Slashdot Mirror
Sneak Peek At Microsoft Anti-Spyware
Ant writes "Broadband Reports mentions Neowin's sneak peek of Microsoft's upcoming anti-spyware software recently acquired community favorite Giant spyware; Microsoft has code-named their re-hashed version of that software 'Atlanta.' It is currently in an internal beta test. There are screenshots of the application in action."
At the risk of sounding trollish... I think it's more than a bit ironic that MS is now going to bundle spyware when a good chunk of spyware is installed thanks to bugs within the present code. Why not deal with existing issues first?
Oh wait, new bells and whistles are good PR and prompt upgrades.
Trolling is a art,
Anti-spyware software. From a company that has a proven track record of putting "phone home" code into their software. I'll be sure to run out and install my copy over the already known-good open alternatives.
How much is a license of SCO/Linux again?
fifth sigma, inc.
Yes.... just tell that to the normal users that simply use their computer for pr0n or for simple searches
Most people dont know where to get software like firefox or spyware removal - let alone even know it exists
Microsoft will either bundle it for free, increasing the value of their OS (again most people don't know about alternatives) or MS will charge for it, making more $$ - in the end, average joe will think MS is their hero for saving them from spyware (o the irony)
Surely this will be available though Windows Update? If not ... Microsoft fix your damn code first instead of making us pay for your mistakes.
*groan*
i think the worst part about microsoft of all people releasing antispyware software, is that they are admitting their OS is easily hijacked. spyware is a worse problem than viruses now a days (since every machine i've cleaned up for friends has 200+ pieces of spyware littered around their machine), and for the most part it is easier to prevent! stop using IE, and stop installing random software off the web.
- tristan
They wrote the operating system. They already know about the next security flaw....they already know about the next big worm. They just won't act upon it until someone on the outside discovers it and/or exploits it. This opens the door to preemptive protection against the spyware that exploits the security flaws.
Besides, the problem with the hijack stuff is that it's increasingly complicated to figure it out inside of MS's nonsense. Who better to offer protection than the people who invented the complexity?
No need to get disappointed. That's the concept of OEM. They always just slap a new label on it. Do you think Dell does anything beside slapping their name on the product!? M$ would be stupid to fiddle with any code.
I know how MS is going to eliminate ALL malware. I figure that they plan to raise attention to the serious issues with just anybody being able to write software, so then they can try and make a licensing program where companies can pay to have their software certified as legit, and the binaries signed (creating a new revenue stream for MS), then once some big companies start following along, keep applying pressure to the ones that don't go along (like them showing up as 'spyware' in their anti-spyware software), then as slowly keep tightening to noose, and eventually require ALL software to be signed by MS.
... I need to get myself a tinfoil hat! *goes off and buys one*
Ok well this won't actually affect malware, spyware, and adware and viruses, trojans, and worms.
Did it ever occur to you that they might have modified code other than the UI? Maybe there are non-visible changes to the scanning engine or something, perhaps to enhance the integration with the Windows OS?
Imagine for a moment that the computer is doing more than painting pretty pictures on your monitor (that's the TV-thing on top). Could we agree that a program intended to detect spyware could be substantially modified without altering the appearance to the user?
How did this get modded as "informative"?
Oh, that's right--he bashed MS. Sorry.
Well at first glance it seems somewhat silly- as if they are treating the symptoms instead of the problem. Everyone can pretty much agree switching to another browser can alleviate a lot of the problems, or even just mutilating IE so that it becomes a pain in the ass to use (i.e. prompting for confirmation before allowing activex/etc), and thats what happens in 2003 by default (IE becomes a pain the ass to use), but agreed- that doesnt cure all of the problems. For instance, I know I've seen some spyware piggyback in on files played by media player or winamp, or p2p programs (contrary to popular belief kazaa lite appears to be spyware as well, fire up a sniffer and watch the local network). But when you really look at it, solving the problem hardly seems to be the point. Contrary to what a lot of us would like to think, microsoft isn't full of idiots- and a lot could be learned from the 'failure' that is most anti-virus software, namely that signature based detection is not the best way to detect malware. So then you have to sit back and ask yourself why a corporation would follow such tactics if the elimination of spyware/adware was their goal? Money, just like it always is- You don't want to cure the problem because then you start pinching your paycheck. Plus you have the advantage of testing/(further) conditioning the public to subscription based payment methods, and they will thank you for it because you are 'helping' them. IMHO, it just seems like another wolf in sheeps clothing, but thats just my take on it.
