15/04: Want a product key for Windows XP or Windows Vista?

Google and Belarc have come together to give you, the user/reader, the product keys for Microsoft Windows XP, Microsoft Windows Vista, Microsoft Office and a lot of other software [Dreamweaver, Photoshop, Symantec antivirus, etc]. Don't believe me?

Click here or here.

The Google Search query used for Windows XP is:

"Windows XP Professional" "Belarc Advisor Current Profile" key:

The Google Search query used for Windows Vista is:

"windows vista" "Belarc Advisor Current Profile" key:

You might have to keep searching until you find a key that works since OEM keys won't activate again on a different computer.

This is a rather old method (first found about one year ago) but strangely enough, it works even now. It appears that Microsoft, Belarc, Google and the Belarc users themselves have done nothing to remove these Belarc profiles which are available online. Even the keys haven't been blacklisted. I would strongly urge Microsoft to blacklist these keys. Other people will keep using these keys so long as they are available or working. This also doesn't reflects well on the anti-piracy drive by Microsoft and other software vendors which I talked briefly about in a previous post titled "Windows XP activation woes and piracy in Pakistan".

To the reader: If you do get the product keys using this method, know that it is your own risk. I bear no responsibility in this regard for whatever happens to you, your PC or anyone/anything else. This post is for informational purpose only.

Asad  Computers 
Karma: 468 [Add to karma] 

Comments made

Isn't Belarc violating anti-piracy laws? There seems to be something wrong here. And this seems too good to be true.
And I think you shouldn't drag Google into it, Google isn't the one providing this service, this is a typical search result.
15/04 14:37:07
@ Usman:

Google is just providing the results. However, they can filter these results, if they so desire. It's not something very difficult to do. They have done it before. They can do it again.
15/04 16:42:29
Actually OEM keys can be activated an unlimited amount of times on an unlimited amount of computers since every OEM system is shipped with the same key. I have witnessed it myself by installing and instantly validating/activating over 100 systems so far according to vendor brand. Some more than once because the people messed up their computers. Microsoft also cannot blacklist these keys since they have no way of distinguishing who is who.
16/04 01:36:27
@ Anonymous:

Your information is wrong.What you must have seen would be a Volume License Key (VLK). you can active a reasonably large number of computers with that key. Indeed, the first ever leaked key for Windows XP was a corporate VLK as under:


This key has been blacklisted since August 2004, by Microsoft. It is regularly a symbol of warez geek pride. Dubbed the "devils0wn" key, this particular key came with the first warez release of the final version of Windows XP. This version was supplied by a group calling themselves "devils0wn" 35 days before the official retail release on August 28, 2001

You can not activate Windows using the same OEM key on two different computers unless you plan to call tech support and lie which is highly inadvisable and undesirable.
16/04 01:59:36
Note WRT Microsoft and Google: yes, they can block stuff, but a) there's a US game called "Whac-A-Mole" ( that expresses the ultimate futility of this, and b) Google really doesn't want to get into the business of censoring results. It's a slippery slope of unending expense and legal exposure.

Better they act like a common carrier---like a telephone or package transport company that is not held liable for what they transmit/ship, as long as they do so for all without discrimination (although they have protections in the US based on that concept that are even better)---and let the injured parties go after the ones injuring them. Getting into the middle of a fight is a recipe for disaster in every culture I've heard of....

- Harold
16/04 05:35:58
@ Harold:

Google is actually well into the business of censoring. Google Search results for China are censored. This is true for MSN search results too. There was hue and cry over it when Google bowed down to the restrictions set by he Chinese government but ultimately, Google had to comply to get to the Chinese internet users.

I imagine the protections you mention are the same as afforded to the weapons industry in the US? As in, the maker of the gun is not in any way responsible for how it is used?
16/04 13:21:28
Does Google do the censoring, or do they allow the authorities to do it (and perhaps also provide easy interfaces so the latter can do it without directly involving Google, or as I remember, their subsidiary that is really running things)?

The common carrier protections go way beyond the general protections afforded any company that produces a product that is not "defective". Companies that make firearms don't really have any extra protections as long as their product is not defective, although there have been some "we really mean it!" laws here (e.g. the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) was used as a tool in the late 1970s to attempt to declare that guns were inherently "unsafe", and their jurisdiction in the area was completely removed). Gun owners (who have extensive pre-Internet communications networks) and the notorious US plaintiff's bar (lawyers who sue) make damned sure all guns and ammo sold in the US are reasonably safe, and owners and the industry quickly find and fix the occasional inevitable mistake.

