Windows Secrets

Subscribers: Sign in

Enter your e-mail address to get a free subscription.
We guarantee your privacy
Skip to content
  • Home
  • Newsletter Archives
    • Current
    • LangaList Plus
    • Patch Watch
    • Wacky Web Week
    • Security Baseline
  • E-Books
  • Lounge
  • About us
    • Refunds
    • Privacy Policy
    • Advertise
  • Contact
  • Your Account
    • Upgrade
    • Preferences
    • Bonus Download
    • Unsubscribe
Home>Outages cast doubts on MS online services

Windows Secrets Newsletter • Issue 148 • 2008-04-10 • Circulation: over 400,000


Table of contents 
  • Top Story: Outages cast doubts on MS online services
  • Known Issues: Article on Vista upgrade trick rattles the cages
  • Wacky Web Week: A new approach for handling telemarketers
  • LangaList Plus: Beware disk cleaners that can make things worse
  • PC Tune-Up: Disabling AutoRun still leaves you open to attack
  • Patch Watch: Patches for IE should be top priority this week

 
Top Story

Outages cast doubts on MS online services

Scott dunn By Scott Dunn

With the recent public betas of Office Live Workspace and Microsoft Online Services, the Redmond company is ratcheting up its efforts to deliver the power of MS Office — or at least a portion of it — to the Internet.

But Microsoft’s ability to offer software as a service (SaaS) has come under fire due to server outages and bugs that have plagued the company’s online services in the last several months.

Early missteps in bringing Office to the Web

Microsoft’s SaaS efforts are off to a very bumpy start. In recent weeks and months, widespread and long-lasting outages of Windows Live Hotmail, Live Messenger, and other new online services have left many of its customers wondering whether Microsoft is up to the challenge.

Failures of Microsoft services since last summer have reportedly affected millions of subscribers, and some of the problems have persisted for several weeks.

A little over a month ago, the Microsoft Developer Network (MSDN) was struck by a series of outages that confounded customers. On Friday, Feb. 29, and Saturday, Mar. 1, MSDN subscribers were unable to download products or product keys.

“There was a downtime to complete some system work that had been started four weeks ago,” wrote MSDN and TechNet subscription product manager Julie H. Cairn in the Official MSDN Subscriptions blog. “The fact that the completion work this weekend would even impact subscriber downloads was totally missed by those that could have gotten a notice posted externally. No excuses — just an apology.”

According to Microsoft, on the Monday after the weekend outage, errors prevented a “large number” of subscribers from downloading products or getting product keys. MSDN had considered the problem small when it was initially discovered the previous week, but by that Monday, reported cases had grown so numerous that the service put together a fix the same day.

This was bad enough for MSDN subscribers, but a problem of much greater magnitude affected them last October. An outage that involved a mysterious “Error 11008″ made it impossible for numerous subscribers to access downloads.

Many customers could not progress past an Error 11008 screen to access MSDN features. The problem dragged on for at least three weeks, proving especially frustrating to consultants who depend on the service to meet the needs of their clients.

“Of all people, is Microsoft not capable of keeping a subscription service up and running more than half the time?”, asked a user identified as Ren in the MSDN blog comments.

Another writer, identified as JD, wrote:
  • “At this point, most companies would have rolled this back to that past release rather than see how angry they can make their highest-value customers. We are the developers that use and recommend your products…. Is this the level of service/reliability we can tell our management to expect from Microsoft? Is there any kind of plan in place to compensate users for this substantial interruption?

    “Please remember that many of us are also developers and understand the complexities of a site like this. I suspect that some of us also support even more complex sites, but could you imagine what it would be like if your local bank left a broken bill-pay site up for a few weeks?”
Microsoft product manager Cairn replied in a post on Oct. 31 that “we have already had the ‘rollback’ discussion a few times.” She offered that in a few months the system would be “a lot less complicated in terms of ownership and responsibility.” Her post promised, “The integration point where these 11008 failure points are happening today will not even be part of the system come February,” though she noted the need for continued work on the problem.

