Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's Security Meeting Causes Unease
Tony Maclennan writes to tell us that there were many mixed feelings at this year's Microsoft Security Response and Safety Summit. Many who attended the conference felt that the presentations were sadly lacking in the technical details that were shared in previous years. With Microsoft entering the arena as a competitor to these anti-virus companies, one has to wonder about the effect on the free flow of information that ultimately benefits the consumer.
Personally, I think that this points out why people should be buying Steve Ballmer gifts.
500GB of disk, 5TB of transfer, $5.95/mo
Has anyone in the DOJ looked into this Microsoft anti-spyware anti-virus bit?
Anyone else feel this is the epitomy of anti-competative practices? Hell their OS is the REASON these other companies exist, and now Microsoft gets to profit from thier own security holes?
Someone else HAS to see the flaw in this idea... I can only pray the EU once again has more sense than the DOJ.
C'mon, folks! It is no longer in Microsoft's interest to divulge techniques that may allow a competitor to secure the most profitable OS in History against it's own vulnerabilities.
The security companies will be better off forming their own knowlege pool and inviting Microsoft representatives to learn from them.
"The mind works quicker than you think!"
After all, they spent a whole month cleaning up their security problems.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
You can imagine why everyone kept their mouth shut:
It's especially a concern that Microsoft requires attendees to sign a document that allows the company to use anything that anyone says at the event.
"Having been put into that situation, people will feel more inhibited to say things," said Jimmy Kuo, a McAfee fellow and a veteran of the Microsoft events. "They ask us to sign a nondisclosure agreement, and if we say anything in those meetings that Microsoft is able to use, they have the right to do so." The agreement was introduced in recent years, he said.
Really, what kind of conference organized by a competitor that already puts in a clause that they can steal the ideas presented would actually render useful information? Think of some big pharmaceutical firm letting its competitors come and show their ideas with a clause like the one above. It would be surprising if anyone would actually show up.
molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
So you're stuck with our crummy OS. Want to buy some protection?
Nobody remembers who got second post. U r teh l0053r, su(|{ my 8utth073 it is teh h41r3333!
This new symbolic link technology sounds like serious stuff. I hope they hold back on the release date until they it's working correctly.
Trend Micro. Perhaps the others are staying away out of fear? Seems shortsighted.
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
You imply that the GP posters spelling is substandard, however I would contend that it is perfectly acceptable. From the dictionary definitions quoted below, clearly by "evet terrists" he was talking about extremist newt activists.
Evet (n.)[See Eft, n.]
(Zoöl.) The common newt or eft. In America often applied to several species of aquatic salamanders. [Written also evat.]
Terrist (n.)
A neologism referring to environmentalists who engage in actions considered by some to be terrorism, (eco-terrorism) including destruction of property as well as various types of nonviolent direct action. It is also a moniker used by individuals who concern themselves with the world (Terra) that is the home of the human species (Homo sapiens).
Oh no... it's the future.
So hands up who didn't see this coming more than a year ago when they started talking about it...Don't forget this is still Microsoft we are talking about - the upper management is still in place which means the ethos while hidden hasn't changed - maybe when gates and the others go it might improve though not before then.
I ate your fish.
So, how many of the wonderful new '12 Rules' does this violate? And how many people really believed in the 'Kinder, Gentler, Microsoft'?
www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance
Microsoft would be irresponsible if they did not include a clause in the agreement giving them rights to use anything disclosed at the conference.
Imagine Microsoft was busy working on feature X. Then, along comes someone from Symantec who talks about feature X at the conference. Later, Microsoft comes out with an update to their product incorporating feature X. Symantec cries fowl and starts complaining about how Microsoft stole their confidential information.
All the clause effectively says is that the information disclosed at the conference is not confidential. If it's not a trade secret, Microsoft can use it as it sees fit anyway. The same would hold true for anyone else at the conference. The agreement just puts it down in plain English for those not up on IP law.
Microsofts poor security and anti-virus is what keeps bills paid for me and a lot of people I know. If you ask me, malware can be a good thing in a capitalist run country like USA. If it wasn't for malware, the entry level jobs at a lot of IT companies would be gone.
If they gave technical details they might be used by h4x0rz or evet terrists!
More like Financial or Market Security Through Obscurity. Like every other market, Microsoft wants a cut of it and to assert their will upon the rules by which it runs. It's utter madness, however, because if Microsoft did their work right the first time this market would be considerably smaller and segements wouldn't exist at all!
That Microsoft seeks to profit from protecting customers from the holes in their software is ludicrous, heinous even! Never fear, McAfee, Norton, MicroTrend, AdAware, etc., you can go on to sell products which protect consumers from the holes in Microsoft's security security!
