I gotta be honest man, I do not understand someone who pirates executable code. I (and I assume most of the hn audience) am not some starving student with nothing to lose. I would much rather run linux than pirate windows.
The OS installation images come from Microsoft. They're the same amount of malware as the OS that comes preinstalled on your laptop. Probably a tad less, depending on the brand.
So instead of downloading the OS, you're downloading a patching executable? How do you trust this? Is it open source and auditable? Otherwise you're opening yourself up to the same concerns.
Probably that one of the original comments on this thread suggested using another free and open source thing instead of using this free and open source thing? Why is linux exempt from "it comes with free malware" and not this other widely trusted and used tool?
Linux is more trusted because there are legions of cybersecurity experts who made their bones combing through the linux codebase to find security exploits. Even if this is open source, how can I be sure someone has audited it?
Alternatively I could pay what is, for me, a pittance, and know that my OS is not compromised.
I assume you haven’t checked on this since the Windows 7 days, but Massgrave is open source, and the activation logic boils down to about five lines of PowerShell, using only native Windows utilities. I think they even have a tutorial on their website that explains how to perform the activation manually if you want to avoid running their scripts.
Most of those 19861 lines allow it to be an all in one script for multiple activation methods and products. And, if you're still skeptical, then you are free to audit all 19861 lines yourself.
Maybe at the very least educate yourself before acting so smug.
Why would I look at the tutorial for a no script activation when I was, you know, commenting on a point about a script? Did to you forget to educate yourself to notice the difference?
> And, if you're still skeptical, then you are free to audit all 19861 lines yourself.
That's nonsense, of course, how would it help other users? Also, do you expect every single user of the crack to have the capabilities and time to do that?
If you are worried about malware from your pirated content you are going to the wrong websites. The good ones are hard to get on and have severe consequences for the uploader and whoever invited them.
However severe those consequences are, I'm sure it's not 'cryptolocker hard drive' or worse 'lose hundreds of thousands from my brokerage account' severe. I am happy to pay for my bits. It's wild to me this is somehow a controversial opinion on a board supposedly populated with well paid software engineers.
I’m thankfully no crypto nut and use windows only for gaming, so I’m prepared for any and all consequences of me pirating it.
Btw it’s just downloading the official image and unlocking it with open source software, so I would argue there is no risk at all.
Btw did you audit all the Linux source code to check for malware?
Agree with you but not every answer is move to Linux. A lot of us help family member with IT stuff. People I help use excel, quicken, and one drive to run their businesses and finances. I could see myself running into GPs license issue with my father in law.
I tried to get a few of them to use chromebooks but the need for quicken or another app they used for decade(s) keeps them windows based.
I agree. Some people don't really think about licences, they buy a PC with Windows and only buy another when that one stops being usable. Even this forced upgrade to 11 is still the path of least resistance.
I gotta be honest man, I do not understand someone who pirates executable code. I (and I assume most of the hn audience) am not some starving student with nothing to lose. I would much rather run linux than pirate windows.