Just a few days later, on Nov. 5, the rollback option was rejected. Kathy Dixon of TechNet Plus Subscriptions posted an update on the TechNet Plus blog, explaining, “It is not an option to roll back these changes, so work is now underway to evaluate possible solutions.”

The next weekend, Nov. 10–11, the MSDN site was down intermittently as the team implemented updates and fixes. For some users, this resulted in a new and equally perplexing “Error 11009″ message, which several subscribers complained about in comments on Dixon’s blog post.

Although the problems were resolved for some users, they persisted for others. In a TechNet Plus blog comment on Nov. 12, subscriber Glenn MacDonald said, “It will not make it worthwhile to renew. I have lost at least a month of service now, and as an independent contractor, it makes it difficult to research errors for clients when I don’t have access to software.”

More problems for consumer online services

Microsoft’s online outages have extended beyond developers:

  • Hotmail hell. One of the most recent frustrations for Microsoft customers occurred in late February 2008, when problems with Windows Live login IDs blocked access for users around the world for most of a day. According to a story in Computerworld, users in the U.S. and at least four other countries were unable to log in to Windows Live Hotmail, Xbox Live, Skydrive Live, and Live Messenger. Estimates of the number of individuals affected varies, but many bloggers put the number in the millions.

  • Invalid validations. For much of a weekend last August, users who attempted to activate legitimate copies of Windows, or to use the Windows Genuine Advantage (WGA) feature to validate them, were told that their products were “not genuine.” The problem was described in Susan Bradley’s Patch Watch column in the paid version of Windows Secrets on Sept. 6, 2007. It was also explained in the WGA blog by Microsoft program manager Alex Koch.

    The problem, wrote Koch, was that “production servers had not yet been upgraded with a recent change to enable stronger encryption/decryption of product keys during the activation and validation processes.” Koch claimed that this was not an outage (if it were, systems calling in would pass validation), but rather that the “trusted source of validations” was responding incorrectly.

  • Partner portal sign-out problems Partner problems. As of this writing, the opening page of the Microsoft Partner Program server contains an announcement (shown at right) of known sign-out problems on the Partner Portal. “We are aware of the problems with signing out of the portal and are actively working to resolve these issues,” the note states, somewhat cryptically.
Will mission-critical services be different?

The public beta of Office Live Workspace (OLW) debuted on Mar. 4. Microsoft’s OLW lets you view, share, and store Office documents using a Web browser. Unlike Google Docs and other online applications, the new service doesn’t let you create and edit documents online. Still, it represents Microsoft’s first attempt to bring Office to the Web. The current build also supports a link within the PC version of MS Office that allows posting and viewing documents online.

Around the time OLW’s public beta began, the software giant also broadened the beta testing of its Microsoft Online Services (MOS) offering. This package combines features of Exchange and SharePoint servers, with support for additional functions. Before last month, MOS was available only to businesses with 5,000 or more employees.

The twin moves are among the first in Microsoft’s attempts to enter the SaaS era. The promise of SaaS is that users will be able to create and edit documents via a Web browser instead of using programs that reside on their local machines.

However, for Microsoft to succeed in providing software as a service, individuals and companies need to have confidence that the services will meet their needs at a reasonable cost and with minimal risk. The recent server problems make it even more important for customers to be assured that their files are safe and accessible.

Some people argue that outages of free services, such as Hotmail and Live Messenger, are less costly than any failures of the mission-critical, hosted applications that Microsoft intends to offer its enterprise customers. Therefore, this thinking goes, the enterprise-level services are likely to receive more attention and resources from Microsoft than the free ones.

Lee Pender, a writer for the independent Microsoft-analysis site Redmond Channel Online Partner, points out that Microsoft’s partners, and not the company itself, handle most of the enterprise-level SaaS hosting duties. However, Pender acknowledges that this comparison may hold little weight with the average customer, who is more likely to have an emotional reaction to Microsoft’s server problems.

