Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Windows Operating Systems Software Security IT

Microsoft's AntiSpyware Disabled by Spyware 428

Posted by CowboyNeal from the save-us-windows-update dept.
Ruke writes "A trojan has targeted Microsoft's AntiSpyware program, deleting all files within the C:\Program Files\AntiSpyware folder, as well as logging keystrokes at several online banking sites." The good news is that it's a Trojan, so one still has to bother with running an attached file.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft's AntiSpyware Disabled by Spyware More

Microsoft's AntiSpyware Disabled by Spyware

Comments Filter:

  • Its the content, not the wrapping, but.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Deekin_Scalesinger ( 755062 ) * on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:44PM (#11636397)
    The news itself might be interest, but in the realm of well written articles this will not make the list. A choice nugget from TFA:

    <<< The password stealing Troj/BankAsh-A Trojan, discovered yesterday, is a spyware. It keeps a track of user activities on the computer. It spies on you. >>>

    Er, didn't we cover the spying part two sentences ago? Is A spyware? A spyware what?

    <<< The Trojan also removes important entries of the antispyware in the registry and thus literal kills the antispyware. >>>

    Literal? Come on - this reads worse than half of the AC posts in YRO. I hate playing the grammar nazi, but this was painful to read...

  • Patch Will Be Available Soon (Score:5, Funny)

    by fembots ( 753724 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:44PM (#11636399) Homepage
    Preview here [slashdot.org]

  • Yeah (Score:5, Informative)

    by The Bungi ( 221687 ) <thebungi@gmail.com> on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:45PM (#11636407) Homepage
    The good news is that it's a Trojan, so one still has to bother with running an attached file.

    Not that that has ever prevented Slashdot from reporting things like these as "vulnerabilities".

    • Re:Yeah (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:49PM (#11636474)
      In other news, Linux systems are vulnerable to a well placed blow by a hammer.

    • it *is* vulnurability (Score:5, Insightful)

      by RelliK ( 4466 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @08:00PM (#11636561)
      The fact that you have to run as administrator to get any work done is a security hole big enough to drive a truck through. It is ridiculous that you can trash your filesystem just by double-clicking a mail attachment. *All* linux distributions I've used set up a user account for you and encourage you to use it. Mandrake, for instance, gives you a big red warning if you start KDE as root.

      Until microsoft fixes this it will be plagued by security holes. And don't give me this bullshit about usability -- Mac OS X got it right, why can't windows?
      • The last version of suse i tried set yast as the default window manager, meaning it was by default not possible to log in and check mail as root (obviously there's still kdesu or even removing the /root/.dmrc file

      • Re:it *is* vulnurability (Score:5, Informative)

        by Software ( 179033 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @08:38PM (#11636852) Journal
        It takes a little work, but you can use Windows as a non-administrator. The best resources I've found for setting this up are at Aaron Margosis's blog; see http://weblogs.asp.net/aaron_margosis/ [asp.net] and specifically http://weblogs.asp.net/aaron_margosis/archive/2004 /07/24/193721.aspx [asp.net]

        It's not as easy to use as OSX (or KDE), but it works. I use it everyday on my primary computer. I'll grant that it's not going to help most users (the ones who run every executable sent to them), but for people who want to use good security principles and still install software every once in a while, it's a good thing.

      • Re:it *is* vulnurability (Score:4, Insightful)

        by lasindi ( 770329 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @08:40PM (#11636883) Homepage
        The fact that you have to run as administrator to get any work done is a security hole big enough to drive a truck through.

        This is true, but let's face it. To say that this is a real example of how GNU/Linux is superior is kind of a cheap shot. If GNU/Linux were mainstream, what would the normal user do? Download goodies.tar.gz from your email, compile and su to install it. Tada, your system is screwed. This is what an "average," unsuspecting, Unix user would do. Buffer overflows and the like are legitimate vulnerabilities, but to blame Microsoft for a trojan being written is just not a legitimate criticism. Any operating system that lets the user install anything is "vulnerable" to trojans.

        lasindi
        • This is true, but let's face it. To say that this is a real example of how GNU/Linux is superior is kind of a cheap shot. If GNU/Linux were mainstream, what would the normal user do? Download goodies.tar.gz from your email, compile and su to install it. Tada, your system is screwed. This is what an "average," unsuspecting, Unix user would do. Buffer overflows and the like are legitimate vulnerabilities, but to blame Microsoft for a trojan being written is just not a legitimate criticism. Any operating syste

          • Re:it *is* vulnurability (Score:4, Insightful)

            by JQuick ( 411434 ) on Friday February 11, 2005 @01:10AM (#11638766)
            I will play devil's advocate.


