Windows 10 9841 timebomb?

[yourepicfailure]

Decided to take 9841 for a spin. Nice build, start menu is nice and functionality is fair.
However, as soon as I connected to the internet, time synchronized and security problems began popping up, likely some timebomb and expiry funk.



I can start windows fine, but most system apps that are signed will not.
I'm hearing of this KMSPico out there that may stop the timebomb, but that still won't solve this certificate problems.
Any solutions? Problem is digital signature, but there has to be a method to disable signature enforcement.
Thanks.

[Lukas Marsik]

KMSPico (or any KMS emulator for that matter) will only activate, no timebomb removal will take place
Microsoft would be pretty stupid if they shipped the OS with some universal switch that completely disables digital signature verification
The only way to actually use these builds is to keep the system date within the timebomb start and end range (Start being usually compile date, end being visible in winver)

[yourepicfailure]

What I have been using is to force disable driver integrity checks, which allows startup.
Guess I'll have to manuever and play with the system. Doubt I'll get any far.

[sparcdr]

The RTC date is easy to change in proper emulators but you gotta disable the time service on anything modern. This is the first time I have heard of Microsoft signing executables against keys with that narrow of a range since Symantec and Thwate are such a ripoff and afaik Microsoft can't/hasn't signed its own authentec PKI as a CA. Thank goodness to us indies for Let's Encrypt! If the clock skews once on some timebombed systems it'll end up burying new changes somewhere (Registry?), a throwback to the "system hardware hash" of Microsoft's foray into software activation with XP, bricking the install. Many of the original "activators" couldn't defeat it once it was hosed (Experience with W2K3). OEM rekying/ignition/reset introduced in 7 enterprise made it easier (Again) as opposed to the "magic dbl" + watermark removal method before SILC was a thing in starting with Vista.

[jimmsta]

I wonder if importing newer certs from later builds would work, or just end up invalidating everything. It's a potential solution, maybe. I'm not about to fiddle with it, though - I'm almost certain it'll invalidate the executables, since they're all signed with the invalid certs.

[sparcdr]

As you said, the executables contain the invalid certificates. If you replace a certificate authority store it won't change that. So it will have no effect on the restriction. The cert chain is evaluated from the bottom anyways.

[Bob Pony]

Well, you could probably try using a tool for Windows called TweakNT, it might not work, but you should give it a try anyway to see if it works.

[nerd70]

Well, you could probably try using a tool for Windows called TweakNT, it might not work, but you should give it a try anyway to see if it works.

dude, tweaknt doesn't do anything on builds post-5048.

[TeddyJi]

Just replace the spp files from Windows 8.

[Applegame12345]

Just replace the spp files from Windows 8.

Will not work.

[TeddyJi]

Just replace the spp files from Windows 8.

Will not work.

Really? It works fine in my VM. The winver.exe said it contains but it won't be activated.