Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Acquires Spyware Removal Company
ack154 writes "Checking for updates on my new favorite spyware removal company, I found that Microsoft has acquired Giant AntiSpyware as of 12/16. I must say that it is very refreshing to see Microsoft finally start to take some serious action to help combat this rampant problem. According to the Giant site, a beta version is expected within one month for Microsoft customers (running Windows 2000 and later, of course)."
So i'm going to assume the first logical step is that the software uninstalls/disables IE?
What percentage of spyware comes in through IE and ActiveX? Seems like they would just fix that. Stop it at the door, don't wait for it to get in and then Try to kill it.
I sure hope they don't start charging for this after the beta. Talk about a conflict of interest. We have this buggy, highly exploitable browser that we do not plan on updating for a couple of years until Longhorn comes out. But in the meantime, you can Buy this program that will maybe help after the fact.
Does not a turn-around make. Just because MS sees a possible investment opportunity doesn't mean that this is them taking steps to fix their broken software. Ever think this might just be an attempt to cash in on their problems??
Even so, I still prefer my (free) SpyBot S&D which runs on Windows and Linux.
There is a discussion in Broadband Reports/DSL Reports' security forum about this.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
You have got to be kidding me. Rather than make their OS and apps secure and PREVENT spyware... they would rather make money selling another product to CURE the spyware.
How can this be a good thing?
Prevention is always better than cure.
Firefox. That's how you stop spyware from getting on your machine. Good god, Microsoft just spent a shit load of money, when they could have just downloaded Firefox. Tsk tsk.
It's good they are looking ahead before this kind of stuff really becomes a problem!
On the upside, if they are serious about it, I think this is going to be a huge boon for corporate IT. Spyware has become one of the biggest headaches for IT these days. I believe about 50% of our support tickets are related to spyware.
Jerry
http://www.syslog.org/
Isnt this a conflict of interest making the software that has the bugs and also selling the software that covers over those bugs. (I know Microsoft...)
I think this really shows how Micky Mouse the code is that they are taking this route instead of getting the protocols right from the start.
The first post after the spoofing vulnerabilitiy in IE is MSFT buying their way out of their own self-created problems...
In 2003, they bought GeCAD , makers of RAV-AntiVirus . So is Microsoft going to release their own anti-virus too?
http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
Thank you Microsoft, for valiently saving us from the dangers you created!
Microsoft: Acting more and more like a government every day.
If created, would this Microsoft anit-spyware tool remove all of the spyware and adware that comes pre-loaded with Windows? A friend of mine ran Spybot S&D on a clean, out-of-the-box Windows machine, and SpyBot picked up several insatnces of propreitary malware before the machine even hooked up to the web... And if this tool doesn't remove all of the aforementiond preloaded spyware, how can it possbily be effective at removing the non-Microsoft versions accquired over the course of normal Internet travel? I go to MSN Groups and SpyBot tells me it has blocked the download of Adware Inc... Just my thoughts on this as it develops.
I thought that said "Microsoft acquires spyware company" at which point my coworker responded "Makes sense, they try to integrate everything else".
can't sleep slashdot will eat me
Ya know, as soon as they release a Microsoft branded spyware removal tool will be the day they draw the line in the sand defining exactly what apps are welcome on the Microsoft platform and what apps are not. If Microsoft gets the final say of what runs on your machine, what makes you think they're only going to be removing spyware?
How we know is more important than what we know.
Irregardless of the quality of the anti-spyware, isn't it just damned *ironic* when a company can make a huge profit on a product, and then make *another* goatload of cash by fixing it.
So I ask you, why would Microsoft *ever* wish to produce flawless software???
and now back to the fallout shelter...
You know, it could be that MS purchased Giant so they don't have to do their own research into the intricacies of how some spyware is installed, avoids detection, and re-inserts itself after "removal". Sometimes an hour with the book beats a week in the lab. If they'd only hired the expertise (who probably currently work for A/V companies), they might have been sued for IP theft.
No man's an island, unless he's had too much to drink and wets the bed.
I've just recently started Giant's AntiSpyware program and found it to be excellent at cleaning up the VX2 remanents and anything else left over after running Spybot S&D and Lavasoft's Ad-Aware. I sure hope that M$'s take-over doesn't make a worth-while antispyware tool worthless.
1. Write buggy OS with no security model
2. Acquire company that bolts on a bandaid
3. Profit!
What next?
"Microsoft to buy Large antivirus firm."
