5 ms·

Good to know everything was resolved, but did you ever find out why your signing account was suspended? That's not something you brush off as haha silly Microso

Good to know everything was resolved, but did you ever find out why your signing account was suspended? That's not something you brush off as haha silly Microsoft..

Xunjin 6mo ago
They should definitely put up a statement addressing it. Moreover what they plan in the future to avoid such traumatic event, this is not a “simple sign program”, this touches fundamental parts of the OS.
Leherenn 6mo ago
Apparently it's quite widespread, so I would assume a bug on their side. That's what support seemed to imply at least. We're still blocked at my company for one month+ now.
- PeterStuer 6mo ago
  "so I would assume a bug on their side" Why a "bug".
  - alekratz 6mo ago
    For something like this, I would generalize a "bug" to encompass both software and human processes. Some decision-maker saw some metrics consistent with spam and enacted a spam-blocking measure. Any decision like this is going to lead to false positives. Maybe they decided "I don't need to confer with anyone", or maybe they did and got the green light even after multiple eyeballs looked at it. I'm not saying that this does any good for Microsoft's already-sullied trust, but mistakes happen and combating spam is a constantly evolving arms race. There's no way any organization is going to get it 100% of the time even after decades of dealing with it.
    - simonjgreen 6mo ago
      Absolutely agree. Don’t automatically attribute to malice what can also be explained by incompetence
  - Leherenn 6mo ago
    I doubt someone manually went and flagged all the accounts as invalid suddenly or whatever and that was their goal. By a bug I mean some kind of automated action that did not produce the expected outcome. Also because, at least on our side, the account was in an inconsistent state: we were correctly enrolled/validated, but could not access the signing interface.
- fhn 6mo ago
  With Microsoft, I assume malice AND negligence first. The hostility they've shown toward their own users tells you everything you need to know.
SturgeonsLaw 6mo ago
Microsoft are saying it's because those accounts didn't undergo verification for the Windows Hardware Program https://www.theregister.com/2026/04/09/microsoft_dev_account_deactivations/ https://www.theregister.com/2026/04/09/microsoft_dev_account...
- walrus01 6mo ago
  I understand it's because it's a device driver, but why should a pure software publisher which has no hardware product of any sort be required to go through a "hardware program" gatekeeper of what binaries a person can choose to install and run on their own computer?
  - rstupek 6mo ago
    They started it because the drivers people used to use from hardware vendors would routinely blue screen windows, which made MS look like the reason windows would crash. Hardware vendors are notoriously inept at software.
    - VertanaNinjai 6mo ago
      Í think their point was that Wireguard has no physical hardware, so it’s strange as a software project they’d be forced to go through verification for a hardware program.
      - nine_k 6mo ago
        Because it's a kernel driver anyway?
        anakaine 6mo ago
        Then the program should have been named the kernel level driver verification program.
        6mo ago
mavhc 6mo ago
https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/hardware-dev-center/action-required-account-verification-for-windows-hardware-program-begins-october/4455452 https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/hardware-dev-center...

Good to know everything was resolved, but did you ever find out why your signing account was suspended? That's not something you brush off as haha silly Microsoft..

Xunjin 6mo ago

They should definitely put up a statement addressing it. Moreover what they plan in the future to avoid such traumatic event, this is not a “simple sign program”, this touches fundamental parts of the OS.

Leherenn 6mo ago

Apparently it's quite widespread, so I would assume a bug on their side. That's what support seemed to imply at least. We're still blocked at my company for one month+ now.

PeterStuer 6mo ago
"so I would assume a bug on their side" Why a "bug".
- alekratz 6mo ago
  For something like this, I would generalize a "bug" to encompass both software and human processes. Some decision-maker saw some metrics consistent with spam and enacted a spam-blocking measure. Any decision like this is going to lead to false positives. Maybe they decided "I don't need to confer with anyone", or maybe they did and got the green light even after multiple eyeballs looked at it. I'm not saying that this does any good for Microsoft's already-sullied trust, but mistakes happen and combating spam is a constantly evolving arms race. There's no way any organization is going to get it 100% of the time even after decades of dealing with it.
  - simonjgreen 6mo ago
    Absolutely agree. Don’t automatically attribute to malice what can also be explained by incompetence
- Leherenn 6mo ago
  I doubt someone manually went and flagged all the accounts as invalid suddenly or whatever and that was their goal. By a bug I mean some kind of automated action that did not produce the expected outcome. Also because, at least on our side, the account was in an inconsistent state: we were correctly enrolled/validated, but could not access the signing interface.
fhn 6mo ago
With Microsoft, I assume malice AND negligence first. The hostility they've shown toward their own users tells you everything you need to know.

SturgeonsLaw 6mo ago

Microsoft are saying it's because those accounts didn't undergo verification for the Windows Hardware Program https://www.theregister.com/2026/04/09/microsoft_dev_account_deactivations/ https://www.theregister.com/2026/04/09/microsoft_dev_account...

walrus01 6mo ago
I understand it's because it's a device driver, but why should a pure software publisher which has no hardware product of any sort be required to go through a "hardware program" gatekeeper of what binaries a person can choose to install and run on their own computer?
- rstupek 6mo ago
  They started it because the drivers people used to use from hardware vendors would routinely blue screen windows, which made MS look like the reason windows would crash. Hardware vendors are notoriously inept at software.
  - VertanaNinjai 6mo ago
    Í think their point was that Wireguard has no physical hardware, so it’s strange as a software project they’d be forced to go through verification for a hardware program.
    - nine_k 6mo ago
      Because it's a kernel driver anyway?
      - anakaine 6mo ago
        Then the program should have been named the kernel level driver verification program.
        6mo ago

mavhc 6mo ago

https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/hardware-dev-center/action-required-account-verification-for-windows-hardware-program-begins-october/4455452 https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/hardware-dev-center...