[Release] WGA-Only KB892130 Addon 1.5.540.0

bober · Post by **bober** » Sun Jul 02, 2006 8:39 pm

i tried again using Integrator 1.22 and RVM207a_WGANotify_RemoveAddon_v1.0.cab.

it worked with only an error window after booting to windows

Code: Select all

Windows cannot find "C:\fnsh_log.cmd"

larciel · Post by **larciel** » Sun Jul 02, 2006 11:27 pm

thanks zacam, your uploaded file works perfectly.

n7Epsilon · Post by **n7Epsilon** » Sun Jul 02, 2006 11:35 pm

@Zacam:

I have a question: I see that you are directly editing txtsetup.sif and dosnet.inf using ExtraFileEdits...

Shouldn't the edits be done to rvmtemp\dosnet.inf and rvmtemp\txtsetup.sif ? Or does v1.3 of the integrator handle things differently ?

Zacam · Post by **Zacam** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 3:20 am

Since this update isn't touching on those copies, it doesn't matter. Add to the fact that this update should be added to an already updated 2.0.7a source, not really. It _might_ have an issue with merging both the update pack and the removal addon under god-only-knows conditions, but in my own testing, it handled just fine editing the main files. I'm presuming that in noticing that it's editing the file directly, it does any rvmtemp edits first, copies back to i386 and does direct edits then.

(mind you, I did test integrations 9 times before I uploaded this under varying conditions and in all 9, I got a perfect result.)

n7Epsilon · Post by **n7Epsilon** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 12:04 pm

I was asking because I am defining a new behaviour in FGCBA for checking ExtraFileEdits where it will warn about non-standard file edits.

and also because of this:

[ExtraFileEdits] looks in the i386 directory by default. If your file is in a sub-directory of i386 then you would specify the sub-directory and the file. You need to point in the rvmtemp directory if you wish to edit svcpack.inf, sysoc.inf, dosnet.inf, txtsetup.sif or any of the regularly edited files that the integrator normally edits because they are copied there during integration and will overwrite the ones that are located in the i386 directory.

This is written here: http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=488 (Defining entries.ini)

Doesn't this mean that if I am integrating a lot of addons with the Update Pack at the same time, won't the copy in I386\rvmtemp overwrite the changes done to the one in I386 ?

@Siginet, can you shed some light on this ?

MrNxDmX · Post by **MrNxDmX** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 5:46 pm

I made an addon for mrt removal a while ago, and used this removal as reference. Today i tested my removal with 207a (full, not updated with addon) with integrator 1.3, and i got integrator stopped....
what i found in i386 dir after closing integrator, in RVM_Integrator_1.3.0.log is:

Code: Select all

[ExtraFileEdits]
RVMUpPck.inf|C:\WINDOWS|%SYSD2%%SYSD%%SYSD2%|0=MRT Remover
RVMUpPck.inf|KB890830.AddReg,||1=MRT Remover
RVMUpPck.inf|[KB890830.AddReg]||1=MRT Remover
RVMUpPck.inf|HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\RemovalTools\MRT","EULA",0x10001,1||1=MRT Remover
RVMUpPck.inf|HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\RemovalTools\MRT","Version",0,"7cf4b321-c0dd-42d9-afdf-edbb85e59767"||1=MRT Remover
Dosnet.inf|d1,MRT.exe||1=MRT Remover
txtsetup.sif|MRT.exe      = 100,,,,,,,2,0,0||1=MRT Remover

but in my removal addon, these were:

Code: Select all

[ExtraFileEdits]
RVMUpPck.inf|%%SystemRoot%%|%SYSD2%%SYSD%%SYSD2%|0
RVMUpPck.inf|%SystemRoot%|%SYSD2%%SYSD%%SYSD2%|0
RVMUpPck.inf|KB890830.AddReg,||1
RVMUpPck.inf|[KB890830.AddReg]||1
RVMUpPck.inf|HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\RemovalTools\MRT","EULA",0x10001,1||1
RVMUpPck.inf|HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\RemovalTools\MRT","Version",0,"7cf4b321-c0dd-42d9-afdf-edbb85e59767"||1
Dosnet.inf|d1,MRT.exe||1
txtsetup.sif|MRT.exe      = 100,,,,,,,2,0,0||1

So, these 2 entries

Code: Select all

RVMUpPck.inf|%%SystemRoot%%|%SYSD2%%SYSD%%SYSD2%|0
RVMUpPck.inf|%SystemRoot%|%SYSD2%%SYSD%%SYSD2%|0

turned into this:

Code: Select all

RVMUpPck.inf|C:\WINDOWS|%SYSD2%%SYSD%%SYSD2%|0=MRT Remover

I will try a new test with new codes, using rvmtemp/RVMUpPck.inf entry...