            Bingo, the problem isn't Windows, its Windows Users.

            Really, this stance strikes me as the antithesis of the problem. It is programmers who bear the blame here. I'm not singling out Microsoft programmers (despite the large and tempting target they present). I'm talking about most people who write system software or applications for general use.

            Here on slashdot, we are predominantly geeks. We enjoy technology and learning about technology. In some cases, a large minority of us mistake our interests in these as evidence that these activities are somehow inherently important. Those who do so gain certain psychological and social pleasure from this knowledge and interest. This is part of being human. We consider ourselves special and important.

            Computers and software are marketed to and used by the general public. People, being people, think that their interests and their knowledge is important. Learning about hardware/software/security, etc. is not interesting to them, therefor the fact that they tend not to spend time doing so should come as a great surprise. Geeks tend to see this lack of interest as evidence of a problem (and at times as an affront to their own sense of self worth). This seems a rather shallow and unproductive view. Human beings focus on those things that interest them. Pleading with them to attend to things we think are important, or looking down on them for this lack of interest, is a fruitless path.

            The problem is not users. The problem is that we have created hardware and software which does not adequately match the needs of the users. Software should match the requirements of its users not require them to change their typical behaviors to meet the needs of the software.

            Some people are destructive and malicious. Well designed software takes this into account, and provides authorized users with reasonable protection from those who would try to harm them. Well designed software behaves in consistent and predictable ways so that users of varying levels of experience, knowledge or interest can benefit from its use.

            Software should be designed for the people who will use it. Most programs suck, because they are designed for a particular business goal, or designed by geeks based on their own knowledge of how they would like to use it. It is no wonder, that most software leaves the average person cold. It is arcane, inconsistent, and requires too much knowledge. Users are not stupid. They are not lacking in intelligence or ability. They are lacking in a sense of enjoyment and sufficient interest to use software the way the geeks designers intend.

            Great software takes its users interests and expectations into account.
            Great developers strive to understand users and write software which serves them.

            So, we are the problem, not the users. Blaming people for their own human nature is not the way to go here. Projecting our own failures of understanding onto the users is a misguided attempt to pass the buck.
            • Really, this stance strikes me as the antithesis of the problem. It is programmers who bear the blame here. I'm not singling out Microsoft programmers (despite the large and tempting target they present). I'm talking about most people who write system software or applications for general use.

              I agree with this as well. I am not saying that the users are at fault, what I am saying is that there is a strong statistical bias here. The Linux community does not have the slightest interest in doing what it takes

        • Yes, but shouldn't the Operating System files be PROTECTED from such trojans? i.e. setting access privileges or something?
      • How many MacOS X users just type their admin password whenever it is requested? Most of them. It's just an annoying part of running MacOS X

  • Trojan attacks MS software shocker. (Score:3, Funny)

    by BluhDeBluh ( 805090 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:45PM (#11636414)
    Yes, nobody ever expected a trojan to attack a piece of free MS software. I mean, look at Outlook. And Internet Explorer.

    And in other news - "Google" gaining marketshare with "PageRank" technology

  • Best Antispyware... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jo_ham ( 604554 ) <joham999@noSpaM.gmail.com> on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:45PM (#11636420)
    The best antispyware is buy a Mac, or install your favourite distro.

    Sorry, but there it is.

    It gets tiring fighting the broken dam, you can't hold all the water back forever.

    • Re:Best Antispyware... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by JQuick ( 411434 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @09:23PM (#11637279)
      The parent was moderated "Troll"?

      Obviously it touched a nerve for somebody.

      The bottom line is that currently spyware is only a problem on Windows. Thus, running any viable alternative to Windows is the most effective way of avoiding spyware at the moment.

      Running a GNU Linux distro, any of the BSDs, or Macos X are all viable options, and arguably the most efficient solution to the problem of spyware.

      Granted, many might find these options unsuitable for a variety of reasons. However, labeling that suggestion a Troll does not make it untrue. Wasting time and CPU to either spyware or anti-spyware software both seem objectionable. Systems which provide desired functionality, and do not require additional effort to continue functioning normally are a sensible choice for many.