“Even if hosted Web-based e-mail and hosted enterprise applications don’t make for a good apples-to-apples comparison,” he writes, “huge problems with Hotmail don’t exactly instill confidence in partners or IT folks mulling over the idea of outsourcing important enterprise functions to a hosted model.”

You need only ask MSDN customers affected by the outages last October and last month whether the problems had a significant impact on their businesses. Judging from the comments posted online, the answer for many was a clear “yes.”

For Microsoft to translate the success of its popular Office applications to the online world, its development teams must inspire greater confidence in their ability to provide consistent, reliable service. Based on the stumbles to date, this is far from a sure thing.

Readers receive a gift certificate for a book, CD, or DVD of their choice for sending tips we print. Send us your tips via the Windows Secrets contact page.

Scott Dunn is associate editor of the Windows Secrets Newsletter. He has been a contributing editor of PC World since 1992 and currently writes for the Here’s How section of that magazine.

 
Known Issues

Article on Vista upgrade trick rattles the cages

Brian livingston By Brian Livingston

The lead story in Windows Secrets on Apr. 3 revealed that Vista Service Pack 1 allows the “upgrade edition” of the OS to be clean-installed, something that supposedly requires Vista’s more-costly “full edition.”

The same trick was present in the original release of Vista, as I reported more than one year ago, but the fact that Microsoft executives have allowed the procedure to remain in SP1 sparked yet another round of thrills on the Web.

It’s news that MS execs retain the process in SP1

The Apr. 3 article, written by associate editor Scott Dunn, demonstrated that Service Pack 1 permits a clean install of Vista to be performed using the operating system’s upgrade edition. The list price for that version of Vista Home Premium is $130 (in the U.S. market) compared with $239 for the full version — a difference of $109.

Microsoft officials have repeatedly confirmed that this procedure is built into Vista. In a News.com interview on Feb. 14, 2007, a Microsoft representative called the hidden feature in the original version of Vista a “workaround,” but claimed that using the trick without owning a copy of Windows XP, 2000, or another qualifying version of the OS would violate Vista’s end user license agreement (EULA).

The clean-install method involves booting a PC from the Vista upgrade DVD. The setup program is then completed without the user entering the disc’s product key or downloading any patches.

Once this unactivated, trial version of Vista is running, setup is started again — this time from within Vista. The “upgrade” option is selected, the product key is entered, and Vista can be activated exactly like the full edition of the product. A complete set of steps was published in my Feb. 1, 2007, article.

Among the numerous Web sites that noted Scott’s latest findings, Computerworld.com gave the story major play. Writer Eric Lai summarized Scott’s story and pointed out another cost-saving policy that Microsoft makes available:
  • “Microsoft Corp. continues to give its tacit blessing for consumers to exploit a technical loophole that allows them to upgrade to Vista with Service Pack 1, even if they don’t own the necessary prior editions of Windows. …

    “Microsoft has a long history of de facto toleration of loopholes that allow determined users to get its software for less than full price. For example, many online stores sell student editions of Microsoft software to any customer with a pulse.”
(To give credit where credit’s due, Scott reported way back on Apr. 12, 2007, that even your dog can buy Windows at Microsoft’s “student” price.)

Other significant media that covered Scott’s Vista SP1 story include Ars Technica, Download Squad, and Slashdot.

How modern, big-time software marketing works

Microsoft’s pricing strategy for Windows Vista is a lot like the old yarn about how some undertakers really make their money.

As told by Jessica Mitford in her 1963 book, The American Way of Death, some funeral directors first show a bereaved next-of-kin the most expensive casket available. This could be called the “gold-plated coffin.”

If the grief-stricken relative approves the first option that’s shown, the undertaker makes a handsome profit. If, instead, the family member asks to see cheaper models, the options that are subsequently offered seem reasonably priced, compared with the high-ticket item that first established the price range.

