For any one who upgraded to Windows 10, READ THIS!!!!

[AdvHomeServer]

http://winsupersite.com/windows-10/word-warning-donotspy10-windows-10-privacy-tool


DoNotSpy10? I say don't do it. Like the article says, each individual needs to take the time and do it properly and not expect a magic pill, app or setting to apply to them by default.

It's just a CHECKLIST. You select which features you want to turn on or off ... all on one screen instead of all the hiding places MS puts them. You're not turning your PC into a zombie. Spend 10 seconds and look it up.

 

[L&LD]

I did look it up. The link I provide shows that spyware is included on at least some of the downloads for that utility.

 

[AdvHomeServer]

I did look it up. The link I provide shows that spyware is included on at least some of the downloads for that utility.

This one make it look pretty innocuous.

http://www.ghacks.net/2015/08/05/donotspy10-configure-windows-10-privacy-settings/

If you like Microsoft, feel free to hug them.

 

[stevech]

Considering my 2011 iMac, "obscenely overpriced" as it was, still performs as it did the day I bought it, despite 4 major OS releases, I'm fine with it. Not to mention the fact that those 4 major releases cost me absolutely nothing because once you buy OS X, they don't expect you to buy it again.

OSX is a loss leader for 250% gross margin products.

 

[RMerlin]

This one make it look pretty innocuous.

http://www.ghacks.net/2015/08/05/donotspy10-configure-windows-10-privacy-settings/

If you like Microsoft, feel free to hug them.

Why do I find it ironic that a software against spying includes adware which are pretty much spywares in their own way...

 

[L&LD]

I like MS, but don't need to hug them. Nor do I need to run away from a problem into a possibly bigger one (with malware, installed). Did you read the user posts in the link you included?

This one make it look pretty innocuous.

http://www.ghacks.net/2015/08/05/donotspy10-configure-windows-10-privacy-settings/

If you like Microsoft, feel free to hug them.

 

[AdvHomeServer]

I like MS, but don't need to hug them. Nor do I need to run away from a problem into a possibly bigger one (with malware, installed). Did you read the user posts in the link you included?

No I didn't. I guess you got me.

I'm just wondering, it is malware, or just the product of overambitious scanners that detect registry changes and interpret them as bad? Since the concept behind DoNotSpy10 is pretty obvious, others will certainly emulate it. If all have a similar problem, then it will be a scanner issue. If others get out a freeware product without incident, then you are a hero. Either way, someone else will attempt to write a program that performs identically as intended. MS is intrusive and I'm rather shocked that so many seem to huddle behind them and defend their snooping and marketing. Look, if you pay for an OS, then you have the right to expect you're not going to be a captive market for incessant marketing attempts. Take the 'free' upgrade or buy a new copy, you still get the ads and the intrusions. Does Merlin put little spy stuff in his software? I expect not. If he started, would the masses defend his right to do so and line up to load it?

Also wondering, when a Win Server correlated with Win 10 comes out, will it need opt out software? Hows does the snooping work with corporate security policies? Will Group Policy settings allow Admins to perform the same service as DoNotSpy10 on servers that currently support Win 10? If so, why not make a user version available to the masses? If not, then what corporate data will MS get its hands on? (FYI: Group Policy allows a Win Server to push setting changes to PCs in the domain and the user can't undo them. This keeps everyone marching together.)

Maybe there's some posts somewhere on that. I'm awaiting your full report.

 

[AdvHomeServer]

Why do I find it ironic that a software against spying includes adware which are pretty much spywares in their own way...

See the above reply. Time will tell if it's bad software or just clumsily written in a way that sets scanners off. Feel free to research it on the internet and make a complete report. You can start with The Hacker News.

http://thehackernews.com/2015/08/secure-install-windows-10.html

The opencandy software it mentions is an annoyance, not a menace. While I would never intentionally install it, I've removed it as a potentially unwanted program several times via Malwarebytes. (I wouldn't be surprised if a large percentage of the people reading this post have opencandy on their PC right now. Give it a scan with Malwarebytes and see.) Oddly enough, many security software companies ignore potentially unwanted programs in the install and while installed since the user must have known they were there and wanted them, according to one internet explanation I found a while back. PUP does not equal virus, according to those articles. Go figure. (Just asking ... does this make Win10 a PUP since it trojans in a lot of potentially unwanted features? What does Windows Defender say after the install? Kind of ironic?)

 

[L&LD]

Sorry, but I have no full report to give to you, but the following personal opinion which is based on the facts as I looked into them for this specific program.

It is not just a scanner issue. There are possible download versions of this utility that might be clean, but given that these settings can be changed in the OS itself, why risk installing malware on a system? And yes, I think adware is malware and worse. It can download anything to your system without your consent.