  • Trojan Man? (Score:5, Funny)

    by LordPhantom ( 763327 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:46PM (#11636422)
    Am I the only one who was humming the "Trojan Man" theme song while I read this?

  • It could be worse.. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:47PM (#11636438)
    They could have taken a working product, repackage it, only to have it compromised less than a month after their re-release.

    Wait, nevermind.

  • Wait for it....wait...wait.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by WordODD ( 706788 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:47PM (#11636439)
    How long till the Slashbots come out in droves proclaiming M$ sucks and their spyware removal sucks and they should all go to hell because a trojan(more like a crappy little batch file) is able to disable their program. Nevermind the fact that with the way this program works it would be just as effective on AdAware or SpyBot...and nevermind the fact that before running this trojan the MS spyware program TELLS YOU NOT TO!!
    • I'm surprised it took this long and that it does not also target Ad-Aware / Spybot. But what downright shocks me is how a cute little troll was not added to the article and rather a calm statement that this is not in fact spyware.
    • Well, I can see you're very excited about this!

      You are completely right, though. I'm sick of reading all the negative reviews of AntiSpyware compared to all the others. Hello? Whoever's writing these reviews? It doesn't matter if it doesn't "find" a piece of spyware. It *prevents* spyware from ever installing in the first place. Right now, it has 59 Win32 system hooks installed on my computer, and believe me, nothing is getting past. I have it pop up twice a day just to warn me when I try to run my DOS ga
      • I have it installed and it has caught *nothing* since being installed... luckily AVG is up to scratch.

        I routinely run .bat files and it has never fired on one of those... why would it? Whoever heard of a .bat virus?
        • You don't have the system hooks turned on.And, yes, a batch file can destroy your computer. Think "format /s c:" here.

          Everybody seems to miss this:

          1) Open AntiSpyware's main window
          2) Click on "real time protection"
          3) Then click on each of the 3 agents...Internet (9 checkpoints), System (25 checkpoints), and Application (25 checkpoints)
          4) Enable *all* of the checkpoints...they are Win32 system hooks...
          5) Try installing some spyware. ; ) It won't work.

          Also, don't fool yourself, antivirus software do

    • Re:Wait for it....wait...wait.... (Score:4, Funny)

      by Elwood P Dowd ( 16933 ) <judgmentalist@gmail.com> on Thursday February 10, 2005 @08:22PM (#11636728) Journal
      How long till the Slashbots come out in droves proclaiming M$ sucks and their spyware removal sucks and they should all go to hell because a trojan(more like a crappy little batch file) is able to disable their program.
      Well, it's been 40 minutes so far, and still no sign. How about you shut the fuck up?
    • Actually, I've found the MS AntiSpyware software has been quite good. I first tried it on a machine where Adaware and Spybot had already been run (with the newest defs available), the MS one still found 13 instances (some 67 files/keys) of known spyware AND was able to remove them. Adaware and Spybot just don't seem to cut it anymore.

  • And in other news (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cr0y ( 670718 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:47PM (#11636443) Homepage
    Viruses shut down norton antivirus.

    I mean really, who didn't see this coming?

    • Re:And in other news (Score:5, Informative)

      by Tuxedo Jack ( 648130 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:50PM (#11636479) Homepage
      Believe it or not, someone's actually documented this.

      Norton 2005 gets pimpslapped by a .vbs file WITH SCRIPT BLOCKING ON. [s6n.com]

      Warning: Link is to .swf file. Flash player required.

    • Re:And in other news (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Nik13 ( 837926 )
      And they tend to do other nasty things like prevent running regedit and other system tools/AV, process hiding, using filenames that look like system processes, and a whole host of nasty tricks.

      It wouldn't be surprising if they started attacting other things like norton's expiry dates/licenses as well, or plain corrupting some registry entries necessary for apps to run. (How long before they replace legit windows keys with the FCKGW ones so people can't get updates anymore?) I won't be surprised either w
    • Hell. Spyware deletes Adaware if you want a precedent. There's a CWS varient that will close ANY antispyware app for months now. The most interesting one I've seen is one that host blackholes adaware to a site that downloads outdated ad-aware defs and redirects most of the popular download locations to one of the billion or so "The most wonderful spam me to death Search site in the world!!!" site.