The full edition of Windows Vista is Microsoft’s gold-plated coffin.

Microsoft hardly expects anyone to actually pay the gilt-edged price. Corporations that sign volume-licensing agreements, for example, can get discounted units that are cheaper than retail upgrade packages. And most individuals will receive Vista preinstalled when buying a new computer, the maker of which qualifies for low OEM pricing.

That does leave a market, of course, of computer hobbyists who plan to install Vista from scratch. This includes Mac users who need to buy a retail package to run Vista in a dual-boot scenario, perhaps using Apple’s Boot Camp.

For every person willing to buy the full edition of Vista for $239, many more would be willing to buy the upgrade edition for “only” $130. Microsoft much prefers to deposit those people’s 130 bucks rather than get zero if people decide that Vista isn’t worth $239.

How do we know what Microsoft executives are thinking about this gimmick? Let’s look at the record:
  • It’s still there after our articles. No one at Microsoft issued a patch to remove the clean-install procedure from Vista after it was first reported in early 2007.

  • It’s still there after the story went viral. No one removed the procedure after the widely read News.com site reported it two weeks later.

  • A CD test? Why bother! Microsoft could have made Vista’s upgrade process request the insertion of a CD containing Windows 2000 or XP, the way XP itself works. But this simple proof-of-ownership test was removed from Vista.

  • Version checking? Who cares! Microsoft could have made Vista’s upgrade process check for a running version of XP or 2000 before upgrading — or made Vista Ultimate check for a running version of Vista Home Premium. But OS version checking was removed from Vista (as confirmed by Knowledge Base article 930985).

  • It’s documented in the Knowledge Base. That same KB article, which was last updated on Mar. 17, 2007, recommends that buyers “use one of the following methods” to clean-install the upgrade edition of Vista. Method 1 provides a terse but effective explanation of the upgrade trick. The document describes Windows 2000, XP, or Vista as “a compliant version of Windows.” The second method is to purchase the full edition. The first method is given more prominence.

  • SP1 is coming, should we take the trick out? Not a single person in a position of authority over the development of Windows directed that the upgrade trick we’ve described be removed in Vista Service Pack 1.

The final proof that Microsoft considers the upgrade trick to be an effective marketing technique is that Microsoft hasn’t issued a patch to remove it, even after this week’s widespread blog exposure. The patch would be so simple that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer could order it done tomorrow. I’ll even give him a name for the new build, no royalties required: Vista Service Pack 1.01.

Either Microsoft’s top executives are so out to lunch that they have no concept of what’s happening with their company’s top product, or Microsoft wants people to use the trick, expecting few people to pay Vista’s gold-plated-coffin price.

One blogger seemed to take personal offense that we’d published an article about a documented feature of Vista that’s more than one year old and still works exactly the same way in Service Pack 1.

Ed Bott writes books for Microsoft Press. In his Apr. 4 blog post for ZDNet, though, he sounds more like he wants to be a legal assistant in Microsoft’s corporate litigation department:
  • “If you qualify for an upgrade license, this technique allows you to do a clean install, legally. If you don’t qualify for an upgrade license, then doing a clean install with this technique is technically possible but violates the terms of the license agreement. …

    “The fact that you can work around a technical limitation doesn’t automatically make the practice legal.”
This statement is completely ridiculous. There’s nothing illegal about using an install technique that’s recommended by Microsoft in its own Knowledge Base. The trick was programmed into Vista because authorized people at Microsoft wanted it to be used, and it’s remained in Vista because Microsoft officials wanted it to remain.

Scott and I clearly reported in each of our articles what the Vista EULA states: “To use upgrade software, you must first be licensed for the software that is eligible for the upgrade.”

