Windows Activation Crack

[tcsenter]

Originally posted by: ViRGE
As I've said before, as long as you don't talk about how to do it, where to get it, or flagrantly admit to being a pirate, it's not going to be locked. Otherwise we're more than happy to allow discourse about such technical matters.

There is a way to discuss how BIOS SLP/SLIC works for OEM activation. e.g. a topic called "how BIOS activation works..."

This is a blatant discussion about an illegal crack.

 

[Qianglong]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: ViRGE
As I've said before, as long as you don't talk about how to do it, where to get it, or flagrantly admit to being a pirate, it's not going to be locked. Otherwise we're more than happy to allow discourse about such technical matters.

There is a way to discuss how BIOS SLP/SLIC works for OEM activation. e.g. a topic called "how BIOS activation works..."

This is a blatant discussion about an illegal crack.

Oh really, did I specific the way of doing it? I did not, I only said there is such method to make a home built PC into a OEM PC via bios.

 

[coolVariable]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: ViRGE
As I've said before, as long as you don't talk about how to do it, where to get it, or flagrantly admit to being a pirate, it's not going to be locked. Otherwise we're more than happy to allow discourse about such technical matters.

There is a way to discuss how BIOS SLP/SLIC works for OEM activation. e.g. a topic called "how BIOS activation works..."

This is a blatant discussion about an illegal crack.

Oh, got your panties all in a bunch? NAZI?

 

[flexy]

i dont KNOW whether it's the case, but do you think that a license check BEFORE any exe is run would slow down the PC?

There *might* be a license check happening, but for sure there are nine zillions other things happening also and the lic check for sure is not the one "slowing down" a PC.

Just use an utility like process monitor etc. and see whats going on in your system, registry reads/writes, file accesses...etc...we're talking many, many thousands of things happening all the time. Then why should the license check alone be responsible for making the OS faster or slower?

This is as absurd as claiming that Windows checks for date/time/location at every exe/application start and removing that check would "significantly speed up your PC"...

 

[tcsenter]

Originally posted by: Qianglong
Oh really, did I specific the way of doing it? I did not, I only said there is such method to make a home built PC into a OEM PC via bios.

There is no way to "make" a home-built PC into a Royalty OEM PC. They are completely different things for purposes of lawful licensing and activation.

You said there is a method to bypass or circumvent activation on home-built PCs using a crack or hack that exploits Royalty OEM pre-activation. Big difference.

 

[Qianglong]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: Qianglong
Oh really, did I specific the way of doing it? I did not, I only said there is such method to make a home built PC into a OEM PC via bios.

There is no way to "make" a home-built PC into a Royalty OEM PC. They are completely different things for purposes of lawful licensing and activation.

You said there is a method to bypass or circumvent activation on home-built PCs using a crack or hack that exploits Royalty OEM pre-activation. Big difference.

As if 99% of the people here gives a rats damn about "lawful licensing and activation"

 

[tcsenter]

Originally posted by: Qianglong
As if 99% of the people here gives a rats damn about "lawful licensing and activation"

That's why we aren't a 'self-governing' community (i.e. mob rules), though apparently may be becoming one if the complete absence of appropriate moderation is any sign.

If you have any concerns, you are more than welcome to toss something up in Personal Forum Issues or to send a PM to the AT Mod account. I don't claim to be infallible, and we have a chain of command for such matters.

-ViRGE

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: Qianglong
As if 99% of the people here gives a rats damn about "lawful licensing and activation"

That's why we aren't a 'self-governing' community (i.e. mob rules), though apparently may be becoming one if the complete absence of appropriate moderation is any sign.

Nobody has discussed the actual process behind circumventing the activation.
Nobody has linked to a page which informs someone how to circumvent activation.

That was, in my mind, why ViRGE (or another mod) didn't lock the thread.

Right now we are merely discussing how utterly impossible it would be from a software development standpoint to do such a thing (as well as how it wouldn't slow the application down or take more than fractions of a second at all).

-Kevin

 

[hclarkjr]

i am surprised it has not been locked either, the mods usually frown upon even the discussion of such things.

 

[KeypoX]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: Qianglong
As if 99% of the people here gives a rats damn about "lawful licensing and activation"

That's why we aren't a 'self-governing' community (i.e. mob rules), though apparently may be becoming one if the complete absence of appropriate moderation is any sign.

Nobody has discussed the actual process behind circumventing the activation.
Nobody has linked to a page which informs someone how to circumvent activation.

That was, in my mind, why ViRGE (or another mod) didn't lock the thread.

