I may be affected by that.

I suppose I could junk Windows entirely. That might be good in the long run, but might be ruinously expensive in the short run if my business relies in part on apps or data formats that are wedded to Windows.

So apart from various levels of self-harm, just what do you suggest that we whingers should do?

[gerryg]

Re: If you don't like it...

The long run consists of a series of short runs.

If it is ruinously expensive in the current short run you have been asleep during all the other ruinously expensive shorts runs. If you have been self-harming for a long time there is no help I can offer you

[Paul Crawford]

Re: If you don't like it...

So apart from various levels of self-harm, just what do you suggest that we whingers should do?

If you sit like a frog being slowly boiled, do you expect it ever to get cooler?

Migrate from Windows in steps. Create a VM for windows and put all Windows-only and can't be easily replaced stuff in that. Many other things (web, email) already run on mac or linux perfectly well, better usually. Look at what alterative you have, many Windows programs have Mac versions so you get that one step further away (OK different set of issues there) with minimal issues of data or GUI changes to worry about. Also many FOSS choices can work on all 3 platforms.

Will it be perfectly the same? Will it be very easy? No, but otherwise why complain to MS who, just like Google and Facebook, don't give a flying monkey's about you or your privacy.

[yetanotheraoc]

Re: If you don't like it...

option 3: do something about it *and* moan about the bastards at MS

[Anonymous Coward]

Long time Microsoft User here, since Windows 3.

I detest windows 10 for many reasons including this one among others, and windows 11 is even worse. My home setup is now linux and chromebook and there are very few things I can't work around.

Unfortunately I'm forced to use Windows for work, but then updates and stability issues are someone elses problem!

[Joe W]

I totally second the "SEP". Yeah, if my company insists on using Windows then somebody else bloody well should take care of it - that's not what they pay me for (ok, also with Linux desktops issued by work).

I started with Win 3.1 for Workgroups... the current Windows is more stable, I'll admit that :)

[captain veg]

more stable

Well yes, Windows for Warehouses contained code from the beta builds of what would emerge as Windows 95. The 32-bit disk access was so buggy that Microsoft recommended turning it off.

-A.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't care that it only runs once - it should not run at all without my permission

Microsoft has as far as I'm concerned absolutely ZERO rights to look what I have or have not installed on my machine. In addition, who can prove to me that's the only thing they're looking for? Maybe it's a generic global scan to see if anyone has any juicy IP lying around that they so "accidentally" acquire à la Google's totally not pre-planned WiFi scan with Streetview which totally by sheer coincidence had a backend waiting to take in all that data.

I'd say that from a UK perspective it's a violation of the Computer Misuse Act that no Terms can bypass, and I'm certain that similar laws exist elsewhere, and trying to blackmail people into executing it by explicitly tying it to security updates should be even more reason for this to end up in court as the crime it is.

I am SO glad we're removing their products from the new setups we're building - we have client data to protect and we cannot feasibly prove we do so if we're using Microsoft..

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I don't care that it only runs once - it should not run at all without my permission

End quote of the movie Anon (2018):

“It's not that I have anything to hide, I have nothing I want you to see.”

[captain veg]

Re: I don't care that it only runs once - it should not run at all without my permission

I'm not keen on Microsoft not asking nicely before updating files that it supplied itself in the first place.

Trawling my entire filesystem for, what, we don't really know, is taking the piss.

-A.

[xyz]

The 4 horsemen of the internet...

Telemetry, automatic updates, targeted adverts and social media. Anyone trying to actually do anything else is an edge case now.

Don't tell anyone, but I've got Office 2007 on a win 7 machine and it's not connected to the interent... I'm bad, I am.

[Novex]

Re: The 4 horsemen of the internet...

I have Office 2010 on a Win 7 VM on Linux Mint, though it can connect to the internet if need be. So I'm not quite as much of a naughty donkey...

[ComicalEngineer]

Re: The 4 horsemen of the internet...

I have Office 2010 running on an XP machine...

Supports legacy software which I still need to use occasionally.

[David Hicklin]

Re: The 4 horsemen of the internet...

