Symantec Updates Cause Chaos in China

Hello Kitty writes "According to Computerworld, a signature update to Symantec's anti-virus software has knocked out thousands of Chinese PCs. Apparently the latest update for the AV component of the various Norton packages mistook two system files in the Chinese edition of Windows XP SP2 for the 'Backdoor.Haxdoor' trojan. Piracy issues may complicate recovery, since once the updates are installed Symantec says the only hope for reviving an affected system is to re-copy the affected DLLs from the Windows restore disks. Everyone has their official restore disks handy, right?"

Comments

Time for a Change

[Thumper_SVX]

Sounds to me like it's time for a change. The Chinese have already demonstrated that when something from Western corporations runs amok they are quite willing to force a change on their people. I'm not saying it's right, it's just so.

Now, this problem has actually highlighted a bigger problem; that Windows is Western software controlled by Western interests. Even the ancillary software you need to run Windows effectively (read: anti-virus) is from third parties in the West who obviously wouldn't necessarily have the desires of the Chinese government in mind. Now, at best I can see the Chinese government is going to realize that their reliance on Western anti-virus solutions may be a flawed dependency and they will write their own Chinese-specific AV solution. At worst... this might just highlight to the Chinese government how vulnerable they are to a "cyber attack", either malicious or accidental that could potentially cripple them.

Microsoft might want to start "spinning", and quick. Chinese people are well aware there are better solutions out there than Windows for an operating system. It's only a matter of time before someone in power starts talking about "Red Flag Linux" and how it's openness can help prevent problems exactly like this... then it's all over for Microsoft in that market.

Yes, I realize the pirated Windows market is huge in China as well... but it's still a massive market for Microsoft to lose because of the accidental actions of one of their "trusted third parties".

Only problem is

[Maxo-Texas]

the pirated versions of windows I ran (win2k), I had full install disks.
the oem versions (win98, winxp, winxp) I bought at best buy and other places, my only option is to wipe everything and reinstall.

So, I would be screwed on the machines where I am a legitimate paying customer, and hunky dory on the machines where I was pirating.

Re:Pity the poor choices of consumers... and pirat

[Dystopian Rebel]

What does any of this have to do with good design? Are you serious? The whole AV software market is a crutch for the lame design of Monkeysoft.

When you are using the most common OS, you will need some form of anti-virus software. I see you've been drinking the Redmond Red flavour of Kool-Aid. UNIX is a common OS and it's been around for 37 years and networked for all that time. Why is there no AV software market for UNIX? What are the two most common implementation languages for Monkeysoft viruses? Monkeysoft has been on the Internet since about 1995. How much time have Monkeysoft users lost to viruses? Whose OS is the most 'botted?

Is all this Symantec's fault for not protecting Monkeysoft better?

If you replace "common" with "most vulnerable", your statement makes sense.

If a program can be downloaded and run from the internet, it can be a virus. Sure... and if it runs with root or root-like privileges, it can do serious damage. Guess which OS lets that happen? To protect yourself, you can install AV software and dedicate one (or both) of your dual CPU cores to constantly scanning every file that is accessed so you can be "safe". A fine value proposition for your computer investment.

This is Symantec being incredibly irresponsible. Failing to find something like this in pre-update testing (or the failure to test updates) is insane and they should be required to pay for repairs. I agree that Symantec made a serious error in deploying an updated defence for the weak OS that they make money defending. But I bet they'll pay nothing, or at least as much to pirates as they do to licensed owners.

Re:Radical change imminent

[1u3hr]

This is also a common cause of famine in China: the central planners tell each region how much rice they will grow in a season, and the beauraucrats tell them that's how much rice was grown. When that fails to be the case, people starve

Yes, that did happen, during the Great Leap Forward, about 40 years ago. These days provincial governments still bullshit about economic growth statistics, but not so grievously.

And of course it's not just a communists who try to save face and walk into disaster. "Mission Accomplished!"

Re:no sympathy

[beuges]

Exactly! This is precisely why MS wanted to prevent antivirus products (amongst others) from running in kernel mode in vista in the first place. I believe Symantec was one of the most vocal opponents of this decision, even though there is no technical reason for allowing antivirus software into the kernel in the first place, as Trend Micro and others all had vista-compatible solutions that worked without requiring kernel access.

Back when that story was making news, there was a lot of commentry here on /. saying that MS shouldn't be restricting access to the kernel, but this just goes to show that the people who demand access to it often shouldn't have access to it. I know that the problem in the article relates to XPSP2 but the fact remains - Symantec shouldnt be installing kernel mode drivers in the first place.