And then they went on to prosper beyond their wildes dreams...
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
fairness and microsoft go together like Military and intelligence. Of course they don't want to talk about how they will patch the gaping holes they leave in their software. And you knew sooner or later someone there would go, hey, why don't WE sell spyware and antivirus software? It's all just foolishness. Microsoft is, has been, and will be, a corrupt monopoly as long as our corrupt government allows it.
Search engine bots don't see sigs (well, unless they're logged in, which I find unlikely). Some people do fake sigs though, like this:
--
$1/mo unlimited RoR, PHP, MySQL, Python webhosting.
Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
I sat in a meeting yesterday with "developers" who had never heard of Bachus-Naur form. I routinely confer with "programmers" who have never heard of a finite state machine. I work daily with "data architects" who have never heard of Dr. Codd or of normalization. I am personally acquainted with upper managers who are just dying to replace OpenBSD-based firewalls with M$ Vista Server. THIS, my fellow cognoscenti, is the extent to which our society is infested with charlatans and ignorami. That M$ can now, on the one hand, generate security holes of arbitrary obscurity, and, on the other, miraculously detect and repair them far and away better than their erstwhile "competitors" is a final and apocalyptic testimonial to the supreme stupidity (I use the word advisedly, in the sense of "willful ignorance") of our omnipotent layers of corporate management. Wasn't it bad enough when M$ were the sole possessors of the Most Sacred A[PB]Is? Wasn't it awful enough that they were able to ignore even the most rudimentary dictates of software engineering with impugnity -- that the drooling imbeciles in management would keep right on paying vast sums of money for hideous deformities of Logic without batting an eyelash? Do they now get to rake in huge profits from "repairing" systemic defects of their own intentional manufacture? I am 41. I am tired and old. I have watched, like a Felliniesque "Sad Clown of Life," wave upon wave of utter inanity wash up on the vast, dead-whale-stinking beach of corporate and academic IT. I have seen too much. I can cry no more. I want to know how to stop caring now. How, for the love of God, do I join the endless ranks of these gibbering fools who never think one picometer beyond their golf handicaps? How, for the bleeding love of the pumping, pulsating heart of Jesus Christ on a pogo stick do I just sit in meetings daydreaming about jumping into my big yellow H2 and driving back to my prefab McMansion in the burb-sprawl and staining my redwood deck with Johnson's WaterSeal? Why oh why must I KNOW that the imminent deaths of such elegancies as Tru64 Unix and MIPS and Alpha are a sin against art and science and technology and Man? Can't I just be stupid too? What's so wrong with me? What have I done? Why must I suffer so? One day, my friends, we will all lounge in paradise happily signing off on million-dollar purchases of Microsoft AntiVirus Protection(TM) with huge idiotic grins upon our faces and lovely oblivious strings of rancid drool dangling from our chins. We will not be tormented by the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Our eyes will bear the brilliant, unfocused glow of perfect, orgasmic stupidity. Until then, we must work to balance our egregious karma. Can there be any doubt whatever that we fried and devoured living human babies in each of our wretched previous incarnations? What more glaring evidence can there be of our complete, total, and inherent evil? We sinners must needs endure the terrible, sadistic wrath of a cold and childish god. May he soon tire of so gleefully tormenting us. Amen. Railgun Sally
And that is Microsoft, the sickest of them all. They are 80-95% of the whole industry alone, and everything else have to rotate around them.
...Ugh! Still not sorted out...
And they soon have a new OS to sell..
As usual this OS is incomplete and a mess:
The event mostly provided a primer on security in Windows Vista, which led to a discussion on how attendees' products might work with the Windows XP successor.
"Symbolic links can clutter up your machine with lots and lots of links that point nowhere" after the malicious software is removed, Kuo said. Protective tools will probably end up doing the clean-up, he said. It's a sign that on Vista systems, security software has more work to do than on earlier versions of the operating system.
Its a good thing the Server version still is some years ahead!
RFC 666: Notice of proposed definition-making
terrist - n.
1. A person who is an advocate of or expert in the planet Earth.
2. Informal. An eco-terrorist.
3. Slang. A person who does not bathe.
See also: open source developer.
:-D
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Kronos was the ruler of the elder gods in Greek religion. He had a habit of swallowing his children whole because it had been predicted that one of them would overthrow him. The anti-malware companies are the children of Microsoft. Is it really surprising that they would rather not be eaten?
If you want your life to be different, live it differently.
MS were quite clever to get DOJ all hot under the collar about Netscape & IE. These are no longer competitive areas. What is more important is that DOJ monitors future manuipulations by MS. For example, how they are playing in mobile space, how they're playing in personal audio (will their new audio device kill iPod through fair means or foul?) and things like anti-virus products.