Lotus 1-2-3 on an XP VM but only for old legacy stuff along with office 2010

Office 2013 (licenced 2d hand - thank EU) sits on it's own VM but windows 7 this time

Why the VM's ? It means that the main machine is not infected with any of that stuff !

[captain veg]

Microsoft is delivering the update to users who have opted to receive updates for its products

> Microsoft is delivering the update to users who have opted to receive updates for its products

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. HA HA HA HA HA HA Ha.

Hahahahahahahahhaha!!!!!!

HA!

Ha!

Ha ha ha, aha ha ha.

Where do I opt out?

-A.

[Plest]

Scan registry and installed apps listing, check for anything owned by MS and done. No need to look at anything else, of course you just want to build a huge DB of how WIndows is being used and no doubt the info will be useful to be sold later on for some bullshit marketing crap.

The kicker is that, "We rented you the operating system, yes we RENTED you Windows, you didn't seriously think you bought it did you? Of course there's a tiny clause in the EULA that says we can poke about in your set up as much as we damn well please! So pucker-up suckers, we're coming in hard and you're gonna grin and say thanks!". Ha ha ha!

I use and have no issues with Windows but let's face it MS have form when it comes to doing whatever the hell they damn well please in Windows and to hell with whatever we think.

[Omnipresent]

The best way to fight MS

...is disconnect it. Turn off your internet. Just be ready for the daily nag prompts, and the occasional time outs from software devs. MS is ridiculous. You can't connect it to the internet because they steal your computer for their own purposes, and if you disconnect it, you get daily nags screaming you are disconnected. What good is your computer exactly? Seems like the only thing it does is serve MS.

[jake]

Re: The best way to fight MS

The best way to fight Redmond is to not use their products.

Works for mean and mine. Try it, you might like it.

[david1024]

Yeah, only looking

They are looking so they can prioritize breaking the versions that are costing them m365 subscriptions. Wish they'd scan my VM's for libre office too. Just more ways to try to try to push more m365 subs. :(

[Grunchy]

The "Ghost Spectre" option

Yeah, I'm doing it. "Ghost Spectre" is a lightweight version of Windows 10 that has all Microsoft updates locked, Microsoft will soon be prohibited from attacking my computer any more.

To me this story raises one more question, "why does Microsoft Office need internet access anyway?"

It's not a browser and it's not an FTP client. Outlook is an email client but other than that, I don't see why the program was built with an online attack vector in the first place.

I'm weary of all the updates, I can't even run a program without it scanning online and informing me that it needs a new version and it has to download 100MB of data and re-do the installation before it can possibly do what I require it to do. No more!

They've created an ecosystem in which we will all require fibre optic connections to handle all the data requirements. None of this does anything for me.

You know what I've got several TB of data storage at home, I'm pretty sure I don't need One Drive or Apple iCloud. Why do you guys need to control all of my data? Get lost!

I run software to accomplish specific things, once I have a version that does what I need done, I don't see the need to update any more.

"It already works fine for me, not gonna update any more, thanks" is what people who run Ghost Spectre say.

[Omnipresent]

Re: The "Ghost Spectre" option

I'll look into it, but I don't know how this would work without inside knowledge from MS. They have services embedded that time out regularly and force reset. You would have to open up windows 10 with intimate knowledge of where and what you were looking at, then some how work around all the services and hidden options that force reset. Maybe a script that runs every so often that turns all services and hidden options back off every x amount of time? Not sure how that would work. Someone knew what they were doing if they were able to open it all up and gut it. Not sure many of the windows features would even work anymore.

[John Geek]

Should be fun when they find my Office 2007 (legit) on my 10 year old Win10 desktop... I hardly ever use Office, its just there for when I absolutely have to. my new XPS13 laptop runs Win11, but I mostly use that as a RDP and SSH client, and ok, light web browsing.

[FlamingDeath]

It does what? you say?

Coming from a company that has its own CVE range

What else does it do?

[Binraider]

Sod off MS. Whether it's supported or not, retail licenses under which the software was distributed placed no upper time limit on how long one can use it.