Right now we are merely discussing how utterly impossible it would be from a software development standpoint to do such a thing (as well as how it wouldn't slow the application down or take more than fractions of a second at all).

-Kevin

If a program had to do an online check it could and prob would take a bit of time sometimes at least. What happens if you lost connection (sometimes router or something cause 30s or so downtime) would the program not run till you got that connection.

I dont care about the crack, but would like to know if programs do call home on each run.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: KeypoX

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: Qianglong
As if 99% of the people here gives a rats damn about "lawful licensing and activation"

That's why we aren't a 'self-governing' community (i.e. mob rules), though apparently may be becoming one if the complete absence of appropriate moderation is any sign.

Nobody has discussed the actual process behind circumventing the activation.
Nobody has linked to a page which informs someone how to circumvent activation.

That was, in my mind, why ViRGE (or another mod) didn't lock the thread.

Right now we are merely discussing how utterly impossible it would be from a software development standpoint to do such a thing (as well as how it wouldn't slow the application down or take more than fractions of a second at all).

-Kevin

If a program had to do an online check it could and prob would take a bit of time sometimes at least. What happens if you lost connection (sometimes router or something cause 30s or so downtime) would the program not run till you got that connection.

I dont care about the crack, but would like to know if programs do call home on each run.

It wouldn't slow the program itself down. It would slow down the launch.

Here is a test, unplug your computer from the internet - does the program suddenly take longer to load? NOPE!

Even running an instance within an IDE when another process is spawned, there is NOTHING in the call stack to suggest a call to an external validation program/script. This "crack" to prevent validation is 100% FALSE

-Kevin

 

[Deadtrees]

Originally posted by: KeypoX

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: Qianglong
As if 99% of the people here gives a rats damn about "lawful licensing and activation"

That's why we aren't a 'self-governing' community (i.e. mob rules), though apparently may be becoming one if the complete absence of appropriate moderation is any sign.

Nobody has discussed the actual process behind circumventing the activation.
Nobody has linked to a page which informs someone how to circumvent activation.

That was, in my mind, why ViRGE (or another mod) didn't lock the thread.

Right now we are merely discussing how utterly impossible it would be from a software development standpoint to do such a thing (as well as how it wouldn't slow the application down or take more than fractions of a second at all).

-Kevin

If a program had to do an online check it could and prob would take a bit of time sometimes at least. What happens if you lost connection (sometimes router or something cause 30s or so downtime) would the program not run till you got that connection.

I dont care about the crack, but would like to know if programs do call home on each run.

As I've stated before, the authentication process does NOT need internet connection. It does NOT use internet connection. What I'm talking about a built-in routine check.
Those who tried to crack Windows7 with various token files would understand this easily.

 

[Deadtrees]

Below is a bit of portion from the script file.

@echo off
Color 017
if exist %WinDir%\serviceprofiles\networkservice\appdata\roaming\microsoft\softwarelicensing\tokens.dat goto _admcheck
if not exist "%WinDir%\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\Appdata\Roaming\Microsoft\SoftwareProtectionPlatform\tokens.dat" goto adm

:_admcheck
cls
if exist data\Source\ai.cmd goto _ai

:_main
cls
echo.
echo. Microsoft Windows Activator  Main  A.I V_090805
echo

echo 


echo  1) Active Administrator  2) Slic2.1 Install 
echo 
echo 


echo  3) OEM License Install  4) Server 2008 OEM key 
echo 
echo 


echo  5) Windows Vista OEM key  6) Windows 7 OEM key 
echo 
echo 


echo  7) Windows Activator  8) Activation Optimizer 
echo 
echo 


echo  9) 32Ram64G Vista and 7  O) Option Utility 
echo 
echo 


echo  C) Activation Check  R) Restoration System 
echo 
echo 
echo.



:_set
set _ok=
set /p _ok=. Press Enter after making your selection
if "%_ok%" == "1" goto _Administrator
if "%_ok%" == "2" goto _adm
if "%_ok%" == "3" goto _adm
if "%_ok%" == "4" goto _adm
if "%_ok%" == "5" goto _adm
if "%_ok%" == "6" goto _adm
if "%_ok%" == "7" goto _adm
if "%_ok%" == "8" goto _adm
if "%_ok%" == "9" goto _adm
if "%_ok%" == "0" goto _adm
if "%_ok%" == "o" goto _adm
if "%_ok%" == "O" goto _adm
if "%_ok%" == "c" goto _adm
if "%_ok%" == "C" goto _adm
if "%_ok%" == "r" goto _adm
if "%_ok%" == "R" goto _adm
goto _main

 

[Cogman]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: Qianglong
As if 99% of the people here gives a rats damn about "lawful licensing and activation"

That's why we aren't a 'self-governing' community (i.e. mob rules), though apparently may be becoming one if the complete absence of appropriate moderation is any sign.

