Vista May Put Anti-Spyware Companies Out

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Vista May Put Anti-Spyware Companies Out

Posted by ryuzaki0 on Saturday March 18, 2006 @10:25AM from the getting-ahead-of-ourselves dept.

Ant wrote to mention a C|Net article with an interesting premise: Windows Vista's tough approach to spyware may put anti-spyware companies out of business. From the article: "While this may be good news for buyers of Vista, it is not for anyone who makes a living from selling anti-spyware software. The worldwide market has boomed recently, reaching $97 million in revenue in 2004, up 240.4 percent from a year earlier, according to IDC. However, companies such as Webroot Software and Sunbelt Software are in for tough times, analysts said."

30 of 392 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

...well... by BewireNomali · 2006-03-18 10:27 · Score: 5, Insightful

didn't msft put anti-spyware companies into business in the first place?

msft giveth, msft taketh away.

--
un burrito me trampeó.
1. Re:...well... by Pneuma+ROCKS · 2006-03-18 11:09 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I don't think spyware is going anywhere. Just as spam, it's here to stay. Many promises have been made by Microsoft in the past and they've been broken like little dry twigs. Giving them lots of credit, one might think they can eliminate and prevent all current forms of spyware, but there are always new ways, and they are always found. I hope Vista is more secure, but infalible? Not even close.
  
  --
  Favorite quote: "
2. Re:...well... by mrchaotica · 2006-03-18 11:24 · Score: 4, Interesting
  But MS made the crap code that allowed spyware to work in the first place. It's all rather Mafia-esque, really:
  
  Write crap code that people buy anyway because you're a monopoly
  
  PROFIT!!
  
  Wait for spyware makers to exploit your crap code
  
  Write anti-spyware software, and sell it at extra cost
  
  Use your monopoly to give your anti-spyware program an unfair marketing advantage over 3rd-party equivalents (again)
  PROFIT AGAIN, because the users more-or-less have to fork out the "protection money."
  
  And there is no "???" step.
  --
  "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
3. Re:...well... by frogstar_robot · 2006-03-18 12:05 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  So what was the design goal for WindowsME? Give the source code to 1000 monkeys, wait a year, then see what they came up with? :/
  
  Don't you think that is unfair to monkeys?
4. Re:...well... by ozmanjusri · 2006-03-18 14:28 · Score: 4, Insightful
  As long as people write crap, other people will install crap. All we can hope to do is educate people to stop installing crap.
  No, that's crap. You can never educate enough people to make a difference. OS vendors need to write systems that;
  
  make it safe for users to install crap
  
  make it easy for users to remove crap
  
  The reason crap happens to Windows is that it is easy to put persistent malware on people's computers. If the OS was designed so users could remove crap themselves, there wouldn't be the same motivation to make malware.
  --
  "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
5. Re:...well... by ozmanjusri · 2006-03-18 17:46 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  What you're saying is technically not possible.
  Tell that to my Knoppix CD...
  I think it IS possible if your OS and hardware are designed properly. You have your core OS on RO media, apps in their own hardware lockable (switch or key) area, strictly compartmentalised human readable config files, and a separate noexe area for data files.
  A sandbox (chroot or VM) environment for trying dodgy stuff would be nice too...
  
  --
  "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
6. Re:...well... by jinxidoru · 2006-03-18 22:03 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Realize that the article didn't say that Microsoft Vista was going to put spyware out of business. Rather, it will put anti-spyware software out of business. It's true that spyware will continue to take on new forms. But Vista will probably be updated to handle these new forms in the same way that the current anti-spyware software is constantly being updated. So the question is not whether Vista can beat the spyware companies; it's a question of whether Vista can beat the anti-spyware companies. It's kind of like the old saying that if you and a friend are being chased by a wolf, you only need to be faster than your friend.
7. Re:...well... by Mistshadow2k4 · 2006-03-18 23:10 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  You're forgetting something here: there's a great deal of this kind of crap out there that installs itself in Windows without the user's say-so. No download, no click "OK" or anything. You're online and boom, you've got spyware. A router helps, a firewall helps, Peer Guardian and WinPatrol help a lot, but you never know when another thing might come along that can get through them and be on your system before you know it.
  