      A lot of spyware out there disables the anti-spyware that exists either by deleting it or not allowing it to up

  • And it's a sure bet... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Tuxedo Jack ( 648130 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:47PM (#11636447) Homepage
    That by the end of this week CoolWebSearch "affiliates" will be bundling it with their software to ensure that they remain undetected (except by HijackThis, Ad-Aware, and Spybot).

  • Blocker blocker blocker... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Indy Media Watch ( 823624 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:50PM (#11636481) Homepage
    None of this is a surprise and a series of new malware tools attempt to disable various protective services.

    For example, deleting the MSI Installer Service such that when you try to install something like SpySweeper the installer won't work properly.

    Alternatively, killing Antivirus or Personal Firewall processes or placing known good-guy websites in the restricted zone of Internet Explorer.

    The 'solution' IMHO is to have multiple layers of defence and to some extent, perhaps to use less popular tools (i.e. not McAfee and Norton) which won't be on the malware's 'hitlist'.

    I know security through obscurity isn't a solution, but in this case, security through not being one of the masses may be.

    I say this having spent nearly a whole day trying to remove Spyware from a friend's laptop.

    • "The 'solution' IMHO is to have multiple layers of defence and to some extent, perhaps to use less popular tools (i.e. not McAfee and Norton) which won't be on the malware's 'hitlist'."



      Why not have true user level file permissions and make it 100% impossible to delete applications without giving a password? Works for the Unix world. Works on this Mac I'm typing from. It still doesn't work for Windows? That's sad.

      • It still doesn't work for Windows? That's sad.

        True file permissions do exist, but unfortunately most users run as Administrator, thus negating those permissions. That's the sad part :( But if you're a competent user, you can help protect yourself by running as a regular user account. You don't run as root all the time on Linux, and similarly on Windows, don't run as Administrator all the time.

        You can also get a Mac like the parent poster has.

  • Beta version (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Indy Media Watch ( 823624 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:53PM (#11636505) Homepage
    From the article: "Microsoft Antispyware is still in its Beta version (experimental version).

    It's a bit early to point the finger.

    • Re:Beta version (Score:5, Insightful)

      by irokitt ( 663593 ) <archimandrites-iaur@@@yahoo...com> on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:58PM (#11636537)
      Also worth noting, how many viruses/trojans/whatever have started by disabling Norton, or McAfee, or Network Associates? High profile anti-virus programs get targeted for removal all the time. So this isn't just Microsoft's bag.

    • Beta Blame (Score:2, Insightful)

      by ackthpt ( 218170 ) *
      From the article: "Microsoft Antispyware is still in its Beta version (experimental version).

      It's a bit early to point the finger.

      What? Wait until tomorrow? This isn't a Spyware problem, it's a virus scanning problem for your incoming mail.

  • Do you work using restricted accounts (Score:5, Insightful)

    by McDutchie ( 151611 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:55PM (#11636512) Homepage
    All the more reason to do all your real work under a user account with limited privileges and definitely never to allow others who use your computer to run with administrative privileges. Since nothing can touch C:\Program Files from a regular user account, the trojan would be ineffectual.

    For all its security efforts, Microsoft continues to let users run as administrator by default, which is downright irresponsible. I just spent an evening cleaning an acquaintance's computer of a persistent, multiple spyware infection because of this policy of Microsoft. Needless to say I created separate restricted user accounts for all members in the household, but the Microsoft installer should have done this from the beginning! You cannot expect regular users to do anything except go with the default.

    I also installed Firefox, and set all of the Internet Exploder security settings on "High" on all accounts except the administrator one (so that Windows Update can be run).

    • The problem here is that when a user tries to install something, like a game, or maybe TurboTax, they have problems. If they can't figure out how to keep their computer clean, they're not going to understand why they need to be restricted on their own personal system. And they definitely won't be able to understand how to log in as admin, install, set permissions on use, log out and then log back in as the regular user.

      It's just too inconvenient for the neurotypical user.
      • yes, the system you describe is inconvenient, but what about the Mac OS X method?

        -can have admin prviledges on your regular account but require admin password enter for important actions
        -option to lock system settings via a padlock icon (to require password next time)

        the best of both worlds.
    • The problem is that lots of software REQUIRES Administrator simply to function properly. You can argue that one should simply ditch that software, but unfortunately its not always that easy.