Zacam · Post by **Zacam** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 9:29 pm

It's possible. I'll remake later today to make sure that doesn't happen. Even though it didn't, I'm not going to discount that it _won't_. Thanks, n7.

nowinscenario · Post by **nowinscenario** » Tue Jul 04, 2006 8:52 pm

@Zacam: quickly--so I presume, just to be clear, that your RVM207a_WGANotify_RemoveAddon_v2.cab replaces the need for RyanVM_WGA-Notify_2.0.7a_RemoveAddon_v1.0.cab...?

Also: just to clarify for all readers, is this updated version still Integrator only?--or is it now usable for nLite modification, too? (In other words, a combo process would still have to be employed, Integrator first...?)

Juzman05 · Post by **Juzman05** » Tue Jul 04, 2006 9:16 pm

Zacam wrote:Or even better, you can use this: RVM207a_WGANotify_RemoveAddon_v2.cab which removes file listings from dosnet.inf and txtsetup.sif. nJoy.

I added this addon, on the textmode install screen, still get a missing file for WGALogon and WGALegitCheck.

any ideas?

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:39 am

Can this --> 'RVM207a_WGANotify_RemoveAddon_v2.cab' be integrated at the same time as the 'RyanVM update pack 2.07a' or should I first integrate 'RyanVM update pack 2.07a' and then 'RVM207a_WGANotify_RemoveAddon_v2.cab'?

Thanks.

Zacam · Post by **Zacam** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 4:04 am

@Sanjay: I don't see why it cannot be integrated at the same time.

@nowinscenario: Actually, v3 replaces the need for 1.0 and 2.
If nLite supports [ExtraFileEdits] it may or may not work, depending on if it can pick up on using "rvmtemp\".

Updated: Now processes DOSNET.INF and TXTSETUP.SIF located in rvmtemp\.

RVM207a_WGANotify_RemoveAddon_v3.cab
MD5: FB3C484710815EF18F361977691F32E7
Size: 1.49 kb

nowinscenario · Post by **nowinscenario** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 4:34 am

@Zacam: WOW, that was fast!--I hope you're wearing a programmer's
seatbelt. Thanks for this. Will try, in all ways, to test, and report results--hope others have good fortune with this.

(BTW, MS is now getting sued with a class action lawsuit over the new WGA nonsense: well, they shouldn't have been so cavalier with their customers ... Trust is a two-way street, and they won't win any advocates by treating legit users like criminals behind our backs--they should have taken note of the whole Sony rootkit debacle before embarking on this wrong-headed approach to piracy: don't sneak spyware in on your own customers, regardless of the rationalized justification. And as far as the "not behind our backs" rest of it: do they really think they garner respect and improve their image and customer relations by requiring legal users to constantly, continually, endlessly--did I mention "over and over"--prove that they are legal users...? Jeesh, it makes one wonder whether any of the jokers in the WGA dept. even took a PR course in college--and if they inhaled or not...)

MrNxDmX · Post by **MrNxDmX** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 1:13 pm

Zacam wrote:@Sanjay: I don't see why it cannot be integrated at the same time.

@nowinscenario: Actually, v3 replaces the need for 1.0 and 2.
If nLite supports [ExtraFileEdits] it may or may not work, depending on if it can pick up on using "rvmtemp".

Updated: Now processes DOSNET.INF and TXTSETUP.SIF located in rvmtemp\.

RVM207a_WGANotify_RemoveAddon_v3.cab
MD5: FB3C484710815EF18F361977691F32E7
Size: 1.49 kb

Dear Zacam, it works but not with dosnet and txtsetup.sif entries.
If you integrate this addon with updatepack, it does not process those entries. But if you integrate after update pack integration, everything goes fine (first should delete rvmtemp entries

)

I got that error with my mrt removal, i was trying new combinations till yesterday. Today I found that if u use this while integration of update pack (with integrator 1.3) it doesnt process dosnet and txtsetup entries... maybe it does but before entries.ini processing, so no entry gets deleted. maybe in 1.4 siginet can change this method, so we can use this and mine as usual.