  It's a common misconception that malware has to be installed on a Windows system with the user's permission - but it doesn't. People keep saying that the users need to be educated enough not to install crap on their systems, but a lot of people obviously need to be educated about the fact that not all spyware is installed with the user's permission. At least half of it is not. It's this kind of "it's all the foolish users installing crap" attitude that helps malware flourish; people think their system is safe if they don't download attachments and install stuff off the net, but they're not. Not at all.
  
  --
  I dream of a better world... one in which chickens can cross roads without their motives being questioned.
Just Fair by Zo0ok · 2006-03-18 10:28 · Score: 5, Insightful

If you are in business just because another company sells crappy products to lots of people you dont deserve to stay in business forever.
1. Re:Just Fair by ZeroExistenZ · 2006-03-18 10:50 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  It's called opportunism and demand for a service.
  
  There's no "deserve" in doing business and trying to meet a demand in order to make money off of it.
  
  --
  I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
2. Re:Just Fair by TubeSteak · 2006-03-18 14:07 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  There's no "deserve" in doing business and trying to meet a demand in order to make money off of it.
  Tell that to the natural gas companies.
  
  Their rates are regulated by the state, so they basically work out a rate that includes costs + profit.
  
  If demand goes up, so do prices
  If demand goes down, guess what happens.
  
  Yep, prices go up. Why? Because they aren't making their agreed upon level of profit. It's a fairly cushy deal.
  
  Be glad MS isn't truly a monopoly, cause if they were, they'd be regulated & their profit margin would be enshrined in law.
  
  --
  [Fuck Beta]
  o0t!
How dare they! by NitsujTPU · 2006-03-18 10:28 · Score: 5, Funny

How dare Microsoft enhance the security of their product, putting poor companies that thrive on the shortcomings of Windows out of business?!?!

I, guess?
1. Re:How dare they! by mrchaotica · 2006-03-18 11:28 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Not quite. It's more like "how dare Microsoft charge extra for a workaround instead of fixing the shortcomings in the first place for free, like companies in every other industry (such as the auto industry) would be forced to do?!"
  
  --
  "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
2. Re:How dare they! by jacksonj04 · 2006-03-18 11:33 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Actually, OneCare is pretty good. And from what I've seen in the Vista CTPs the security model is actually a damn sight better than before. Stability is phenominal as well, it took a whole 12 seconds to make it fall over (Video driver issue if you must know, Safe Mode is solid as a rock).
  
  --
  How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
erm by BitterAndDrunk · 2006-03-18 10:29 · Score: 5, Funny

I thought it was still running Internet Explorer?

--
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . . .
Analysis by jaymzter · 2006-03-18 10:29 · Score: 4, Insightful

Every version of windows since Windows NT was supposed to be better and more secure. Unfortunately that wasn't the case as we all know. How about we hold off on the hyperbole until Vista ships one of these days and we see how it actually works, not how some marketdroid claims it will.

--
If thou see a fair woman pay court to her, for thus thou wilt obtain love
1. Re:Analysis by Anonymous Coward · 2006-03-18 10:35 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  I don't know about *better*, given it is a subjective measure, but the NT line has generally improved in security with new releases. Win2000 was relatively indistinguishable from WinNT security-wise, but WinXP at least considered security in its design, and improved on it a little with SP1 and markedly with SP2.
  
  I'm not saying it's all sunshine and rainbows; it's still not a fully locked down OS but they have been improving.
2. Re:Analysis by nacturation · 2006-03-18 10:59 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  How about we realize that, in this case, CNet is just a shill for the Microsoft PR department.
  
  --
  Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
3. Re:Analysis by aftermath09 · 2006-03-18 11:35 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  No, no. They really mean it this time! ;)
They'll find a way. by bluemeep · 2006-03-18 10:29 · Score: 4, Insightful

For every unstoppable wall of protection, some jackass'll find a way around it. It's only a matter of time.
1. Re:They'll find a way. by richdun · 2006-03-18 10:56 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  You sound like a bitter Frenchman...
  