For MS's point of view, being able to lock up the anti-virus APIs makes more than just business sense. It also allows them to shut the door on (limited) review of their system by citing some lame excuses like "there is no valid reason for anyone to look at these interfaces, anywone doing so is probably a terrorist!". Loss of that (limited) review would be a bad thing for the industry.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
If they were smart enough to know the flaws, why not just fix them?
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
Before Microsoft jumped into the antivirus/spyware game, everything was okay, because although there were major security issues with Windows, other businesses jumped up to fill the gap and fix the problems. Life went on, and nobody got hurt (except the consumer, paying their $39.99 a year).
Now that Microsoft is in the game, they threaten to destroy these other businesses that were covering-ass before, and screw the consumer even more with price hikes once they dominate the market, but it's not less-right, it's more-wrong. This should never be accepted in the first place! If I put out software with major security flaws and then charged for more software to monitor the holes, I wouldn't sell a copy!
I doubt the government is going to do anything about this. We just have to hope people vote with their dollars once Vista comes out. I know I already have.
If MS makes money out of their security products - ppl say they are anti-competitive If MS makes their security products free - ppl say they are using their OS monopoly to kill the (windows specific) security companies. Solution: Fix the holes in OS instead of offering spyware/anti-virus tools for free/money.
I don't want a signature.
The security companies will be better off forming their own knowledge pool and inviting Microsoft representatives to learn from them.
What's ours is ours and what's yours is ours, right? What a flamebait assertion, that M$ should keep the details of how they do things to themselves but that others should go out of their way to share what they manage to claw from the void. Typical.
M$'s behavior and the results are entirely predictable by this point. They want to own the market so they are withholding what others need. As in every case of M$ putting a "competitor" out of business, the Windoze market will be that much poorer when the competitors are all gone. All everyone is left with is the decidedly inferior M$ offering which will subsequently be neglected and suck more and more as time goes by. Windoze security was already a lost cause, so it won't matter that much. The spam and DoS will continue to flow as long as M$ has market share. The only people this really matters to are those about to lose their jobs.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
And if you are logged in, you can turn off sigs in your preferences. I have no clue what this thread is about as a result...
Wikipedia is your friend. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Antivirus
I don't want a signature.
Cognos employees are known as Cognomen .
Cognoscenti are people who smell like employees of Cognos.
I wash mah-self with a rag on a stick.
Offering someone protection for a fee when you're part of the danger to that person means that you're running a protection racket. For a fee, MS offers to close the holes which it leaves in its operating system. I think that you see this kind of scheme at work all over the computer industry. The pushing of upgrades of software and hardware as a fix against problems is of a similar nature.
SpyBot and AdWare are free, so why would they care if Microsoft bundled anti-spyware with windows? It's not like they're being denied revenue.
The fact is, the overwhelming majority of users don't have any anti-spyware protection, and Microsoft is tired of getting blamed for this (note that spyware doesn't generally rely on OS flaws, but on users explicitly installing malware). In order to clamp down on spyware, it's necessary for anti-spyware to be bundled, since most are not installing 3rd party anti-spyware.
-- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
If Microsoft releases the buggy, hole-ridden mess that so many are afraid of along with functional, cheap, easily obtainable antivirus tools, they're out of a job. If Microsoft were to release an OS as secure as, say, Linux, they're still out of a job.
The second options is impossible for a closed source company.
The first option, less most of the bugs, is what M$ would like you to believe is going to happen.
The usual option is to realease anything they can and then put the others out of business. Price and "free" are only the surface of the attack. The real attack comes from denying the "competitor" needed OS information and outright sabotage. Microsoft's insane complexity and bugs are a legacy of that kind of attack.
No company has a guaranteed right to profit.
M$ is a company too. Vista is the end of the road for them. Their profits and market share will implode soon after they get that buggy junk out the door when no one buys it.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Fixing it would be more effective, but less profitable.
"I really wish that Microsoft disappeared .. Then it will be Linux, MacOS, or whatever .. which will be plagued by security grief"
If it was true that you don't see such destructive security breeches on these other OSs because they are not popular, then why don't we see the same on servers running Linux/BsdUnix etc.
"Microsoft is at the top, and hence, is villified" No, Ms is villified because they produce crap product and plot the destruction of their competitors/partners.
"there is NOTHING wrong with MS making an Anti-Virus, and Anti-Spyware solution"
How about producing an OS that don't catch viruses?
"Microsoft offers their Virus Protection as a FOR PAY product"
Further proof if that were necessary, that that MS is lacks the expertise to produce a secure Operating System.
davecb5620@gmail.com