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. "

3 of 116 comments (clear)

  1. Paid software safer? by pembo13 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  2. The biggest problem... by Dissman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  3. Pure FUD by nolife · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.