Microsoft Beta Includes Built-in Virus Scanner 867
Ethereal writes "InternetNews.com reports that Microsoft has begun beta-testing a built-in virus scanner for its Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2) that will be included in the final product in mid-2004. The tool is among the operating system enhancements the Redmond, Wash., company is developing as part of its Security Center initiative to rebuff viruses, worms, trojans and crackers. Microsoft will also provide free online training to help developers make the most of SP2's security features, Chairman Bill Gates said at today's RSA Security conference. It's the first time the company has offered training with a Windows service pack release."
Oh boy (Score:5, Interesting)
Good bye Norton and Mcaffee? (Score:5, Interesting)
Anti-Trust? (Score:5, Interesting)
When are they going to learn. (Score:3, Interesting)
Monopoly considerations aside... (Score:3, Interesting)
Ms did this before (Score:5, Interesting)
Like that will work... (Score:2, Interesting)
The more important question..... (Score:5, Interesting)
Will we have the choice to turn theirs off?
I mean, Microsoft is so lax with their security updates, I am not sure if they would create a false sense of security. Also, what if Microsoft detects illegal software? Is this a virus? Will we retain control? Is this a premonition of the TCPA?
OEM bundles... (Score:4, Interesting)
M$ Anti-virus (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:serious shit for mcafee, norton, zonealarm, etc (Score:4, Interesting)
Oh, you are being serious. A company does something to make it's customers happy, and you want government gangsters to split them up because they put someone else out of business? As a consumer, what entitles TrendMicro to my $$$ when I would rather give it to MS (or not give it - service packs are free.
Get a clue. Just because you can write code doesn't mean you understand economics [capitalism.org].
Re:serious shit for mcafee, norton, zonealarm, etc (Score:5, Interesting)
And splitting up MS wouldn't have done jack squat about this. The OS division would have happilly put in virus and firewall protection and you know why? BECAUSE THAT KIND OF STUFF BELONGS IN THE OS! (WoW). Shoot, we can be grateful they didn't split MS up because then the OS division would be all over the place and wouldn't have to worry about bogus (don't let them improve the product!) BS like this.
Wow (Score:5, Interesting)
Antivirus software is better served at the router (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:serious shit for mcafee, norton, zonealarm, etc (Score:2, Interesting)
They have to realize that they are a software company. All of these companies have had a jump on these technologies for a long time. If they are to succeed, their product will simply have to be better than what is included offered at a valuable price to the consumer.
Now, the software business is no different than anything else. In order to reduce risk, you have to diverisfy. If your soul business is personal/firewall and antivirus you will know that you are in a highly competative market(high risk).
If you expect to run a business you will have to design your operations to be able to overcome industry trends or you will fail. There is no sense to cry, its just logical.
Its like a programmer concentrating on 1 language. Sure its great if you know the one language, but when companies don't wanna spend money on developping in that language any more what are you going to do?
Eggs in one basket? Please think.
Re:so... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Ms did this before (Score:2, Interesting)
Those that have heard any of the circa '95 M$ talks to users groups should be able to confirm this...
Re:Oh boy (Score:5, Interesting)
MSDOS 6 had a virus scanner and it was such a pointless, easily circumventable, obsolete, watered down piece of shit that anyone wanting a real scanner had to pay for a real product anyway.
And of course because MSDOS shipped with a broken virus scanner, it meant users got a false sense of security and plenty more viruses did the rounds despite of it.
So while it might seem that shipping a scanner is a good idea for security, in practice it will probably make the situation even worse than it is now.
Re:serious shit for mcafee, norton, zonealarm, etc (Score:5, Interesting)
My estimate is that 80% or more of the software sold for the Windows platform is 'compensatory': it's stuff you wouldn't dream of having if Windows were as adequate as it should be.
Virus scanners, personal firewalls, trojan eliminators, anti-hacker tools - we're always back to square one: Microsoft let the demons in to start with. As Bill Joy so eloquently put it:
They took systems designed for isolated desktop systems and put them on the net without thinking about evildoers.