      Case in point: Visual Studio .NET 2003. Debugging managed code in a Web Application/Web Service, or a Windows Service pretty much requires Administrator access.
      • Well for web service not exactly. IF you configre the web service you want to debug to run under your credentials(ie app pool as you) you do not need Admin acces. (remote debugging still does though). I have never had to debug a service, so i do not know about that.
      • Why should a limited user be able to attach to a system process and debug it?

        You can develop with VS.NET2003 as a limited account just fine. The case you mention is special, and you either need to run the webserver's application pool as your identity to debug, or run VS.NET2003 as Administrator. Not a huge deal, just do 'runas...' and start VS.NET as Administrator.

        No reason to abandon running as a Limited Account.
    • "All the more reason to do all your real work under a user account with limited privileges and definitely never to allow others who use your computer to run with administrative privileges. Since nothing can touch C:\Program Files from a regular user account, the trojan would be ineffectual."

      You're forgetting one major problem. Let's do a hypothetical situation here to help you understand. Let's pretend that you've managed to get the average Windows user to use a regular user account and only user the adm

  • Very insightful my friends! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by nerd256 ( 794968 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:58PM (#11636534) Homepage
    "you have to consciously or unconsciously run the EXE to install the server side on your computer."

    This is opposed to your computer plugging itself in, tapping into the internet, downloading and running itself?

    Seriously, every peice of malware one gets is result of human action or inaction. If one were more conciencious of the threat, they would take necessary precautions. ( install Firefox/Linux )

    I also think this title tries to make a funny or ironic statement at the expense of accuracy. A Trojan is not what I consider spyware, or, something that sneaks it way in via website, javascript, etc... A trojan targets just teh fools.
    • "This is opposed to your computer plugging itself in, tapping into the internet, downloading and running itself?"

      Yes, it is. Ever tried to install Windows while on a network, especially while directly connected to the internet via a broadband line of some type? You'll get your computer owned before you can install patches from Windows Update.
  • You have to be running as Administrator for it to affect your system. It works by writing files to the system directory, deleting the MSAS install directory, and writing keys to HKLM, among other things. All of these are blocked if you are not administrator.

  • Download? (Score:3, Funny)

    by KinkifyTheNation ( 823618 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @08:04PM (#11636596) Journal
    Anyone have a link where I can download this at?
  • So, someone developer an application that deletes some files and installs a keylogger. Whoop-de-doo... :-S

  • Talk about misleading (Score:2, Informative)

    by Fringex ( 711655 )
    It isn't spyware it is a Trojan. Spyware are programs either secretly installed by a base program to monitor your habits of browsing and usage or installed but mildly covered. This is a Trojan intent on stealing banking passwords and such. Two completely different things.

  • Not a problem.... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by MBraynard ( 653724 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @08:18PM (#11636704) Journal
    I imagine if the OS could prevent you from writing a program that deleted files in a directory and enabled a keystroke logger, you clowns would whine that MS is limiting your ability to use their OS.

    You *should* be able to install such a program on your computer. You *should* also be smart enough to know what you decide to put on your machine.

  • Thank you Symantec (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Supp0rtLinux ( 594509 ) <Supp0rtLinux@yahoo.com> on Thursday February 10, 2005 @08:18PM (#11636705)
    So thanks to today's news that Symantec programs may execute programs that should be flagged, one must now only use a solid product like Symantec Anti-Virus to load up software to remove Microsoft's anti-spyware software. Beautiful. Perhaps I should save everyone the time and hassle and just make a website with a malformed jpg or gif that loads an ActiveX script to then download the trojan and thus get it all done in one shot. Vulnerability after vulnerability after vulnerability. Perhaps this guy [nccomp.com] wasn't so far off.

    Of course, I can't help but point out the obvious: rumors keep abounding that M$ will charge for its anti-spyware and anti-virus softwares. So let me see if I'm clear on this... they write shitty code that I'm forced to use (since the apps I need only run on Win32), and then I have to pay again for software to keep people from exploiting the software that was shitty to begin with. Isn't that a bit like selling you a piece of shit car, then charging you to use your warranty when the clutch fails on day #2 of ownership? You know, many of us thought that the day would come that M$ would charge for access to WindowsUpdate. Is there anything they won't charge for? Don't they ever say "we fucked up... here's a freebie on us"? Or "you already paid $300 for our OS... here's a way to secure it for free".
  • We've seen viri/trojans that delete antispyware before. All the more reason to install software somewhere other than the default location, and to run more than one antispyware/antivirus solution.

