Microsoft Tightens Corporate Windows Activation with TPM-Bound KMS Servers
Microsoft has decided to tighten controls in its corporate Windows activation system, prompting some media outlets to declare the end of pirated Windows 11. In reality, the hunt for home users has not begun: the new requirement will only affect organizations that maintain their own KMS servers.
KMS allows companies to activate computers inside their network through a single server without sending each machine directly to Microsoft. The problem is that attackers have learned to create fake and cloned KMS hosts that distribute licenses to devices for which no one has paid.
The new KMS Hardware-Secured technology will bind such a server to TPM. The chip must confirm the hardware identity to Microsoft and prove that the platform has not been modified after registration. If the check fails, activation of the corporate fleet will be blocked.
In August 2026, Windows Server 2025 will begin displaying warnings about readiness for the new requirements. They will become mandatory with the release of the next LTSC version of Windows Server, whose date has not yet been announced. Until then, existing KMS systems will continue to work as usual.
Administrators of physical servers can already check support for TPM attestation using the command Get-TpmSupportedFeature -FeatureList "Key Attestation". For virtual KMS hosts, Microsoft is still preparing separate recommendations.
The innovation is not directly related to pirated copies of Windows on home PCs. It does not check the user computer and does not affect popular illegal activation methods that do not rely on corporate KMS servers. Even the KMS38 method closed in November 2025 was a different story: it faked the activation period through a system file and had nothing to do with TPM or real KMS infrastructure.
Thus, Microsoft is indeed strengthening license protection, but so far only where Windows is activated in bulk. Home pirates can breathe easy, while corporate administrators should check their TPM support.
Related articles
CISA and NSA Urge Shift to Memory-Safe Languages Like Rust to Eliminate Memory Vulnerabilities
Official reports from CISA, NSA, FBI and partners highlight that decades of safe coding practices and code analysis tools have failed to resolve memory safety issues in languages such as C and C++. Government documents cite statistics showing that 70-75% of exploited vulnerabilities and zero-days stem from memory errors, including data from Microsoft, Google Chromium, Mozilla and Project Zero. Google reports that Rust adoption in Android reduced memory-related vulnerabilities below 20% in 2025, with a 1000-fold lower vulnerability density compared to C++. The analysis details Rust's ownership, borrowing and move semantics that provide compile-time guarantees unavailable in C++, enabling stronger compiler optimizations. Reports also acknowledge migration challenges including learning curves, interop issues and ecosystem gaps, while noting ongoing C++ safety improvements targeted for C++26 and C++29. Major organizations including Microsoft, Amazon and Google are already committing to Rust for critical new code.
Russian CA TCI Integrates ACME Protocol to Automate TLS Certificate Issuance
The Technical Center Internet (TCI), part of RTK-COD, has deployed a production ACME server compatible with standard clients such as acme.sh, Certbot and lego. The implementation aligns the ACME state machine with the existing isolated signing infrastructure, Domain Control Validation mechanisms and mandatory Certificate Transparency logging to Yandex and VK CT logs. Certificate lifetimes are shortening industry-wide, with Web PKI limits dropping to 47 days by 2029, making manual issuance unsustainable. The service supports HTTP-01 and DNS-01 challenges, ECDSA P-256 keys and certificate revocation, while preserving the requirement for Subject/CN in CSRs and mandatory revocation reasons. A separate staging environment uses an internal CT log simulator for safe testing. Future plans include full multi-SAN support, ARI (RFC 9773) and removal of the Subject/CN restriction.
Russia Pushes Corporate Multibanking Forward with Updated Open API Standards
The Bank of Russia and AFT have advanced Open Banking standards that enable corporate clients to aggregate account data across multiple banks within a single interface. The new specifications cover consent management, security profiles based on STO BR FAPI and OpenID Connect, and account information retrieval for both individuals and legal entities. While the 2025 pilot results demonstrated practical use cases such as personal financial assistants and corporate multibanking, the updated standards effective from October 2026 still lack a unified initiation-of-transfer component. Developers must therefore combine the new account-data APIs with separate bank-specific payment initiation mechanisms. The article explores how accounting systems or independent fintech services could become the primary workspace for financial directors managing payments, payroll, and liquidity across several banks. It also examines real-world challenges including idempotency handling, status reconciliation after network failures, and the separation of application permissions from signer authority. Examples from the UK Open Banking Limited sweeping VRP statistics illustrate how pre-authorized variable recurring payments can streamline operations while highlighting the additional policy work required for corporate supplier payments in Russia.
Hacker Attacks as Force Majeure: Russian and International Courts Diverge on Liability for Cyber Incidents
In November 2026, Russian hosting provider Beget suffered a major cyber attack that disrupted websites, virtual servers, email, DNS, and control panels for thousands of clients. Beget notified customers of circumstances resembling force majeure under Article 401 of the Russian Civil Code but stopped short of claiming automatic court recognition. Russian courts have reached inconsistent rulings on whether DDoS attacks and ransomware qualify as extraordinary and unavoidable events, examining factors such as attack scale, provider preparedness, and contractual obligations. International cases from France, Norway, the United States, and the Netherlands further illustrate that outcomes depend on evidence of prior security measures, backup integrity, and specific contractual language rather than the mere occurrence of an attack. Key precedents include disputes involving Timeweb, Expeditors, and Nordlo Haugesund where liability was limited or denied despite confirmed incidents. The analysis shows that even when force majeure is rejected, clients often struggle to recover full losses due to liability caps and proof requirements. Businesses are advised to maintain independent backups, review service agreements, and document incidents thoroughly to protect against financial exposure.