Nobody has discussed the actual process behind circumventing the activation.
Nobody has linked to a page which informs someone how to circumvent activation.

That was, in my mind, why ViRGE (or another mod) didn't lock the thread.

Right now we are merely discussing how utterly impossible it would be from a software development standpoint to do such a thing (as well as how it wouldn't slow the application down or take more than fractions of a second at all).

-Kevin

Such a thing is not utterly impossible. Ever since OS's became multithreaded (Early Dos I believe). Something like this has been made possible.

The OS allocates a time slot to a program, executes that program for so long, then jumps out and checks if there are any tasks that need to be done. This ensures that if one program crashes, it doesn't take the whole OS down with it. Since a call to execute a program has to go through the os, it is entirely possible that the OS could check activation status at the start of each program. (And even after x amount of time that has passed in the program) Without the program actually doing said check.

That being said, I'm fairly certain this is not the case. And, even if it where, the difference between activation checks/no activation checks would be minimal at best. So your program loads in 10.2839 ms instead of 10.2830 ms Most people don't notice such differences. (Even if the difference is up to 200 ms, most can't tell the difference).

The rest is placebo effect. The OP is told that it is faster, and thus he says it FEELS faster. FEELS is a terrible way to measure how fast an OS is, because a large portion of it is psychological in nature.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: Cogman

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: Qianglong
As if 99% of the people here gives a rats damn about "lawful licensing and activation"

That's why we aren't a 'self-governing' community (i.e. mob rules), though apparently may be becoming one if the complete absence of appropriate moderation is any sign.

Nobody has discussed the actual process behind circumventing the activation.
Nobody has linked to a page which informs someone how to circumvent activation.

That was, in my mind, why ViRGE (or another mod) didn't lock the thread.

Right now we are merely discussing how utterly impossible it would be from a software development standpoint to do such a thing (as well as how it wouldn't slow the application down or take more than fractions of a second at all).

-Kevin

Such a thing is not utterly impossible. Ever since OS's became multithreaded (Early Dos I believe). Something like this has been made possible.

The OS allocates a time slot to a program, executes that program for so long, then jumps out and checks if there are any tasks that need to be done. This ensures that if one program crashes, it doesn't take the whole OS down with it. Since a call to execute a program has to go through the os, it is entirely possible that the OS could check activation status at the start of each program. (And even after x amount of time that has passed in the program) Without the program actually doing said check.

That being said, I'm fairly certain this is not the case. And, even if it where, the difference between activation checks/no activation checks would be minimal at best. So your program loads in 10.2839 ms instead of 10.2830 ms Most people don't notice such differences. (Even if the difference is up to 200 ms, most can't tell the difference).

The rest is placebo effect. The OP is told that it is faster, and thus he says it FEELS faster. FEELS is a terrible way to measure how fast an OS is, because a large portion of it is psychological in nature.

Ok - bad wording on my part. Impractical is a much much much much better word as this is certainly something that is physically possible to implement.

Deadtrees, do you have any idea what you just posted (I don't, but I'm betting that you don't either)? Also, there is unicode in this file, not merely ASCII so there is nothing useful shown.

-Kevin

 

[Deadtrees]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: Cogman

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: Qianglong
As if 99% of the people here gives a rats damn about "lawful licensing and activation"

That's why we aren't a 'self-governing' community (i.e. mob rules), though apparently may be becoming one if the complete absence of appropriate moderation is any sign.

Nobody has discussed the actual process behind circumventing the activation.
Nobody has linked to a page which informs someone how to circumvent activation.

That was, in my mind, why ViRGE (or another mod) didn't lock the thread.

Right now we are merely discussing how utterly impossible it would be from a software development standpoint to do such a thing (as well as how it wouldn't slow the application down or take more than fractions of a second at all).

-Kevin

Such a thing is not utterly impossible. Ever since OS's became multithreaded (Early Dos I believe). Something like this has been made possible.

The OS allocates a time slot to a program, executes that program for so long, then jumps out and checks if there are any tasks that need to be done. This ensures that if one program crashes, it doesn't take the whole OS down with it. Since a call to execute a program has to go through the os, it is entirely possible that the OS could check activation status at the start of each program. (And even after x amount of time that has passed in the program) Without the program actually doing said check.