Also, if you are rigorously following the very simple Four Rules ( ; READ THEM NOW AND COMMIT TO MEMORY, they're simple and you don't want to be an idiot if/when you ever get your hands on a firearm), only a mistake that results in a blowup/venting of hot gasses back into your face in a long gun has the potential to injure someone, and modern guns (i.e. those designed starting in, say, 1898 (sic, the famous Mauser 98 action)) are pretty safe even when that happens if you wear eye protection).

The bit about the "maker of the gun is not in any way responsible for how it is used" is basic US law, and holds for everything that isn't "defective", or unreasonable dangerous. It's understood that things like items like cars, guns and five gallon buckets are inherently very dangerous (all gun deaths including suicides are something like 30K per year vs. 50K+ for cars (old from memory statistics), and nowadays, a lot more tiny children drown in buckets (they stick their head in, overbalance, and then can't get out) than are killed in any way by a gun)), and that if used incorrectly, there will be liability, but just for the user. Cars, guns, and buckets are already as safe as anyone can think of making them.

- Harold
16/04 17:54:27
16/04 18:08:56
@Asad, @ Harold
Well, look they again got the guns out in Virginia Tech. There is some truth in what Asad says. MInd you they were really "unsafe guns", killing 31 and injuring 29.
By the way, how is it that American govt. is so lax on these issues?
17/04 02:01:09
Usman: if the gun(s) didn't injure the shooter, they were not "unsafe" as a consumer item, or at least, they were no more "unsafe" than a 1-3 ton vehicle, which is a very unsafe thing indeed if used improperly.

The US government isn't "lax", this is a foundation of our Constitution; look up the "Second Amendment" (the first ten were a necessary compromise between the Federalists (who drafted the Constitution) and those opposed to them to a greater or lessor degree).

Why are we "lax"? Because we don't want state sponsored genocides; see the ... unpleasantness in what was East Pakistan: "Kill 3 million of them and the rest will eat out of our hands." The sources I've read say that well over one million were indeed killed.

Related, it's also the last fail safe against a tyrannical government; our "masters" don't get very far in their thoughts if they conceive of a coup or whatever, not when half the people in the nation are armed. No one with a clue considers invading the US for more than a second, like Imperial Japan they realize it would be a bloody house by house affair. Like Switzerland in WWII: sure, Hitler wanted it, but the General Staff said taking it would have broken 80 divisions, something they just couldn't afford.

It's really a question of which risks do you want to run; the history of the last century tells us that individual violence, like that at VT, is a drop in the bucket compared to what a state can do.

- Harold
17/04 18:56:26
@ Harold
Listen Harold, I didn't want to offend you but it is a fact that this attitude is making American educational institutions a risky place. Remember, a similar incident occurred in a Amish school last year. Someone just got deranged and killed school girls.
Now keeping in light what you have said, what I mean to say is that these are the signs of some deeper syndrome. Personally I find it very hard to imagine that citizens of a country like yours with endless opportunities should be upset to the extent of taking others lives.
Look at our country, imagine what we face here.
17/04 21:09:58
@ Harold, Usman:

Gentlemen, we are digressing quite a bit from the topic...

You can always discuss this via email.

Let's regress to the topic with relevant info pertaining to it.
17/04 23:20:09
If MS isn't bothering to set-up office in Pakistan and provide us top-notch tech-support, what right does it have to then twist our arm and expect us to cough up the money for it's software in dollars, haiN ?.

"No taxation, without representation".

Harold ought to jump up and say Hallelujah any minute now... :)

Sheikh 'Can I Get An Amen ?" Chilli
22/04 15:04:29
@ Sheikh Mujaddad Chilli:

Microsoft only has liaison offices in Pakistan. They are slowly expanding their established base here but it is too slow. As I once noted before, the telephone based activation doesn't work here.

They tend to use BSA for threatening about taxation.
22/04 17:45:55
You say they are expanding their base of operations here, what exactly is the expansion? Man I see no expansions!
23/04 15:26:21
@ Usman:

They are holding various professional events at many places now. For instance, for the last couple of years, Pakistan Developers Conference (PDC) by Microsoft was only held in Karachi. Last year, it was also held in Lahore. This year, it will be held in Islamabad. I will be participating in it as a Microsoft Student Partner for my university.
25/04 17:05:56

Add comment


Allowed BBCode:[b] [i] [u] [color=] [size=] [quote] [code] [email] [img]

Comments must be approved before being published.


Copyright 2006-2013 Asad Asif - All rights reserved unless otherwise noted.

CSS | XHTML 1.0 Strict | RSS