But clicking OK when shown the first few lines of a EULA on-screen doesn’t legally require anyone to suspend common sense. When Microsoft’s own KB article defines Vista as “a compliant version of Windows,” and the upgrade procedure is recommended for all to use, no court would rule that a person who’d paid the retail price for Vista’s upgrade edition had done something Microsoft could complain about, legally or ethically.

Any reporter who’d read our story and done any real research would have found each piece of evidence I’ve presented in the six bullet points listed above. Such nonsense about what’s “legal” doesn’t belong in ZDNet or any respectable news site.

And, by the way, some Microsoft exec should take Ed aside and clue him in on the joke.

No ethical dilemma in using a documented feature

Integrity is crucial for a journalist, as it is for people in most professions. I would never encourage anyone to steal, because it’s wrong and it can only haunt you (or wreck your karma). Whether I sign a written agreement, or I merely look you in the eye and shake hands on a deal, trying to fudge the terms later would cast a shadow on my reputation, which is all I really have.

It’s possible that the clean-upgrade path was added to the original release of Vista by a rogue programmer. I didn’t believe this back in February 2007, and I said so then, but it’s possible. Now that we see that the technique has not been removed from Vista Service Pack 1, however, I believe we have solid evidence that Redmond decision-makers tacitly approve of its use.

A handful of readers e-mailed Windows Secrets last week, though, concerned that launching Vista’s clean-install process would be unethical if someone used it without owning a previous version of Windows.

I support software makers’ right to earn an honest buck. I honor those readers who are so honest that a hint of deviating from the strictest reading of a EULA raises moral issues for them.

The best description of this concern was submitted by James Beach, who writes:
  • “The new house I just purchased allows anyone to walk up to the door and let themselves in — with no need to have access to a ‘key.’

    “The same behavior was present when my last house was burglarized, but the fact that the trick wasn’t removed from my new house suggests that I approved the back door as a way to make the price of my stuff more appealing to criminals.

    “It sounds like you guys would like the world to be a place where trust is replaced by an attitude of ‘get away with anything you can.’ After all, if people are stupid enough to extend trust that you’ll be a law-abiding citizen, they deserve to be taken advantage of. They probably want you to take advantage of them.

    “Get a life and start publishing legitimate secrets instead of trying to play Robin Hood. (Oh, and I’m assuming by your attitude that I’m perfectly OK to plagiarize all of your work as long as you haven’t taken the time to find and prosecute me.)”
Let’s be clear that neither Scott Dunn nor I ever said that anyone should try to get Vista for free. There are plenty of “timer cracks” on the Web that will let people use the original version of Vista free without activation until 2099 or whenever. We’ve never published these cracks, and we never will.

The clean-upgrade path, as we’ve described it, requires that consumers pay the going price for a copy of Vista. Microsoft likes this revenue, and if you want Vista, you should buy a copy. We won’t help you steal it.

For the sake of argument, is buying less than the full edition of Vista a form of stealing?

The publication of Scott’s article is nothing like planting the following sign in front of your home:

My Front Door is Unlocked —
Please Take Everything You Find Inside


What Scott has reported is more like planting the following placard:

Home for Sale — $499K
$100K Off with Coupon Code BALLMER


People who are selling things find creative ways to make the price look like a good deal. It’s clear that Microsoft has done nothing to remove the clean-upgrade path from Vista. And its continued existence in SP1 proves that the trick is a useful marketing tactic.

There’s no moral problem with a home buyer taking the seller up on the “$100K off” promotion. For the same reason, there’s no moral issue with someone using Microsoft’s documented feature to pay $100 less than the gold-plated price. It’s what Microsoft wants and expects (regardless of what its p.r. surrogates say).

I don’t work for Microsoft. I work for consumers. Until someone pries my cold, dead fingers from my keyboard, I’ll be working to let you know anything Windows does that varies from Redmond’s official pronouncements.

If the clean-upgrade technique is truly unwanted, Mr. Ballmer could have a patch made to remove it as quickly as he can send an e-mail to an intern. Now that Vista has been in wide circulation in various forms for almost two years, and no such patch has appeared, I’m not holding my breath for one to be ordered.