That being said, I'm fairly certain this is not the case. And, even if it where, the difference between activation checks/no activation checks would be minimal at best. So your program loads in 10.2839 ms instead of 10.2830 ms Most people don't notice such differences. (Even if the difference is up to 200 ms, most can't tell the difference).

The rest is placebo effect. The OP is told that it is faster, and thus he says it FEELS faster. FEELS is a terrible way to measure how fast an OS is, because a large portion of it is psychological in nature.

Ok - bad wording on my part. Impractical is a much much much much better word as this is certainly something that is physically possible to implement.

Deadtrees, do you have any idea what you just posted (I don't, but I'm betting that you don't either)? Also, there is unicode in this file, not merely ASCII so there is nothing useful shown.

-Kevin

Having used computers since DOS 3.x days, yes, I do know what I posted. I'm just playing it safe. I do not want to post something specific.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: Deadtrees

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: Cogman

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: Qianglong
As if 99% of the people here gives a rats damn about "lawful licensing and activation"

That's why we aren't a 'self-governing' community (i.e. mob rules), though apparently may be becoming one if the complete absence of appropriate moderation is any sign.

Nobody has discussed the actual process behind circumventing the activation.
Nobody has linked to a page which informs someone how to circumvent activation.

That was, in my mind, why ViRGE (or another mod) didn't lock the thread.

Right now we are merely discussing how utterly impossible it would be from a software development standpoint to do such a thing (as well as how it wouldn't slow the application down or take more than fractions of a second at all).

-Kevin

Such a thing is not utterly impossible. Ever since OS's became multithreaded (Early Dos I believe). Something like this has been made possible.

The OS allocates a time slot to a program, executes that program for so long, then jumps out and checks if there are any tasks that need to be done. This ensures that if one program crashes, it doesn't take the whole OS down with it. Since a call to execute a program has to go through the os, it is entirely possible that the OS could check activation status at the start of each program. (And even after x amount of time that has passed in the program) Without the program actually doing said check.

That being said, I'm fairly certain this is not the case. And, even if it where, the difference between activation checks/no activation checks would be minimal at best. So your program loads in 10.2839 ms instead of 10.2830 ms Most people don't notice such differences. (Even if the difference is up to 200 ms, most can't tell the difference).

The rest is placebo effect. The OP is told that it is faster, and thus he says it FEELS faster. FEELS is a terrible way to measure how fast an OS is, because a large portion of it is psychological in nature.

Ok - bad wording on my part. Impractical is a much much much much better word as this is certainly something that is physically possible to implement.

Deadtrees, do you have any idea what you just posted (I don't, but I'm betting that you don't either)? Also, there is unicode in this file, not merely ASCII so there is nothing useful shown.

-Kevin

Having used computers since DOS 3.x days, yes, I do know what I posted. I'm just playing it safe. I do not want to post something specific.

Using a computer for a long time doesn't mean crap. I have used computers like the ATARI, and the early DOS based machines, that doesn't mean I am an expert on them.

Furthermore, if you know what you posted, why in the WORLD did you post your "proof" in Unicode/Multicode knowing full well that nobody here would be able to read your "proof"?

 

[IEC]

LOL Deadtrees, that portion of the "script" tells us nothing, because it just shows some conditionals and goto statements. This thread is hilarious.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: Spartan Niner
LOL Deadtrees, that portion of the "script" tells us nothing, because it just shows some conditionals and goto statements. This thread is hilarious.

Sorry off topic for a second. Right now, Spartan, your avatar is the grinning smiley face. I don't know how or why haha.

On topic - I agree 100% with both of your statements in this post.

-Kevin

 

[Deadtrees]

As stated, I'm juat playing it safe. I do NOT want to post anything that might give a hint. However, as you and others pointed out its being nothing much, I guess I'll add more.

:tokens
cls

del "%WinDir%\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\SoftwareProtectionPlatform\tokens.dat"
if exist "%WinDir%\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\SoftwareProtectionPlatform\tokens.dat.bak" del "%WinDir%\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\SoftwareProtectionPlatform\tokens.dat.bak"
if exist "%WinDir%\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\SoftwareProtectionPlatform\cache\cache.dat" del "%WinDir%\ServiceProfiles\NetworkService\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\SoftwareProtectionPlatform\cache\cache.dat"

rd /s /q %windir%\System32\spp\tokens
xcopy data\spp\tokens %windir%\System32\spp\tokens /cheriky
if exist %windir%\System32\nb.cmd xcopy data\tokens\32Ram\tokens %windir%\System32\spp\tokens /cheriky
if exist %windir%\System32\spp32\spp\tokens\skus\Security-SPP-Component-SKU-HomeBasic goto _HomeBasic
if exist %windir%\System32\spp32\spp\tokens\skus\Security-SPP-Component-SKU-HomePremium goto _HomePremium
if exist %windir%\System32\spp32\spp\tokens\skus\Security-SPP-Component-SKU-Professional goto _Professional
if exist %windir%\System32\spp32\spp\tokens\skus\Security-SPP-Component-SKU-Enterprise goto _Enterprise
goto _Ultimate

