Slashdot Mirror
Windows AntiSpyware Downgrades Claria Detections
accihap writes "A week after word leaked out that Microsoft was negotiating an acquisition deal with Claria (See recent /. coverage), spyware researchers have noticed that the Windows antispyware application has downgraded Claria's Gator detections and changed the recommended action from 'quarantine' to 'ignore.' Screenshots of the new default settings."
Honestly...is anyone surprised by this? We all saw this coming.
Unfortunately, M$ can pull this sort of thing with near-impunity, as the only ones outraged by this are the ones who had issues with them in the first place (read: us).
The vast majority of Windows users out there are just going to shrug and say, "Oh well...if Microsoft says they're not a threat, then they must not be a threat."
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
...how quickly corps like MS will sell out their customers to make a quick buck. This is not only found in the Spyware arena but also with companies such as Intel embedding DRM into their chips when coaked by the various entertainment industries.
My 3D Texturing Skinning work (under construction)
First thing is we need to make sure these images are real. We have been caught with faked images many times before. If they are then I think all it really does is reinforce the need to run multiple anti-spyware utilities.
When a for-profit organization releases a product that can adversely (or positively) affect another for-profit organization we must expect, at least sometimes, to have some negative effects on the consumer. Its a capitalist society and companies are free to do anything and everything they need to maximize profits, within the scope of the law.
This sort of thing boils my blood. There is a certain level of trust I have with a vendor who provides detection and removal of spyware, etc. I've not payed as much attention as maybe I should have, but what other vendors are strong in detecting spyware that don't give in or at least haven't thus far? The product they purchased from Giant was really good to boot. Doesn't take look for the MS taint to occur, does it?
Unrelated, I get the impression, MS doesn't need more competent competition to fail. Instead, they need to continue doing just what they are doing. Between moves like this, the failure to manage projects, etc. they are hurting themselves just fine and making everything that isn't MS look better.
Every so often the MS marketing machine almost gets me to believe they might be changing. The developer blogs have helped a lot in that respect. Then MS does something like this. On the one hand they say they are concerned about this threat and then, not too long into the future, they pull a move like this which says the exact opposite.
I'd like to see independent evidence before jumping to conclusions. Anyone want to install Gator and test it themselves? :-)
A few people I have spoken with have been telling me how wonderfull this free tool is. I pointed out I don't need said tool as I just run a better OS but now I have a much better comeback next time someone praises MS for releasing this hehe.
How long before MS integrates Gator into the OS where it cannot be removed without corrupting the system?
If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
Indeed. In fact, I have to constantly remind the Windows evangelists that the entire spyware and virus problem has created a cottage industry, and as long as Microsoft can make money off of it, they will choose never to solve it.
--Storm
One has to wonder if companies such as Microsoft do things like this intentionally or, as the comment in the article indicated, simply miss some things in the wash?
Of course this was done intentionally. GAIN must be the most widespread and well-known spyware out there, do you think that a team of people working on one of the world's biggest anti-spyware programs accidentally thought it was not a threat and should be set to "ignore"? Or do you think someone "accidentally" modified the status in the database by clicking a few wrong buttons, and that quality control didn't check before a product release that their anti-spyware program happens to ignore the world's biggest spyware? There is just no way this happened by mistake.
At first people thought:
1. MS buying Giant means putting a great anti-spyware product into Windows. Windows becomes *stronger* at stopping such attacks.
2. MS possibly buying Claria means that Microsoft could eliminate one of the biggest pieces of spyware out there. In other words, Claria/Gator becomes *weaker*.
Now, it's possible that things will look like this:
1. Anti-spyware becomes *weaker*.
2. Claria/Gator becomes *stronger*.
So much for doing the right thing(s).
Marketing a security product for your own operating system is like correcting your own spelling test.
I might just have to go make up some more bumper stickers or something.
[
Hey, look at the bright side, at least it detects their software and doesn't ignore it completely! Can anyone else tell me a company that would not do the same? Anti-anti-spyware anyone?
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
I'm wondering: if anyone out there actually still trusts Microsoft (rhetoric: of course, some people do), is there any demonstrably good reason for that trust or are they just ignorant/apathetic?
I suppose another way to ask this question is why the Revolution(tm) hasn't come yet...
$p$g
I don't know why anyone would think otherwise. Everything that Microsoft puts on your computer wants to call back home and report on what you do and how you do it. Everything Claria trys to put on your computer wants to call back home and report your every action and keystroke. So running any 'Microsoft spyware' in the first place is like letting a burglar watch your home. What did you expect would eventually happen?
Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
Well considering he said "networks he manages" I doubt that replacing windows is an option. You've never really had fun until you've tried to explain to a CIO or equivelant that some of the software (especially the OS) that they are using in a company with 20,000 computers causes all kinds of problems. You generally get a blank stare back and a comment like "But it is Windows, which is secure, right?". Love clueless upper management.
Yes, it's true that the usual reaction to MS stories tends to be kneejerk criticism often without much evidence of thought or rational balance. The baby gets the old heave ho along with the bath water more times than not. I usually urge a more reasonable approach based on the real contributions that MS has made to the IT industry and the fact that most major corporations behave the same way. I may not agree with MS's methods, but I try to keep an open mind, always aware of what MS has always represented. That said...NOT THIS TIME!
It's bad enough that the most pernicious and persistant tattle tale software on a MS box is probably the operating system. Take for example the index files in WIN98 that have never been explaned, the automatic updates in apps that can't be disabled, and services that reinstall themselves behind your back. I really do buy the 'least common denominator' explanation for a lot of these 'features', most users really don't understand their computers enough to maintain them, much less integrate new codecs, standards, and protocols. I do believe that making the default behaviors in many programs more update and security focused was a necessary step. MS often gets a bad rap for problems users could avoid by performing their recommended chores, especially installing patches. Bill Gates has recently touted a new focus on security, wanting to win back some customer trust. Whew, it was nice to see MS finally starting to turn in a new direction. Maybe I should have known better. The attitude expressed in this situation seems to be "Oh that's OK, it's just us, your friendly neighborhood MS. It was bad when those other guys did it, but you can trust us! By the way, could you enter your 16 digit authentication code and explain what that new unsupported by XP hardware is, since we really can't trust you?"
Microsoft could take the lead in creating really secure, customer oriented products. Maybe they would make a little less money if they gave up the drive to control every part of the industry. Would that kill them? IT is past the point where it needs one firm hand on the tiller to keep from sinking. Microsoft has the power and influence to change the face of software development. They could help make the world a better, freer place. Too bad the accountants have taken over from the dreamers.
billy - say it ain't so Bill...
Why do you find it hard to believe? Because McAfee and Norton are big names? Because they're more popular? Life's full of examples where the underdog is the superior product, from OS X vs. Windows to Saucony vs. Nike.
IMO, AVG and Avast! are both better antivirus packages than McAfee or Norton.
The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.