Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Discusses Anti-Spyware Plans
LaughingCoder writes "Microsoft has announced their plans for the (currently free) AntiSpyware application, which is now in Beta. It is currently slotted to be bundled with Windows Vista. The end-user has the option of switching it out and using a different vendor's spyware protection if they want." From the article: "Microsoft gave an official name to its software for protecting computer users against spyware. The software, which has been known as Windows AntiSpyware Beta 1, will be called Windows Defender when the finished version becomes available next year, a Microsoft spokesperson said Tuesday. A posting on Microsoft's TechNet Web blog announced the change on Friday and also revealed some details about capabilities coming to the software. The current version of Windows AntiSpyware Beta 1 has 18 million users, the spokesperson said. "
This may come off as a crazy question but why would Vista need anti-spyware?
Aren't they gonna implement a secure user-privilege levels?
Even if someone does mess up their own home directory, they won't be able to touch system files?
So theoretically one could log in as an admin and easily remove the unwanted warez.
Or is Vista going to be more of the same when it comes to file permissions?
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
Making the engineering change from "Windows AntiSpyware" to "Windows Defender" took a lot of careful coordination across our team to ensure that the strings in the UI got changed, the help files all got updated, registry keys, file names and properties, as well as a couple of images all got changed.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
I've become fed up with the anti spyware programs...
...
I've had Adaware detect things Spybot doesn't, Spybot detect things Adaware doesn't detect, MS's program detect things Spybot doesn't detect, etc etc etc...
My usual course of action to thoroughly cleanse a system is to boot to safe mode, run adaware > spybot > MS antispyware > HijackThis
My question is... will there ever be a program that can detect it all? Becuase so far, I haven't found one.
But can you trust Microsoft anymore with stopping spyware from installing on your computer? Have they added protection from Sony's rootkit? What will they do with Claria/Gator/GAIN spyware technology that they now have access to?
Microsoft might remove spyware apps that break Windos, but is their goal to really remove anything that can spy on you, this being the company that's introduced Microsoft Genuine Advantage?
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
It is possibly the first anti-spyware program to use a joystick. Malicious executables appear as little moon landers and you have to shoot them before they can abduct your good files. I actually look forward to getting infected with spyware, but my thumbs start to hurt after a time.
The only potential conflict of interest I see is if MS charges for the software. As long as it is free its a GREAT addition to Windows.
However, it would be horable for our economy. As they start to give away anti-virus/spy-ware software, that eliminates a multibillion dollar industry. That is a problem, but not MS's problem. Its a free market issue, and the market will adjust.
As far as it being- an anti-trust issue, I don't believe it is. This is a tool that fixes/protects against exploits in their software. They aren't adding a product from an unrelated market (e.g. web browser or media player). This is a logical step, similar to service packs and updates. The fact is if they didn't offer updates, a company would emerge that patches windows, just like the virus industry emerged.
All in all I tihnk this is a good thing for windows users. I think the anti-ms crowd is going to throw a fit, and wrongfully claim abuse of monopoly, but what can ya do? MS is making the correct decision to include it in Vista. If they charge extra for it, or turn it into a paid subscription service, that is an entirely new issue. That would be a conflict of issue, and morally wrong, maybe not legally, but it would hurt their business.
It seems someone else was using "Windows Defender" until MS sent in their lawyers. Tucked into the agreement was a line making the prior owner give all rights to the "Defender" name to MS. Two weeks later, MS announces the new name.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
Microsoft bundling anti-spyware software with their OS is kind of like a shipbuilder installing an automatic leak plugger in a new ship.
It'd be better to build it so it didn't leak in the first place.
Don't anthropomorphize computers, they don't like it.
Ships have bilge pumps because there are just so many ways a leak can start. In fact, back in the day of wooden ships it was not unknown for the Dutch to fit old ships with wind powered bilge pumps and just keep them pumping so they could be used beyond the normal lease of life. The analogy is not exact, but it is common for any very complex system to have continuous maintenance needs that in theory could be avoided. I'm not justifying MS, just pointing out that your analogy would lead to MS building in the equivalent of automatic bilge pumps, fire extinguishers and smoke alarms, just like you have to have on a ship. Which seems to be what they are at last doing.
Pining for the fjords
Spyware basically is malware takes advantage of a poorly architected Windows environment.
That's just plain wrong. I'm a Linux user and I'm no Microsoft fan but to be fair, spyware isn't Microsoft's fault. If a malicious programmer wants to write a program to say, monitor your keystrokes, or send your computer ads, and a user willingly installs it, there's really nothing Microsoft can do to stop it short of prohibiting the user from running any and all programs.
First, Microsoft is announcing this anti-spyware will be free. I'm wondering how could they charge for it? Spyware basically is malware takes advantage of a poorly architected Windows environment, n'est-ce pas? I would think it unseemly to manufacture a product that has deficiencies, then sell a product to protect against those deficiencies. (Oh, you want air in those tires? We have an addon, called valve-stems which, for now, we're offering for free.)
.bashrc? Or your GNOME session?
No, it isn't. While Spyware has used "drive-by-downloads" and other Windows flaws to install itself in the past, today's spyware is almost universally bundled with software that the user downloads and installs. Web toolbars, screensavers, background utilities, file sharing products, and other shareware is frequently loaded with spyware.
Spyware can be written for any platform. What's to stop spware from modifying your
Add to that the fact that most software is installed as root, and there is no limit to the damage that spyware-infected software could do. Even your Kernel and bootloader aren't safe.
Spyware is a problem that can affect any platform. While some spyware is undoubtably based on Windows flaws, spyware bundled with software can affect any platform.
Besides trolling, you don't seem to care anything about the discussion. Yes, the GP poster has a point. But you don't contribute anything to the discussion, you just take parts of the GP argument and turn them into a horrible straw man.
The next time you're sarcastic, please try to make a point of it. I admire the Windows user interface (well, most of it - some things i can't stand, like that stupid online registration), it's just that their security COMPLETELY SUCKS and their closed source + monopoly just makes things worse and very hard to maintain.
It's microsoft's fault their crappy OS is so open to spyware (*cough* IE, ActiveX, poor security scheme, services enabled by default, etc. etc), so, yes, MS should PAY to keep the OS we spent $200 on, clean. IMO Microsoft should pay us so we can purchase *ANY* antispyware, not necessarily theirs.
Of course alternatively, you could build the OS so that spyware can't install itself silently and start phoning home.
Do not make the mistake of believing that your platform is immune.
Spyware works on any platform because users are stupid. Almost any user will gladly reveal their administrator password if promised "free screensavers". At that point, all of the access control in the world won't help you.
No operating system that allows the user to take control of their system is immune from spyware. There are always users who will give spyware whatever permissions it needs to install.
You do realize that a lot of spyware is user installed, correct? GAIN is usually approved by the user. Backweb installs with Logitec and Kodac software, so the use actually runs the program to install it. Many people LOVE weatherbug and make sure to install it on their system as soon as they get it. How exactly is MS supposed to stop this? Make it so people can't install software?
"Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
I don't have a problem with that.
You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!