Slashdot Mirror
Concerns Over Security Software
Arthbunot Bullwinkle writes to mention a BBC article exploring concerns about the future of security software. The piece looks at trends toward 'free' security products, such as ZoneAlarm, and wonders aloud about where those products will find themselves after Windows Vista is released. From the article: "'Now maybe the good ones will actually get rid of that attack but at the same time they may drop maybe 10 or 20 other attacks onto your system.' The bottom line, according to Mr Day, is that when you download free security software you cannot be certain what you get. But completely free security software may be a thing of the past when the new version of Windows hits the shops early next year. "
How is software that one pays for inherently safer?
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
The biggest problem that I see with Vista is that everyone will be encouraged to use nearly identical software. It's why most viruses written get past Norton at least for a few days... everyone knows to test Norton and McAfee to be sure your virus works.
I've always gained a bit of security by using Mozilla rather than IE... by viewing my e-mail in plain text rather than HTML. By using Zone Alarm rather than a Norton or Microsoft product. When you have everone using one piece of security software, it's less secure because if you can infiltrate one, you can infiltrate all.
Um, I hate to defend Microsot, but unlike Internet Explorer, which had no need to be integrated into the OS as much as Microsoft claimed it was, but basic network security features are exactly the kind of thing that should be built into the OS. I hope that antivirus programs eventually become obsolete (likewise with firewalls *anywhere* except perhaps in extremely sensitive environments, but that's probably a long way off).
Now, I'm not particularly confident that Microsoft will actually manage to render third-party security software obsolete, simply because the company just isn't all that good at software development, but I'm certainly not going to rebuke them for trying.
http://outcampaign.org/
The bottom line, according to Mr Day, is that when you download free security software you cannot be certain what you get.
Mr Day is Greg Day of McAfee.
His intentions are for spreading FUD. There IS bogus spyware software and virus removal tools out there. Odd thing though is some are free and some you actually have to pay for. Having a cost does not make it legitimate at all and Mr Day is stating a criteria that unless you pay for it, chances are it may be a scam. Of course this also implies if you did pay for it, it is not a scam and that is far from the truth. Instead of breaking the FUD campaign into free and paid for, it should be split into "well known and trusted" and "not well known and trusted". Mr Day does not want it to be decided on well a known and trusted basis because to reach that status takes time and effort by a company, he wants everyone to just assume his companies software is the best solution and of course that HAS to come at a price.
Sorry vendors and computer users but these are not binary decisions and it takes some research either way. Free or not free.
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
"The bottom line, according to Mr Day, is that when you download free security software you cannot be certain what you get."
Can we not say the same for commercial software? How many people are still buying Norton Anti-virus despite it's somewhat public record because of it's brand name and price tag? What about firewall software? We've all seen plenty of reviews and comparisons showin firewall A to be better than firewall B and vice versa, but some of the best firewalls for Windows _are_ available for free (e.g. Sunbelt Kerio Personal Firewall [free version] or the rapidly developing Comodo Firewall).
Nothing guarantees that because a product has a price tag attached it is better than any other product.
How to find something reliable and trustworthy? The same way people have been doing it for years - identify knowledgable and reputable third-party reviewers, communities, and do a little research.
Artcile is obvious FUD. Instead of provide information ot the public about which free security porgrams are not full of spyware, the BBC decide to blanket all free security software as unsafe, and help these companies sell their products.
It's either bad journalism or an infomercial.
Most security software that is downloaded comes with checksums you can and should check. That way you do know what you download is what you expect.
- Tjp
I am in wallow with my inner money grubbing capitalistic pig. ... Oink!
I'll never trust McAfee after a friend of mine installed the trial version of their AV software.
On day 29 of the 30 day eval, it flagged a virus as being present on his PC. Suspicious, he set the clock back to the day before, and rebooted. No virus found. Restored the clock to the day before the eval ran out, and McAfee AV found the virus again.
Not exactly trustworthy behaviour.