:_HomeBasic
cls
echo.
echo.
echo. Wait for a sec...
xcopy data\tokens\HomeBasic\tokens %windir%\System32\spp\tokens /cheriky
goto _rilc

:_HomePremium
cls
echo.
echo.
echo. Wait for a sec...
xcopy data\tokens\HomePremium\tokens %windir%\System32\spp\tokens /cheriky
goto _rilc

:_Professional
cls
echo.
echo.
echo. Wait for a sec...
xcopy data\tokens\Professional\tokens %windir%\System32\spp\tokens /cheriky
goto _rilc

:_Enterprise
cls
echo.
echo.
echo. Wait for a sec...
xcopy data\tokens\Enterprise\tokens %windir%\System32\spp\tokens /cheriky
goto _rilc

:_Ultimate
cls
echo.
echo.
echo. Wait for a sec...
xcopy data\tokens\Ultimate\tokens %windir%\System32\spp\tokens /cheriky
goto _rilc

:_rilc
cls
echo.
echo.
echo. Wait for a sec...
echo.
echo.
cscript//Nologo %windir%\system32\slmgr.vbs -rilc
cls

:_License
cls
Color 017
echo.
echo OEM License Install 
echo

echo 

echo  1) For those who are on Virtual BIOS ! 
echo 
echo 

echo  2) For those who are on Modded BIOS ! 
echo 
echo 

echo  3) Users with valid OEM Key 
echo 
echo 
echo.

:_set
set _ok=
set /p _ok=. Make your selection then hit enter
if "%_ok%" == "1" goto _HP
if "%_ok%" == "2" goto _OEM
if "%_ok%" == "3" goto _OEM
goto _License

:_HP
cls
echo.
echo.
echo. Wait for a sec...
cscript %windir%\system32\slmgr.vbs -ilc data\License\HP.xrm-ms
choice /n /t 2 /d y
cls
goto _key

:_OEM
call data\License\license
goto _key

:_key
cls
echo.
echo.
echo. Wait for a sec...
if exist %windir%\System32\spp\tokens\skus\Security-SPP-Component-SKU-HomeBasic cscript//Nologo %windir%\system32\slmgr.vbs -ipk KEY DELETED
if exist %windir%\System32\spp\tokens\skus\Security-SPP-Component-SKU-HomePremium cscript//Nologo %windir%\system32\slmgr.vbs -ipk KEY DELETED
if exist %windir%\System32\spp\tokens\skus\Security-SPP-Component-SKU-Professional cscript//Nologo %windir%\system32\slmgr.vbs -ipk KEY DELETED
if exist %windir%\System32\spp\tokens\skus\Security-SPP-Component-SKU-Ultimate cscript//Nologo %windir%\system32\slmgr.vbs -ipk KEY DELETED
slmgr -dlv

:_end
cls

 

[Deadtrees]

One thing I forgot to mention:

At this point, I do not care if you believe it or not. Either way, you probably wouldn't be able to get this crack as the author himself doesn't want it to be spread.
I just wanted to point out how this crack actually makes applications load faster by eliminating licence-check cycles. Is it real? Based on my experience and others, yes it is real. I don't doubt it at all.
Again, let me state the nature of the site where I got this crack. It's a private and small community site where experienced programmers come. Those guys who are knowledgeable on this matter confirmed it and I agree with it. Of course, that doesn't mean whatever they say is true but in case, it was just true.
I've checked tokens and cache file sizes that have license information and the reduction that is done is quite significant. Also, those who have SSD drives said the difference in loading speed was more evident. As I'm on mechanical HDD, I haven't confirmed it personally.

 

[legcramp]

If you don't care if we believe it or not, and we probably won't get this crack, why bother making a thread on it at all?

 

[coolVariable]

Originally posted by: RIFLEMAN007
If you don't care if we believe it or not, and we probably won't get this crack, why bother making a thread on it at all?

BS => Attention whore?