    Also, when software starts disappearing from your computer you might want to look into it.

  • C:\Program Files\... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by YrWrstNtmr ( 564987 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @08:22PM (#11636733)
    This is one of the main faults (along with running as Administrator) in the MS world. The default location is easy to target, and everyone's PC is set up the same. C:\Program Files\... can be hardcoded into the malware to delete or otherwise cripple the target application.

    Install elsewhere. I've found very, very few applications will not accept another partition to install to.

    • OK. That's all and good, but what if a trojan/virus scans the REGISTRY? Even if you install said software to C:\usr\local\, it is still going to find it.

      MS needs to get rid of the damn registry first. Then we can start talking about other methods. Although I will say that it is a start. I myself, usually install in subdirectories outside C:\Program Files\ like C:\Games, C:\apps, C:\pr0n, etc..

      Also, I neat trick that I used to do with win9x PCs is instead of using C:\WINDOWS for windows-centric files

  • Anyone else... (Score:4, Funny)

    by jpellino ( 202698 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @08:29PM (#11636793)
    ... thinking of Tim holding Gareth's stapler out the window when they heard this?

  • Ah well (Score:3, Funny)

    by nahnkari ( 732424 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @08:32PM (#11636808)
    In another news, the CIA was considering using Micro$oft Antispyware to keep out North Korean spies.

    Alas!
  • "Domination of your PC II: Revenge of the Spyware"

  • If (Not oMicrosoft.bHasClueStick) Then ... (Score:4, Funny)

    by kiddailey ( 165202 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @10:51PM (#11637863) Homepage

    Honestly, did anyone NOT see this coming?

    I jokingly predicted this exact situation in a post when they first released the beta of the app (though admittedly I thought it'd take a little bit longer before it was actually in the wild). Rest assured that it is only a matter of time before you see this in a non-trojan form that is automatically installed via an IE exploit delivered by some ad-serving company.

    Microsoft's move of buying up and releasing an anti-malware application of their own is IMO nothing more than an attempt to improve public perception of their so-called efforts towards improving Windows security.

    Amusingly enough, I believe it to also be an example of how much they simply don't get it and/or don't care -- the insecurity of the underlying OS is the direct cause of the probem, not the spyware.

    No amount of anti-malware software targeting the effects (automatically installed spyware) of the problem (insecure OS/Web Browser) will have any positive impact because it's the problem itself that allows the effects to continue... and have enough power to take the anti-malware software and just turn it off.

  • That didn't take long. (Score:4, Funny)

    by big-giant-head ( 148077 ) on Friday February 11, 2005 @12:52AM (#11638648)
    M$ when you want software really bad, we have really bad software.

  • Nonsense.. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by PurpleXanathar ( 800369 ) on Friday February 11, 2005 @04:20AM (#11639615)
    1) If Windows had protected the antispyware program in some special way, we were now all complaining about antispyware being considered "special" by the OS and thus being in unfair competition with other spyware programs.

    2) On any Unix machine you have to be root to install most of the software (you usually have to be root before rpm or make install) : a simple trojan relying on *stupid* user behaviour can be written for any platform and this is not a security problem of the platform, is a security problem of the user's brain.

    3) From 2, even if the default user was not administrator, most people would simply try to install this new porn-lemmings game they received and they would "run as" it (just like you su - make install on linux).

    4) It's not even only a problem in the user brain. I wonder how much would it take to discover 5 malicious lines inserted in some big open source project. This *is* a possible evet, it could be an angry sourceforge employer, a security hole somewhere, a

    5) It seems to me whatever the choice of MS is in any particular matter, there is always someone who takes it to bash it down. When the fact is ridiculous like in this example, this kind of behaviour is detrimental to the whole community. Do you live to make Linux great ? Than use your time to make it the perfect OS, not to make Windows appear the worst OS ever - 90% of users have chosen it as the best product for them and they will not change their mind because you are bashing it down, they will change their mind when they'll see something better *for them*. ..Go and flame me now.

Slashdot Top Deals

Software production is assumed to be a line function, but it is run like a staff function. -- Paul Licker

Close