For my own systems, I lock them down as much as possible while still giving me access to the necessary functionality I need. Any and all utilities over the years that I have used to speed up this process have fallen by the wayside as they eventually seemed to be the reason of system instability or random and hard to pinpoint glitches.

I can agree that what this utility promises is something I suggest doing too for others as well as my own systems.

Experience has taught me that doing it manually has been the best long term result and lets me learn a thing or two while I'm at it.

No I didn't. I guess you got me.

I'm just wondering, it is malware, or just the product of overambitious scanners that detect registry changes and interpret them as bad? Since the concept behind DoNotSpy10 is pretty obvious, others will certainly emulate it. If all have a similar problem, then it will be a scanner issue. If others get out a freeware product without incident, then you are a hero. Either way, someone else will attempt to write a program that performs identically as intended. MS is intrusive and I'm rather shocked that so many seem to huddle behind them and defend their snooping and marketing. Look, if you pay for an OS, then you have the right to expect you're not going to be a captive market for incessant marketing attempts. Take the 'free' upgrade or buy a new copy, you still get the ads and the intrusions. Does Merlin put little spy stuff in his software? I expect not. If he started, would the masses defend his right to do so and line up to load it?

Also wondering, when a Win Server correlated with Win 10 comes out, will it need opt out software? Hows does the snooping work with corporate security policies? Will Group Policy settings allow Admins to perform the same service as DoNotSpy10 on servers that currently support Win 10? If so, why not make a user version available to the masses? If not, then what corporate data will MS get its hands on? (FYI: Group Policy allows a Win Server to push setting changes to PCs in the domain and the user can't undo them. This keeps everyone marching together.)

Maybe there's some posts somewhere on that. I'm awaiting your full report.

 

[zakoh]

It seems that now we have to seriously rethink the home WLAN security strategy, unless you want all your contacts, and all contacts of a friend or relative who visited your home to have access to your WLAN, to have access to your LAN. Once Windows 10 becomes common, no longer you can trust a friend or relative with your WLAN password. It seems like a possible solution is to have a guest network, with guest password randomly generated, at least on weekly basis, if not daily.

I cannot understand why Microsoft would introduce a stupid feature like this. Was this really called for?

 

[L&LD]

You obviously do not understand the feature at all. Research on how it is intended to work and you'll see your statements do not make much sense.

It seems that now we have to seriously rethink the home WLAN security strategy, unless you want all your contacts, and all contacts of a friend or relative who visited your home to have access to your WLAN, to have access to your LAN. Once Windows 10 becomes common, no longer you can trust a friend or relative with your WLAN password. It seems like a possible solution is to have a guest network, with guest password randomly generated, at least on weekly basis, if not daily.

I cannot understand why Microsoft would introduce a stupid feature like this. Was this really called for?

 

[RMerlin]

You obviously do not understand the feature at all. Research on how it is intended to work and you'll see your statements do not make much sense.

That's the root of the problem: Microsoft introduced a fairly scary setting, and even their FAQ doesn't do a very good job at explaining how it works (and that's assuming someone even knows about its existence).

A lot of people will blindly connect to their home network and fail to notice the sharing checkbox that is new on the passkey UI, and is unfortunately checked by default. This is a feature that should be opt-in, not opt-out.

 

[AdvHomeServer]

You obviously do not understand the feature at all. Research on how it is intended to work and you'll see your statements do not make much sense.

As a consultant, how do / will you reply to business managers who wonder if their employees who use Win10 will impact corporate information / security / trade secrets just by not being computer experts? What will be your informed reply to a question you will certainly be asked many times?

 

[AdvHomeServer]

That's the root of the problem: Microsoft introduced a fairly scary setting, and even their FAQ doesn't do a very good job at explaining how it works (and that's assuming someone even knows about its existence).

A lot of people will blindly connect to their home network and fail to notice the sharing checkbox that is new on the passkey UI, and is unfortunately checked by default. This is a feature that should be opt-in, not opt-out.

It's not opt-in because a lot of people wouldn't opt-in. I'm not planning to opt-in to Win10 unless I have no choice. I'm really looking into the central laptop or VM via TeamViewer for all apps that need a big PC; and otherwise using an android tablet for everything else. I'll report back in a few months.

 

[sfx2000]

As a consultant, how do / will you reply to business managers who wonder if their employees who use Win10 will impact corporate information / security / trade secrets just by not being computer experts? What will be your informed reply to a question you will certainly be asked many times?

If the enterprise/education network is managed by Active Directory, then by default WiSense is disabled - and if using WPA/WPA2 enterprise, those credentials are not sharable by WiSense on the client side by design.

More importantly, in the AD scenario, policies can be put into place to prevent Win 10 machines from being able to attach, and for existing Win7/win8 machines from being upgraded.