"Microsoft announces acquisition of blue-screen-B-gone Inc."
"Microsoft acquires company that removes the freakin' paperclip"
Spybot doesn't really run on linux, and I doubt spyware runs on linux desktops, either. There are cookies you may want to be aware of, but most linux web-browsers make this easy. There are some linux viruses, but also cross-platform antivirus programs. Clam Anti-Virus is a free, open-source app which runs on Windows, Linux and Mac OS X.
In other news, Philip Morris acquires Pfizer's Nicotrol divison.
Story at eleven.
Im dreaming ofa big bndwdth, That can resist the
Microsoft makes money based on upgrades. New versions of Windows, new versions of Office, new versions of whatever. People blindly upgrade in the hopes that the new version will fix the bugs of the old one. But all these new versions are just as buggy as the first. Not the same bugs, but all new ones...
Now if Microsoft were to make a product that performed wonderfully the first time around, why would you have any incentive to upgrade? They can tout new features and bells and whistles, but if the product you have is working fine for you, then why spend the money?
As long as they hold a monopoly, they can continue to create buggy software with no real risk of losing customers.
Now what if they could sweeten the deal even more. What if they "forced" people to buy software that had a giant problem, and they also sold the cure. Then they get to charge you twice. They could fix the problem, but then they would lose money. That doesn't make much sense. As long as there are no real alternatives to the average user, Microsoft has free reign to run their stratagy.
Microsoft isn't dumb. There's a reason they are where they are today. They've found a damn good buisness stratagy that works.
...items....
Now think again why MS would want such a anti-spyware product.
MS needs to fix and upgrade IE as part of any attempt to fix the problem. No question. But the need for spyware removal tools is still there.
One of these days I'm moving to Theory - everything works there
GIANT Software makes a product called Spam Inspector, and up until about 6 months ago, it was one of the best anti-spam products for Outlook. Then they started to demand yearly fees to use the program (when they originally sold it as a one-time payment.)
So yeah, I ditched the program and found Spambayes, and I haven't had a complaint. I'm bummed I wasted money on SpamInspector, though.
Not All Who Wander Are Lost
...is that it was a move to generate the worlds most ironic headline :
"Microsoft acquires Giant Company"
IMHO, it's only a "good thing" from a relative standpoint. Sure, it's "good" that MS realizes spyware is enough of a problem that they decide to buy out someone who has already been working hard to solve the problem. (From a few recent comments I read over on ArsTechnica after they posted a spyware-testing article, Giant's product is supposedly quite good. In fact, arguably the best available right now, of the non-freeware spyware removers.)
As the parent poster pointed out though, this stuff isn't even an issue for non-Windows users. I'm using my PowerMac G5 tower right now, and it's rather nice not to have to wait while my anti-virus package loads up (further cluttering up a crowded system tray), and then having to wait while the thing does its automatic updates every day or two. No spyware/malware worries either. Just boot up and go....
I do PC on-site service calls for a living (Mac too, on the odd occasion we get them), and I can honestly say that virus/spyware issues generate the vast majority of my income right now. From that angle, I guess I should be happy there's such a big problem. But somehow I'm not... I often tell my customers about the Macintosh alternative (both the good and the bad), and at least 40% of the time or so, they decide it really sounds like it's "right up their alley" and they consider one for their next system purchase.
Call me crazy or whatever... but after 14 years of working with computers, I just feel like it should be as enjoyable an experience for people as possible. Using as much as 30% of your CPU time running background tasks like firewalls, virus scanners and anti-spyware packages seems so unnecessary....
1. Develop crappy exploitable browser and distribute browser for free.
2. Refuse to seriously fix free browser.
3. Buy anti-virus and anti-spyware companies.
4. Sell anti-virus product to clean up after your free crappy exploitable brower.
5. Use monopoly desktop OS position to drive-out the competition.
6. Profit.
Typical Microsoft.
Microsoft bought a company that produces software designed to uninstall malware from it's operating system. Shouldn't Microsoft have enough mastery of it's own OS to do this internally? Sad, sad, sad.
Many of Microsoft's security flaws are self imposed. ActiveX and security zones in IE, for example. Eager to make the web another Windows application zone, they introduced ActiveX. Wanting to crush Netscape because they could possibly make Microsoft Windows irrelavent in the future, they integrated IE into Windows, and that required security zones. I won't lay the blame entirely on Microsoft for the viruses and worms, but I will lay it on them for the drive-by install of spyware that every IE user has to beware of. In their efforts to destroy competition, they opened their customers up to this.