MrNxDmX · Post by **MrNxDmX** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 1:42 pm

RyanVM wrote:ah, so the entries aren't being removed from txtsetup.sif then. Duh, silly me. I'm really not sure why that isn't working, though, since the relevant info is in the INI file. As a temporary workaround, you can just skip that file and any other WGA files it might complain about.

Has anybody else had this problem?

yeah, i had it with my mrt removal too.
I guess this is about integrators handling files. I think it process extrafileedits first then process entries.ini, cos dosnet and txtsetup entries come from entries.ini.
I tried using "Dosnet.inf|d1,MRT.exe||1" but didnt work, then tried "rvmtemp\Dosnet.inf|d1,MRT.exe||1", didnt work too.
Thought of editing entries.ini with "rvmtemp\extracted\entries.ini|d1,MRT.exe||1" it worked, i mean entries.ini edited, but didnt edit before dosnet.inf editing, so mrt.exe entry was still in dosnet.inf.
Then i decided to use this addon with a second run of integrator (after update pack integration), finally it worked perfectly. but after update pack integrated, with a second run of integrator.

mindwarper · Post by **mindwarper** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 2:13 pm

so that means as an additional question I want to know...
So it is wise to do this same procedure with the systemfiles patches (posted by Zacam Here) ???
not that it is neccessary, but to be on safe side mayB ???

Zacam · Post by **Zacam** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 7:07 pm

@nowinscenario: Actually, it wasn't very fast at all. I should have had it released on 07/03. But thank you.

@MrNxDmx: That is somewhat strange. I didn't feel like leaving both rvmtemp and base edits in place though. But you do confirm that it _does_ work, just so long as it's not being integrated at the same time as the update pack? Also, confusing.....[ExtraFileEdits] is IN entries.ini, so how could it process a section in a file before it processes the file itself? Further, it should process the UpdatePack first _then_ the addon and then shift stuff from rvmtemp to main I386. Also, Dosnet.inf isn't a compressed file, so while it will be copied to rvmtemp (since it's being called to for modification) it shouldn't be in extracted. And while you're editing the lines in entries.ini, there's no point to that because the entries for the update pack is going to process before the entries for the addon and won't be there by the time the addon begins to execute.

@mindwarper: the PatchAddons do _not_ need a seperate integration. _ESPECIALLY_ since I covered editing the rvmtemp\RvmUpPck.inf when and where necessary. And the hex-edits that occur do so when and where they're supposed to. The PatchAddons _can_ be integrated either WITH the update pack, or after.

Aserone · Post by **Aserone** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 5:48 am

Ok I haven't followed this thread for a while and haven't had any/much time with 1.3 yet.

But in 1.2.2 [obsolete_files] took away any entrie in both txtmode.sif and dosnet.inf related to the file specified.

That's why there were no need to make EFE's to these. And Zacam I see your also removing LegitCheckControl.dll, that wasn't the point of this addon to begin with and the regs for pure wga is still applied instead? :/

So if nothing has changed in the way the integrator works with [obsolete_files] you can just skip all LCC.dll entries and also the dosnet/txtsetup entries for wgalogon.dll/wgatray.

Or delete all regs for LCC.dll from the first 10 replace entries. So to make it work as you seem to have intended it.

I guess this is a little late and I won't check this addon before 2.1.0 and 1.4 if it's supposed to be out in a couple days that is..

Zacam · Post by **Zacam** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 6:03 am

Well. Whoops. I didn't think to correct that from the orignial posted (1.0) release. (If only because I didn't _notice_ it in the original 1.0 release. I feel all small now.) I wasn't intending to turn this into a "remove" WGA entirely, but a "Replace Notify with Only".....though, nice to know someone can use v3 for a complete removal!

As for obsolete_files removing the dosnet and textsetup, it apparently wasn't. (as noted by Rudi1's post and the few subsequent "me too" posts)

RVM207a_WGANotify_RemoveAddon_v4.cab
MD5: 67AC72781691CEF354C6208BC692FD15
Size: 1.49 kb

Corrected the mistaken removal of LegitCheckControl.dll so that the reg entries will now work.
dosnet.inf and txtsetup.sif modified in rvmtemp AND I386 (just to make sure).