  But true. The only sure protection is to build something that cannot be circumvented because of some law of physics. Software-driven systems will probably never reach this point. We just have to educate people to be safe enough that only the most inventive criminals can get in (and make it so that people understand how to be safe, not just install X because it will "protect" me from Y). It's just like common sense in anything else - know where not to go, what not to do, and if you are unsure, don't do it.
2. Re:They'll find a way. by Ilgaz · 2006-03-18 11:06 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  It is a common misconception that Spyware/Adware programmers are "lamer", "script kiddie" types.
  
  They are advanced programmers which reads slashdot, post to usenet etc too.
  
  They are just "evil" or don't have/believe in ethics.
3. Re:They'll find a way. by the+argonaut · 2006-03-18 11:35 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  They are just "evil" or don't have/believe in ethics.
  
  They're Republicans?
  
  --
  fuck you.
4. Re:They'll find a way. by lubricated · 2006-03-18 14:11 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  maginot line
  
  --
  It has been statistically shown that helmets increase the risk of head injury.
Tough on spyware? by linguizic · 2006-03-18 10:30 · Score: 5, Funny

The only thing microsoft is tough on is stains, though oh so gentle on carpet. Wait, that's Bissel. That's right MS is tough on network administrators.

--
Does this sig remind you of Agatha Christie?
Who broke my window? by Realistic_Dragon · 2006-03-18 10:34 · Score: 5, Interesting

This is known as the Browk Window theory in Economics - that is, by running around breaking windows I create work for glaziers.

In actual fact were the windows not being broken the resources could be put to better use elsewhere - the time of the labourer and the money spent could be used to grow the economy rather than in the mantainance of existing infrastructure which is an activity that adds zero to the bottom line.

In this case not needing spyware companies will allow the workers and the capital emplyed to go and do something more efficent, in economic terms... such as innovating new and better spyware, seeing as how well Microsoft's other security related announcements have worked out :)

--
Beep beep.
Nah, don't think so by KenDodd · 2006-03-18 10:36 · Score: 4, Insightful

Do they mean the same way that SQL Server put Oracle out? And Windows 200 killed Linux? Come, come - what utter twaddle. The "spyware/piss-you-off-ware" concocters will just shift paradigm.

--
Did you know my dad's dog died?
Webroot Software and Sunbelt Software... by Aphrika · 2006-03-18 11:10 · Score: 4, Insightful

...sorry to be an ignoramus, but who?

As far as I'm concerned, if M$ are closing holes that shouldn't really be there, that's a Good Thing (tm).

I mean, these same spyware companies don't make a mint off other OSes do they, so why should they piggy-back a specific one? Isn't that essentially making money from a weakness? And if the weakness is removed, well... game over I guess, until M$ falls at the next hurdle and people make cash out of it. I mean, Mr. Norton seems to have had it quite easy for a while now...
Re:Other areas too by Nethead · 2006-03-18 11:29 · Score: 4, Funny

Boy! You old-time, low-numbered slashdot posters sure can get cranky!

--
-- I have a private email server in my basement.
Rah! Rah! (Pffft!) by QuestorTapes · 2006-03-18 15:36 · Score: 4, Funny

Gosh, it's great to live here in Pleasantville, where things are just so darn KEEN!

It's about time MS used their overwhelming security expertise to address this pressing problem!. Gosh knows, now that:

- NT 3.1 solved all the BSOD problems...
- Windows 2000 given us perfectly stable drivers that never fail...
- we have a flawless and simple system for authenticode verification to prevent all those darned pirates and their stolen copies of Windows...
- and a rock solid browser like IE 6 with none of those silly security defects found in (shudder) DOWNLEVEL browsers like FireFox and Opera...

All we've been waiting for is MS to put the last bricks in the wall of total user trust and security with flawless DRM and anti-spyware!

Kudos to the Bill G and the brave, fighting lads at MS for their continuous and unflagging dedication to providing a rock-solid security combo of Win95-compatible OS, ActiveX-enabled Browser, and integrated VBA-enabled Office applications, that makes third-party anti-virus, anti-trojan, firewall, backup, and other rip-offs completely unecessary!

Yeah! And now I'm off to meet the ghost of John Lennon on his magic Yellow Submarine for a late night trip to visit Narnia!

Just how F**KING STUPID are these reporters, anyway?