 

[sfx2000]

That's the root of the problem: Microsoft introduced a fairly scary setting, and even their FAQ doesn't do a very good job at explaining how it works (and that's assuming someone even knows about its existence).

A lot of people will blindly connect to their home network and fail to notice the sharing checkbox that is new on the passkey UI, and is unfortunately checked by default. This is a feature that should be opt-in, not opt-out.

Bingo....

And if the machine is managed locally - e.g. Local Account, it looks like WiSense is not enabled by default.

MS really pulled a bone-headed maneuver here - it's well intended perhaps, but between the default opt-in and lack of transparency during setup, it's causing them much more pain (and users as well).

 

[AdvHomeServer]

If the enterprise/education network is managed by Active Directory, then by default WiSense is disabled - and if using WPA/WPA2 enterprise, those credentials are not sharable by WiSense on the client side by design.

More importantly, in the AD scenario, policies can be put into place to prevent Win 10 machines from being able to attach, and for existing Win7/win8 machines from being upgraded.

Agree, but MS is pushing a lot of work and concern onto people who paid to use their software just so MS can sell advertising and provide potential opportunities for hackers. Group Policy and dedicated, informed, and vigilant employees to the rescue while companies indirectly subsidize MS marketing efforts well beyond the amount paid for the software.

It makes me wonder ... is this the golden ticket for Windows Server consultants. Imagine the sales pitch ... Hire us to make sure your servers are not impacted by MS views about information sharing on your network. Then keep us coming back to make sure they are not impacted by any changes MS made while your attention was directed at running your business.

Edit: If Google were to develop an enterprise Android, would you ask your employer to migrate to it?

 

[stevech]

Could it be that Win 10 Enterprise has a different strategy?

Also curious to recall the announces stats that Windows is but 20% of MS revenue. It seems to get 95% of the attention and angst.

Alas, the back office systems (that 80%) and services, are invisible to all but the IT staff. And the IT staff is primarily concerned with job preservation.

 

[sfx2000]

Agree, but MS is pushing a lot of work and concern onto people who paid to use their software just so MS can sell advertising and provide potential opportunities for hackers. Group Policy and dedicated, informed, and vigilant employees to the rescue while companies indirectly subsidize MS marketing efforts well beyond the amount paid for the software.

In the enterprise, things are a bit different, and perhaps more controlled and consistent -- again, Group policies with regards to information disclosure, etc.. are perhaps more restrictive in nature. And those use cases can go from Points of Sale to Call Center/Support operations to Road Warriors to Engineers/Developers - a POS terminal, obviously, that needs to be locked down very tightly for multiple reasons, not just for PCI compliance...

That's probably why it'll be some time before we see deployment into the enterprise space - many companies are still on Win7, and the only reason why there is that WinXP was basically end-of-life.

It makes me wonder ... is this the golden ticket for Windows Server consultants. Imagine the sales pitch ... Hire us to make sure your servers are not impacted by MS views about information sharing on your network. Then keep us coming back to make sure they are not impacted by any changes MS made while your attention was directed at running your business.

In many ways this isn't much more of a challenge that supporting BYOD - and Active Directory and knowledgeable NT SysAdmins have been doing this for some time now.

If Google were to develop an enterprise Android, would you ask your employer to migrate to it?

Highly doubt it - Android was never designed with security as a key priority - which makes enterprise deployments a major challenge - folks can try to add it in later, but it's just such a huge threat surface, and with the blackhats beating on it on a constant basis...

ChromeOS on the other had - it's reasonably secure, and security and sandboxing was designed in from the very beginning - as such, I could see it being deployed in certain use cases, but not as a general migration..

AD and Win will be around for a long, long time - not because it's better, but because of long term investment in the support infrastructure and ecosystem, esp. for Productivity and Business apps - and many shops are also steeply invested in MS Developer Tools, which, again, is another lock-in to the Windows platform.

 

[sfx2000]

Could it be that Win 10 Enterprise has a different strategy?

Also curious to recall the announces stats that Windows is but 20% of MS revenue. It seems to get 95% of the attention and angst.

Alas, the back office systems (that 80%) and services, are invisible to all but the IT staff. And the IT staff is primarily concerned with job preservation.

I would agree - For enterprise deployment, IT needs to work hand in hand with MS to deploy - remember, there's internal business apps, etc - and a lot of testing and training that will have to be done before considering deploying Win10 into that space.

Windows, the OS, gets a lot of attention, as it's the foundation of all their other apps - I would suggest that MS spends more time on Windows the OS, and less time on Office (and other apps) because of that - but Office, per seat, generates much higher revenue and profit

Regarding IT - lot of folks get confused about IT, just consider that IT is there for the business, not the users at the end of the day - it's their job to ensure that tools are in place for the enterprise to do their business. Some IT shops are better than others, but generally...