I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
#2. There are far more options than
a. "riddled with spyware"
and
b. "100% bug free"
Linux is not "100% bug free" but its security model is far better than Microsoft's and, as a result, it is far less likely to be infected.I'm sure they do, for a suitable definition of "Knowledgeable".
Or, to put it another way, there are lots and Lots and LOTS of infected Windows machines out there so maybe the requirements to be considered "Knowledgeable" are a little too extreme?But there is a continuum there, not a binary state.
Sure, security might be a "problem", right below hard drive crashes and CPU fan failures.
The idea is to remove/reduce the potential threats so that your system is not cracked within 10 minutes of going online.That is correct. But there are LOTS of bullets available that Microsoft is ignoring.
The biggest is to change IE from an "allow everything except what is specifically denied" security model to one such as Firefox's "deny everything except what is specifically allowed".
Sure, a "knowledgeable user" could configure both systems to have the same, effective security, but as I've stated before, there doesn't seem to be a lot of those "knowledgeable" users around.
The second biggest thing is to TURN OFF UN-NECESSARY SERVICES. Look at a stock Win2000 or WinXP machine and see all the services that are on by default.Yep. But the least Microsoft can do is to make their system as secure as possible.
Cracking is all about access.
If the bad guys cannot get access to your system (no ports open), then they lose an entire avenue of attack.
Knowledgeable users know this and make use of hardware and software firewalls, antivirus apps and spyware detection apps.
"Sure, I leave the front door to my house unlocked, but I keep the bedroom door locked".
You should stop the problem before it reaches the OS, not apply bandaid solutions after the fact.
94% of Repubs and 21% of Dems voted to renew the Patriot Act
It started when microsoft created Visual Basic way back when.
They invented this new thing called a VBX.
a VBX was basicly a custom control in a DLL file and had hooks where VB could talk to the control and where the control could talk to VB.
The VBX evolved along with Visual Basic through versions 2,3 and 4 on the 16 bit platform.
Also, some other programs (including 16 bit versions of Visual C++) were able to embed VBX files.
Next we have OLE. This started out with OLE 1.0 and advanced to OLE 2.0 and to COM. The OCX (as it was known) developed from a merger between the VBX and OLE. It started out as a way to embed controls into an app just like a VBX. There was a 16 bit version of the OCX (that never took off) and the 32 bit version.
The ActiveX control is the evolution of the OCX.
ActiveX controls are NOT bad, they are a good idea.
What was a bad idea was implementing support into Internet Explorer for embedding ActiveX controls. And for implementing VBScript to talk to those controls.
I have yet to see one use of ActiveX on the internet that could not be done some other way.
Thankfully, I seem to be able to avoid ActiveX controls in my own use, the only place I have seen them lately is on some Microsoft sites.
As for those who say that some banks and such use ActiveX, well if I found a secure site that required IE to function, I would take my business elsewhere.
My recipe for spyware-free computer with IE.
IE + Spybot Search and Destroy BHO + SpywareBlaster + Proxomitron = spyware-free computer.
Doesn't even have to switch to Firefox. And all websites works fine with this config.
They probably bought the company since it was cheaper than buying licenses for all of their machines at Redmond :)
first, it disables IE, then Outlook Express and Outlook 2003, then Windows Media Player, then MSN Messenger, then... Windows XP! Error 0x30a8 r93x038 Windows can't boot properly due to a missing file: msspy.exe in folder system32 Please call Microsoft or re-install Windows XP.
First off, Spyware didn't even exist at the time that Windows 98 was made. I would suggest that if you are being infected on a clean install, that you trash your stolen copy of the OS and go buy a real one. ISO downloads are quite often infected by spyware, trojans and such. So I wouldn't be surprised if you were having that problem.
As they say, An ounce of prevention is more valuable than a pound of cure. Why don't they fix the hole in Internet Explorer rather than implement software to remove exploits? Oh thats right! It's not a security hole, it's a feature.
You find it "refreshing" to see Microsoft try to capitalize on a problem they themselves caused? You don't pay very much attention, do you?
Don't you think it's a little fishy that a company like Microsoft releases software with all sorts of holes, then sells you the software to fix it? I'm not sure what this business practice is called, but it's very much akin to a pharmaceutical company selling the cure for a disease they created in the first place.