Microsoft wasted their money. Pest Patrol, the only one worth paying for, already got gobbled up by Computer Associates. I hope CA doesn't screw it up.
How ya like dat?
One would hope that if somebody actually took the initiative in installing Firefox, or similar, that they would know that the MS tool is, in fact, lying.
That said, dollars to donuts that nobody who'd install FF or its ilk would pay Microsoft for something they can get for free off Lavasoft/Spybot.
You're doing it wrong.
They already did that with IE - it's call XP SP2.
With XP SP2, modulo security holes, the defaults on downloading code are all NO - the user has to decide that they want the rubbish or not.
After that, it's a question of user education.
This is insane. Spyware stems directly from Microsoft's inability to engineer a secure computing architecture... something =every single one= of its competitors can do. Buying a single anti-spyware product isn't going to fix the problems that make spyware possible in the first place. It will merely offer a false sense of security to the foolish.
It's like tossing a half-full Dixie cup onto a raging housefire you set in the first place. A half-assed placebo to gull the gullible.
Any Mac or Linux user can tell you: Spyware isn't a problem. Windows is a problem.
SoupIsGood Food
Fixing IE would involve such a substantial change to both itself and windows that it won't happen. You've seen how long it took to provide the 'fixes' in SP2 for XP, and in the end it diverted staff from development of Longhorn. Imagine that applied to something even more fundamental to windows, like redesigning ActiveX to be easier to manage, or making IE an optional windows component.
That kind of work would be probably be even harder than writing Longhorn, and we've seen how long that's taking. And that would most likely require a development team as big as that of Longhorn, if not bigger. And they wouldn't be getting paid for it - so what do you thing the chances are of MS doing that?
This sounds an awful lot like what the mob does.
"Pay us protection money, and we'll make sure you no unfortunate accidents happen."
Brielle
why would I trust them for Anti-spyware?
Just off the top of my head, I can see their version of "anti-spyware" software telling me that the following are spyware:
Firefox
Google Tool Bar
AIM
Spybot Search and Destroy
Ad-Aware
Sun Java Counsole
Adobe Acrobat
iTunes
Then, after clicking on an option NOT to remove these items, it does it anyway OR makes the MS verions the default on the system.
They are the giant, yes, but some company needs to take back marketshare to prevent MS from doing what they want, when they want, to the "dumb" user's machine... Some company needs to step up and provide a user friendly, wide-distro OS. (All Mac OS not apply - I love them, but they already made their niche)
In a system where it is IMPOSSIBLE to remove the web browser? Methinks not ;)
That said, dollars to donuts that nobody who'd install FF or its ilk would pay Microsoft for something they can get for free off Lavasoft/Spybot.
They would, if the tool provided by Microsoft detected everything (and more) that the 2 programs combined detect.
Some say Ad-Aware is better than Spybot. Others claim vice-versa. Only yesterday i first ran Spybot (detected 19 objects correctly) and then Ad-Aware, which still detected 39 objects (that Spybot somehow missed). Other people may tell you the same story, only with Ad-Aware running prior to Spybot.
Fact is now that you need _several_ programs to remove spyware from a computer (CWshredder anyone?), and i personally would like to have one program that does everything the seperate programs do. That the tool is provided by MS doesn't really matter (to me).
The moving target is emulating IE's handling of broken Javascript.
If Moz tried to implement this, they'd be climbing uphill.
If it works, is free and can be deployed and controlled via Active Directory GPOs I am going to be a happy man for the enterprise.
Anyone know if it IS going to be free?
Having a GPO aware anti-spyware would be good, but I doubt if MS would be allowed to make it free. Certainly I don't think they could bundle it with the OS, because they'd kill the anti-spyware industry at a stroke. Leveraging a monopoly, anybody?