Apple Macs come with a built-in firewall, and I don't see anybody complaining over there. They also come with a built-in mail filter, and the same thing applies: no one is complaining. In fact, it all makes good sense.
Your Windows 'cottage industries' are never never never going to enlighten their clients anyway. They're never going to really care for them, and tell them the truth, that the easiest way out of this slaughter that continues every day is to ditch the Microsoft ship. No, they want you to keep using Windows; they want you to keep getting the shit kicked out of you; if you migrated to Unix, they'd be penniless.
The ultimate irony of course is that Microsoft themselves are now mucking with 'compensatory' software - instead of fixing the holes that make such gems necessary in the first place (something they're most likely incapable of doing anyway).
No solutions; just observations. The world goes round.
Burning the MS Bandwagon... All aboard! (Score:3, Interesting)
Shut your gob for once. Please.
*Not all open-sourcers, but you know who you are. You probably just modded me down, infact.
Monoculture (Score:2, Interesting)
Now let's make the assumption that the built-in virus scanner becomes the default in over 95% of Windows installations.
Who is going to write a virus that will be automatically removed at the very moment the built in virus scanner has updated its definitions?
That's right, nobody. That's why every new Windows virus will simply disable the market's only virus scanner (or its auto-update facility) upon infection and the user will be under a false sense of security even though his/her system is infected.
Naturally the virus cannot infect computers with updated definitions, but the virus will always have some time to spread in the wild before new definitions are released. If each infection equals one machine with disabled virus protection (and a clueless user who doesn't know how or feel the need to re-enable it), it's not much better a situation than the one we have now.
Re:I can see it now.. (Score:1, Interesting)
All anti-trust lawsuits aside... (Score:5, Interesting)
-
Apple has been doing it for years. (Score:3, Interesting)
Bundling is a interesting issue. There really are legitimate reasons why it is better to provide one integrated package, but from a market point of view it just reaks of anti-competitive behavior. Which is another reason why open source software is so interesting in the grand scheme of things - because an open source operating environment (OS + stuff) could have all the benifits of bundling, with none of the detriments of a monopoly.
Stripped Versions of Tools - no harm (Score:5, Interesting)
On the other hand remember Norton Commander? Total Commander has killed it.
Trust me...(fox watching chickens) (Score:2, Interesting)
the bugs to decide which ones are important enough
to look for....(thinking)...."inforrmation security
best practices"...."seperation of roles".....nahh.
---eludom
Re:Oh boy (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Riiiight (Score:2, Interesting)
I know parent are kidding (or at least, exagereting), but if MS-AntiVirus(c) existed now, sure it could detect the win2000-source.zip "virus" and call home or delete it.
Yea thats right, use a screwdriver for nails! (Score:3, Interesting)
I am stunned by how incredibly good salesmen they are and at the same time such loosers come to technology.
Re:Oh boy (Score:5, Interesting)
You think that it won't be worth it for Microsoft to provide AV service for free? I'll bet it will. All the people pirating Windows will be lacking AV service then...at some point, Microsft is bound to start blocking Windows Update service to pirated copies of Windows.
Re:I love the smell of Antitrust Lawsuits in the m (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Virus scanners handy on Linux too (Score:3, Interesting)
You still need AV though as there are some that package themselves in
Rethinking Closed Source Business (Score:2, Interesting)
It's a win-win situation for everybody. These companies still have potential to gain because well, they are still selling their software. Microsoft gains because of the economic law of comparative advantage. Consumers gain because various companies will be competing to get that liscence with Microsoft. Of course, if say a power user isn't satisfied with the basic firewall or AV software that Microsoft will liscence, they are still free to purchase from other companies which will surely be there to cater to such niche groups.
Doubtful of significance (Score:3, Interesting)
I really don't believe this will be a big deal. Most likely it'll just be a very basic virus scanner. The people who bought commercial virus scanners will keep doing so for a fuller product.
I don't see Microsoft pumping too much effort in to their virus scanner, as just having one will probably be good enough to make most people feel fuzzy. I have a hard time imagining another Netscape-like situation, and I'll tell you why.