The Vista upgrade discs are fully functional

Mary Smith-Markell writes to ask about the difference between the upgrade and full editions of Vista:
  • “OK, I’m computer challenged. If a Vista ‘upgrade edition’ disk does the same thing as a ‘full edition’ disc, why would Microsoft even bother having two separate products that do the same thing? Unless they were trying to bolster sales by bilking the undereducated (like me). …

    In a side-by-side comparison of the two discs, are there any differences? For example, can one use the upgrade edition to do a repair install, or is the full edition required? Are there any tools or features available in the full edition that are not available in the upgrade edition? Thanks for clarifying.”
Having installed both forms of Vista on test machines many times, we can say that the only difference between the full and upgrade editions is the product key that the user enters.

If you boot from the Vista DVD (rather than launching Vista setup from within Windows), the clean-install option is not available if you enter an upgrade key at that point. That’s why you have to do a clean install with no product key, and then afterwards launch setup from within Vista to do an upgrade installation with the key.

The upgrade disc does include the repair function and all the other features that you ordinarily see when you boot from the DVD.

MS leaves prices unchanged for Anytime Upgrade

Reader Daniel Coté has this question about the pricing of upgrades from one version of Vista to another:
  • “Now that Microsoft has reduced the price of Vista, are you aware of a potential reduction for the so-called Anytime Upgrade price? I’d like to upgrade from Vista Home Premium, which came installed on my PC, to Vista Ultimate.”
The Windows Anytime Upgrade (WAU) program lets those who purchased one flavor of Vista upgrade to another. This is explained on a Microsoft Web page.

However, according to a Microsoft spokesperson who responded to Windows Secrets, the recent Vista price reduction does not affect the Anytime Upgrade. Microsoft does not plan to make changes to the WAU pricing structure at this time.

Readers Beach, Smith-Markell, and Coté will each receive a gift certificate for a book, CD, or DVD of their choice for sending comments we printed. Send us your tips via the Windows Secrets contact page.


 
Wacky Web Week

A new approach for handling telemarketers

Telemarketer  Telemarketers. They have an uncanny knack of calling right when you don’t want them to. Whether you’re just sitting down to dinner, forced to interupt a relaxing shower, or deep in R.E.M., they generally find you at the most inconvenient moment — all so they can try to subscribe you to a magazine you’ve never heard of.

In this hilarious 3-minute video, comedian Tom Mabe decides to have a little fun with an offending peddler. It’s a little more work then simply asking to be put on the “do not call” list, but the world is a funnier place for it! Play the video


 
LangaList Plus

Beware disk cleaners that can make things worse

Fred langa By Fred Langa

My search for the best disk-cleanup program has uncovered some that aren’t worth the time and effort, let alone paying a registration fee.

One of the utilities I tried even left more unnecessary files on my drive than were there before I ran the program!


In search of the perfect disk-cleaning utility

My last two columns on Mar. 13 and Mar. 27 showed you how to create a free, highly customizable, and automated cleanup tool using Windows’ built-in features and functions.

My do-it-yourself (DIY) tool can actually clean your hard drive much, much more thoroughly than Windows’ default cleanup tools and settings. But crafting the tool takes some time and tinkering.

My DIY approach uses commands that delete files without making it easy to restore them using Windows’ built-in Recycle Bin, if need be. Also, these commands are character-based and don’t offer a graphical user interface (GUI). So, I went searching for the best GUI-based program that supports the recovery of any files it deletes.

To winnow the candidates to a manageable size, I added a further stipulation that the tool should either be free or at least offer a fully functional free trial.

This article is part of our paid content. Subscribe.

Already a paid subscriber? Click here to login.


 
PC Tune-Up

Disabling AutoRun still leaves you open to attack

Mark edwards By Mark Joseph Edwards

The worst kind of security bug is one that Microsoft probably won’t be fixing any time soon.