If this doesn't work, I'll really want to know why.

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 7:50 am

Zacam wrote:I wasn't intending to turn this into a "remove" WGA entirely, but a "Replace Notify with Only".....though, nice to know someone can use v3 for a complete removal!

Can you elaborate on how one can use v3 for removing WGA entirely. I personally feel the whole WGA notify thing creates problems with creating users in my unattended DVD, which then further creates more problems.

Zacam · Post by **Zacam** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:01 am

Well, in v3 (and v2) I didn't notice that Ryans v1.0 was also calling to remove the legitcheckcontrol.dll as well. (And the proclaimed topic purpose was to simply replace WGA Notify) So, if one were to finish adding the KB entries to the [ExtraFileEdits] they could completely remove WGA and WGA Notify.

yeckel · Post by **yeckel** » Fri Jul 07, 2006 1:46 am

This is odd it worked GREAT for me first time the pe thing is what i missed sorry i am a noob at makin these packs this is only my second try this packed worked with out my modifications as well

but mucho better with my modifications! lol

mastodon · Post by **mastodon** » Sat Jul 08, 2006 3:49 am

Zacam, at install v4 complains that it can not find wgatray and the other one (cant remember), so the unattended install stops two times.
What am I doing wrong?

Zacam · Post by **Zacam** » Sat Jul 08, 2006 5:11 am

When was v4 integrated? Was it at the same time as the update pack? If so, integrate after per the original instructions. Failing that.....*shrugs* failing that, wait for 2.1.0 which will render the whole issue a moot point.

Kingskawn · Post by **Kingskawn** » Sat Jul 08, 2006 7:13 am

So if I understand the Update Pack 2.0.7a is the newest one where I don't have to remove the WGA?

It's the 8th of july and the download on this page http://www.ryanvm.net/msfn/updatepack.html is good. No changes to made.

Or do I have to do some modifications like said in this post?

Stellvia12 · Post by **Stellvia12** » Sat Jul 08, 2006 8:57 am

No, You do have to patch it because you need to get rid of this:

KB905474 - Windows Genuine Advantage Notifications 1.5.540.0

Aserone · Post by **Aserone** » Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:26 am

Back on track here, converted this to WGA-Only as Ryan suggested. Haven't had enough time to test this yet on multiple comps. Need feedback.

Released: WGA-Only KB892130 Addon 1.5.540.0

Have fun all!

Edit: Didn't see that Kel had already released one. lol, my bad link.

ahmerkhan · Post by **ahmerkhan** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 8:17 am

LegitCheckControl.DLL got to version 1.5.0708.0

http://download.microsoft.com/download/ ... ontrol.cab

fortwunty · Post by **fortwunty** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 5:53 pm

Anybody heard of this muBlinder program before? Here's the description:

muBlinder ( Microsoft Update Blinder ) is an application that bypasses Microsoft Update's Genuine Windows Validation and allows you to view, choose and install all available updates in addition to downloading programs off of the Microsoft Download Center. Incase you have installed the Genuine Windows Notification update muBlinder allows you to get rid of those nagging popups.

muBlinder does not need to be installed and can be placed on a floppy disk or flash memory stick. Just unzip to a folder of your choice and run it. For removal, simply delete the muBlinder.exe file and the associated DLL.

In order for muBlinder to work, both the mublinder.exe and its associated dll file should placed together in a folder of your choice.

I'm not exactly sure if this is legal, so I won't bother pasting the URL. Some people might find it useful... just Google it if you want it (first link).

ricktendo64 · Post by **ricktendo64** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 5:57 pm

I know it SoKoOLz turned me on to it... I think He wanted to make a CPL addon for it (not for public release of course)

nowinscenario · Post by **nowinscenario** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 6:32 pm

Well, consciously using pirated illegal software shouldn't, of course, be our right--but bypassing any crap we feel like bypassing on a legit OS copy should be our right: isn't this what we all are doing with every single change, add-on, modifcation, etc., anyway?--of course, it is. As far as being exactly sure if it's legal, technically a lot of the stuff we do here could be construed as nitpickingly illegal in the sense that it doesn't slavishly hold to every letter of the EULA--but MS is really ultimately concerned about illegal OS copies, not any of these so-called gray areas (where we're really not towing the "party line"). I suppose we could argue that we're following the spirit of the law, and not the letter of the law--whereas WGA is really trying to address the former: in a nutshell--if you talk to them--they want piracy stopped as their primary concern, not some enthusiast community modification.