Microsoft went all out with IE, not because they simply felt a browser should be included with windows, but because they were threatened. Netscape (and just the web in general) was turning out to be a whole new platform. Interesting technologies like Java were starting to make it clear that the web could be used to make platform-agnostic apps.
You really have to credit Microsoft with having the foresight to notice this was a threat, cause it was. However, the threat was really just that it would have leveled the playing field, which they obviously don't want.
So back to my point, virus scanning is just virus scanning. It doesn't really keep people locked in to a platform other than comparing to other OSes might be favorable. For example, "OS A has virus scanning builtin, while OS B does not." That is why I can't imagine them investing too much money in it or getting in to a competition with a current virus scanner.
I agree... (Score:2, Interesting)
We bitch about lack of security then bitch when they take steps in the right direction. I think the AV industry can always make a profit with "added value" applications. There's no way MS can provide the same level of support.
-precog
Forced upgrades? (Score:3, Interesting)
I just had a scary thought. Remember a while back when Microsoft was talking about how they want the ability to force users to apply patches to their systems remotely? They said this after another round of worms exploiting well-known vulnerabilities. Remember the outcry after they said that? I took a cursory look at the older articles on /. and didn't find the one I'm referring to but I know it's there.
Re:Oh boy (Score:3, Interesting)
I still maintain a XP boot for my games that don't work under winex, so I like this.
Re:I love the smell of Antitrust Lawsuits in the m (Score:2, Interesting)
a resounding thank you from the virus writers (Score:2, Interesting)
once Windows AV has taken the market share and driven out the competition, this tedious job of getting around virus protection will become much easier.
knock out Windows AV
infect computer
Like many posters above... (Score:2, Interesting)
Bundling the OS with antivirus software seems like a good idea, but it also has certain long-term implications that aren't so great. What happens when support for legacy OS's with built-in virus protection? Will older systems continue to be honeypots, festering with every new incarnation of worm and trojan simply because the sale of that OS isn't profitable anymore?
I also don't see why MS keeps trying to value-add their products by piling on support for add-ons (MSN, Media Player Updates, IE Updates)rather than more robust features and better security. It is nice to have a fully-usable OS right out of the box, but it sucks to be force-fed an entire OS upgrade simply because MS finds it no longer feasable to support an older OS plus all of its bugs/exploits and cruft.
IMO, MS needs to dump the extras, plug the third party guys that make Windows marketable in the first place and beef up the operating system itself in terms of security, speed and usefulness.
Also an API for standard OS-program hooks (anti-virus software, browsers, email, etc) would go a long way to make things better for everyone, not to mention avoid hemmoraging cash in the form of legal fees.
Re:serious shit for mcafee, norton, zonealarm, etc (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh, and the drug companies love incurable diseases, since that gives them a customer for life. There is more money to be made in palliative measures then cures, so that's where they focus their research. If doctors and hospitals really valued our health so much, wouldn't they focus more on preventing disease, rather then waiting for patients to get sick? I never claimed anti-virus companies were actively writing new viruses. I just said that they have a vested interest in not preventing them from being written. Just as firewall vendor's stock doubles whenever a new worm comes out. Police and firemen get paid the same whether or not they prevent crime and fires. The more viruses there are, the more the stock of the anti-virus companies goes up... that means the officers of the AV companies have a fiduciary responsibility in their being new viruses.
Re:Not so fast (Score:3, Interesting)
Even then it's hardly fair. MS has access to the Windows source code and can fix bugs (<Tinfoil Hat>or introduce them</Tinfoil Hat>) that causes problems with it's AV software (or Office, or IE, or Media Player, bah bah bah).
Apple (iTunes), Symantec (Norton's AV), Corel (Wordperfect), Real (RealOne Player), AOL/Yahoo (IM clients), AOL (Netscape) and Intuit (Quicken) don't have this luxury. Yet they all have to compete with Microsoft products -- Media Player, Office, Windows messenger, Internet Explorer and Money.
Capitalist systems are based on being able to compete with your competitor on fair terms. The current status quo is many things but fair is not one of them.