This week, I tell you about an annoying security problem in which Windows Vista fails to disable its AutoRun and AutoPlay features, even though you think you’ve got these two security risks under control.


Vista AutoRun might leave your systems vulnerable

According to an advisory published by US-CERT, Vista might not truly disable its AutoRun and AutoPlay features when you configure the operating system to do so. Those features kick into action whenever you insert a CD or DVD.

On a typical system, if a CD, a DVD, or a U3-enabled USB drive includes an AutoRun file — or can be detected by Vista as AutoPlay media — Vista automatically launches a corresponding application to view or play the media. That behavior can pose a serious security problem if you insert a medium that contains malware.

To protect against that possibility, Microsoft provides ways to disable AutoRun and AutoPlay for various devices. However, according to the US-CERT advisory, “Windows Vista may [leave] some AutoPlay enabled, even though the Group Policy Editor and associated registry values indicate otherwise.” This, of course, means that an attack would still be possible.

As far as I know, Microsoft has not issued any kind of patch for this problem. Worse, I’m not even sure that the company will issue a patch. (AutoRun and AutoPlay are considered important and desirable features.)

This article is part of our paid content. Subscribe.

Already a paid subscriber? Click here to login.


 
Patch Watch

Patches for IE should be top priority this week

Susan bradley By Susan Bradley

Patches for IE should be our first priority this month, with several vulnerabilities that are ripe for malicious attacks facing us.

There’s still no sign of Windows XP SP3 in the near future, but Windows Server 2008 is receiving its first patches, and Vista SP1 is subject to a much-needed patch for an earlier patch that’s proved troublesome.


MS08-022 (944338) and MS08-023 (948881)
Internet Explorer gets its usual dose of fixes

The two browser-related patches that appear in this topic, and the one that follows, are all equally important for protection against malware that exploits IE.

Our first patch is MS08-022 (944338), which fixes an issue with VBScript and JScript — languages that can be used by Web sites. If a hacker sets up a site and embeds an infected script, control of your system could be handed over.

This paragraph is for those who installed Visual Basic Script Edition 5.6 or earlier on systems with IE 7 installed. You may find that you need to manually install Script Edition 5.7 if the install of patch 944338 fails with an error code of 0x8007F0F4.

Early reports from the public Windows Update newsgroup indicate that the update to Script Edition 5.7 appears to solve the issue. This version is available from the Microsoft Download Center.

This article is part of our paid content. Subscribe.

Already a paid subscriber? Click here to login.


YOUR SUBSCRIPTION

The Windows Secrets Newsletter is published weekly on the 1st through 4th Thursdays of each month, plus occasional news updates. We skip an issue on the 5th Thursday of any month, the week of Thanksgiving, and the last two weeks of August and December. Windows Secrets is a continuation of four merged publications: Brian's Buzz on Windows and Woody's Windows Watch in 2004, the LangaList in 2006, and the Support Alert Newsletter in 2008.

Publisher: WindowsSecrets.com, 1218 Third Ave., Suite 1515, Seattle, WA 98101 USA. Vendors, please send no unsolicited packages to this address (readers' letters are fine).

Editor in chief: Tracey Capen. Senior editors: Fred Langa, Woody Leonhard. Copyeditor: Roberta Scholz. Program director: Tony Johnston. Contributing editors: Yardena Arar, Susan Bradley, Scott Dunn, Michael Lasky, Scott Mace, Ryan Russell, Lincoln Spector, Robert Vamosi, Becky Waring. Product manager: Andy Boyd. Advertising director: Eric Gilley.

Trademarks: Microsoft and Windows are registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation. The Windows Secrets series of books is published by Wiley Publishing Inc. The Windows Secrets Newsletter, WindowsSecrets.com, Support Alert, LangaList, LangaList Plus, WinFind, Security Baseline, Patch Watch, Perimeter Scan, Wacky Web Week, the Logo Design (W, S or road, and Star), and the slogan Everything Microsoft Forgot to Mention all are trademarks and service marks of WindowsSecrets.com. All other marks are the trademarks or service marks of their respective owners.