So, if we use this so-called "muBlinder" program on a legit copy of Windows, for the reason of combating yet another in a litany of Windows annoyances, how is this really illegal? (Look, MS themselves, after public outcry and class action suits, as well as crappy programming results in many cases, showed us how to remove at least their first incarnation of this WGA nonsense. Now if we keep complaining to them, like the good little civil disobedients that we are, maybe they'll drop the whole flawed approach altogether... Ok, ok, I here "Dream On" bellowing in the background, too!)

Hell, yes, I'd say make an add-on! How is it, ultimately, really any different than using Windiz Update functionality in Firefox...?--or Autopatcher to install updates which you otherwise could not get from MS without WGA...?--or updates which you're not even supposed to have unless MS specifically released them to you as a password-protected e-mail log-in...? In addition, how is it that we can easily go to Windows Update to test a build in VMware without wasting activations...?--this has made it mighty inconvenient for me, because I don't want to commit to a real install until I've run the OS through a battery of tests in a virtual machine (I'm certainly not going to use a firend's OS copy to customize it for them, then hand it back for them to use without such testing--let alone in a production environment)....

This "walking on eggshells" concerning such issues is getting out of hand. The big picture is: we have legit copies, we're not reselling them illegitimately, we're not pirates--whatever else we do with our own personal copies is up to us (and that actually does fall under overriding legal precedents that supercede obscurantist EULA: all you have to do is a little research on the issue to see that this is true--and that we need to stop worrying so much).

biatche · Post by **biatche** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 6:05 am

sounds like a good program. i'd be interested in using it.

RickSteele · Post by **RickSteele** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 7:02 am

Aserone

New version of LegitCheckControl.dll 1.5.708.0 US, English out; when installed the notification update-I had this hidden, optional and all- on MSU disappeared.
I saved the dll and the inf; would you be interested in updating your addon to this newer file. Thanks and have a nice day.

Post by **5eraph** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 7:23 am

@RickSteele: Try Kelsenellenelvian's WGA addon. Aserone hasn't been around in the last few weeks.

RickSteele · Post by **RickSteele** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 1:04 pm

5eraph

Thanks and I see Kel has already updated to the latest. Thanks again.

RogueSpear · Post by **RogueSpear** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 1:51 pm

nowinscenario wrote:This "walking on eggshells" concerning such issues is getting out of hand. The big picture is: we have legit copies, we're not reselling them illegitimately, we're not pirates--whatever else we do with our own personal copies is up to us (and that actually does fall under overriding legal precedents that supercede obscurantist EULA: all you have to do is a little research on the issue to see that this is true--and that we need to stop worrying so much).

It's easy not to walk on eggshells when it's not your forum that you've spent the last couple of years working on and cultivating into a productive resource for thousands of people. Whatever legal reasoning you'd like to use to justify discussion of bypassing WGA is mostly irrelevant as well. Should Microsoft decide that they're not happy with a web site, the threat of legal action brings a very real possibility of spending thousands of dollars to defend yourself - even if you are right. My guess would be that not too many people around here would suddenly get philanthropic and cover that expense. And how many would be willing to travel and testify on behalf of the site and it's owner?

I don't want to sound alarmist, but this is a tired topic and contrary to what anyone says, I'm sure that there are plenty of visitors here, registered or not, that are not using legit copies. Just try to show a little respect for the forums that you visit.

ahmerkhan · Post by **ahmerkhan** » Wed Oct 04, 2006 4:11 pm

RogueSpear wrote: It's easy not to walk on eggshells when it's not your forum that you've spent the last couple of years working on and cultivating into a productive resource for thousands of people. Whatever legal reasoning you'd like to use to justify discussion of bypassing WGA is mostly irrelevant as well. Should Microsoft decide that they're not happy with a web site, the threat of legal action brings a very real possibility of spending thousands of dollars to defend yourself - even if you are right. My guess would be that not too many people around here would suddenly get philanthropic and cover that expense. And how many would be willing to travel and testify on behalf of the site and it's owner?

I don't want to sound alarmist, but this is a tired topic and contrary to what anyone says, I'm sure that there are plenty of visitors here, registered or not, that are not using legit copies. Just try to show a little respect for the forums that you visit.

Excellent Reply......