Except that MS working practises are effectively saying there now is. So have they broached their own licensing terms? (Possibly).

Keeping old versions around is actually important to some software; for example I have some tools that were cobbled together using various parts of Office 2003 that won't ever be migrated (in fact, legally speaking, we need to retain access to this system in it's original form). Leaving it in an off-network VM in perpetuity is fine.

Don't worry, their practises have already done their very worst to drive me from anything in their product catalogue, just like Oracle.

[Anonymous Coward]

I switched my old laptop from Windows 10 and Office to Ubuntu and LibreOffice. It's now more responsive and I've got at least 25% more battery runtime back. When I stop doing things, the laptop CPU idles at about 1-2%, and not the 12% Microsoft was subjecting it to!

[shawn.eary]

I'm not sure why things like Windows 10 and MS Teams eat up so much CPU/Disk usage when "idle". If only Steinberg Cubase would run on GNU\Linux...

[Binraider]

While there is a learning curve, Linux DAW are available.

I'm similarly stuck with Reason on Windows for the time being, but I'll probably just drop that on the Macbook and forget about it on X86.

[jake]

"While there is a learning curve, Linux DAW are available."

There is a learning curve for any new thing you learn.

I know several audio professionals who use one (or more) of the various FOSS DAWs. Most of them also pay for one (or more) of the Microsoft-based solutions. I am almost never called in to resolve problems with their FOSS software ... but they all try to convince me to work on their Redmond boxen fairly regularly (sadly for them, I don't do Windows). As far as I know, all the systems are used roughly equally.

"I'm similarly stuck with Reason on Windows for the time being"

I'm not "stuck" with my one Windows box, I just haven't had the spare hours to transfer several decades of CAD files from AutoCAD to a FOSS solution[0]. HOWEVER, I'm not stupid enough to continue paying Microsoft and Autodesk to upgrade their products ... For my needs, AutoCAD2K on Win2K is more than adequate. Yes, it's air-gapped.

For the record, all new work is being done on FOSS. When I need to work on an archived drawing, it gets moved over to the FOSS side before being checked, and then worked on. Eventually, the Microsoft and Autodesk software will not see the light of day anymore. As it is, they get used maybe five or six times per year. I'm getting there.

_{[0] The available automated tools are excellent, but I'm far too anal to trust them explicitly with piddly little details.}

[Anonymous Coward]

consent

Why don't MS prompt the customer (local user or administrator) to consent to the scan, a simple yes or no and a concise explanation of what they want to report back and why.

Empower the customer to decide their own fate and if they respond no then respect that decision and move on.

[shawn.eary]

Please Don't

I paid a ton of money for MS Office back in the day. It still works and runs. I would rather Microsoft not try to deactivate products on my computer. I don't have the money to endlessly upgrade for no reason on every Microsoft whim. I've some high dollar hardware get phased out in the past because Microsoft reconfigured the kernel and the vendor refuses to rewrite the drivers into compliance.

[hayzoos]

Another straw on the camel's back

For some this will be the breaking point.

MS does not need to trawl a computer to find older versions of Office, all the key registry entries and files are known and the search can be laser precise.

The Windows End User License Agreement is what comes into play here, IDK - does it allow for MS to perform this activity? I'd say probably since you do not own any MS software but have paid for the privilege to use it under the terms of the EULA.

I should fire up the ole Windows machine with Office 95 installed just to be a thorn in the side.

[Andy The Hat]

Opted in for updates ...

Since when is a tool specifically designed to only obtain data from the host machine and delete itself an "opted into update"?

This verges on illegal use of a remote machine unless anyone can point me at the specific line in the EULA for those packages impacted that allows for this ...

[jake]

Re: Opted in for updates ...

Most commercial software these days includes a line in the finest of print that says (paraphrasing) "We reserve the right to eyeball your machine whenever we want to, because it's our software, not yours. And besides, our lawyers are bigger than yours are. Neener!".

If your machine runs a modern Redmond or Cupertino OS, you have agreed to this invasion of privacy.

Seriously, read the fine print.