HOW TO SUBSCRIBE: Anyone may subscribe to this newsletter by visiting our free signup page.

WE GUARANTEE YOUR PRIVACY:

1. We will never sell, rent, or give away your address to any outside party, ever.
2. We will never send you any unrequested e-mail, besides newsletter updates.
3. All unsubscribe requests are honored immediately, period.  Privacy policy

HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: To unsubscribe from the Windows Secrets Newsletter,
  • Visit our Unsubscribe page.
Copyright © 2012 by WindowsSecrets.com. All rights reserved.

Table of contents

Top-scoring articles in the past 12 months
  • Leaving long cookie trails throughout the Web 5.00
  • Windows-like security for Android devices 5.00
  • Win7′s no-reformat, nondestructive reinstall 4.53
  • The sorry tale of the (un)Secure Sockets Layer 4.42
  • RPV: Win7′s least-known data-protection system 4.33
  • Recovery: the last step in total data security 4.30
  • Time for a .NET update we can’t ignore 4.30
  • Getting the most from Windows Search — Part 1 4.25
  • Revising printing habits saves money and trees 4.25
  • Upgrades end in erratic, partial hangs 4.25
  • Pros and cons of a ‘keyfile’ password 4.21
  • Beating back Duku and a plethora of other threats 4.20
  • Office 2007 gets its final service pack 4.19
  • Putting Registry-/system-cleanup apps to the test 4.19
  • One year and 99 security bulletins later 4.18
  • 1.8TB external drive goes down hard 4.17
  • Don’t pay for software you don’t need — Part 3 4.16
  • Internet Explorer gets another round of patches 4.15
  • Is your free AV tool a ‘resource pig?’ 4.15
  • Vacation’s over; it’s a big round of patches 4.15
  • Remote access leads to remote attacks 4.15
  • Keeping you up to date: say no to .NET — again 4.14
  • Take control of Google’s privacy policy settings 4.14
  • Office File Validation patch leads to problems 4.14
  • The advanced system-recover toolkit 4.13
  • New “419″ scam involves PayPal and Western Union 4.12
  • Readers’ best personal-privacy tips 4.11
  • Getting the most from Windows Search — Part 2 4.11
  • Re-examining Dropbox and its alternatives 4.10
  • Easily edit Windows’ right-click context menus 4.09
Connect with us Follow us on Twitter Connect with us on Facebook View our RSS Feeds
  • Home|
  • Newsletter|
  • About Windows Secrets|
  • Advertise with us|
  • Unsubscribe|
  • Sitemap|
  • Affiliates|
Trademarks: Microsoft and Windows are registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation. The Windows Secrets series of books is published by Wiley Publishing Inc. The Windows Secrets Newsletter, WindowsSecrets.com, WinFind, Windows Gizmos, Security Baseline, Patch Watch, Perimeter Scan, Wacky Web Week, the Logo Design (W, S or road, and Star), and the slogan Everything Microsoft Forgot to Mention all are trademarks and service marks of iNET Interactive. All other marks are the trademarks or service marks of their respective owners.
iNET Interactive Copyright © 2011 iNET Interactive.
All rights reserved.
Terms of Use  |  Privacy Policy
Internet Services
  • Web Hosting Talk
  • HostingCon
  • Hosting Catalog
  • Host Voice
Web Development
  • Hot Scripts
  • DB Forums
Digital Marketing
  • ABestWeb
  • Search Marketing Standard
  • PayPerClickUniverse
  • SEMCompare
Consumer Tech
  • Windows Secrets
  • Overclockers
  • Mac Forums

Learn more about
advertising opportunities across the iNET Interactive Network.

LiquidWeb