Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Google The Internet Security Businesses IT

Google Buys Anti-Malware Security Startup 125

J Tomas writes "Google has quietly made its first anti-malware acquisition, snapping up GreenBorder Technologies, a venture-backed company that sells browser virtualization security software. GreenBorder's software creates a DMZ (demilitarized zone) between the Windows desktop and programs downloaded from Web pages or opened from e-mail messages in Microsoft Outlook. The early speculation is that Google will add the sandbox technology to the Google Toolbar or release a rebranded version as a standalone download."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Buys Anti-Malware Security Startup

Comments Filter:
  • Malevolence (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Evil or not evil? Hmm...
  • Thanks... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @11:06AM (#19310131)

    GreenBorder's software creates a DMZ (demilitarized zone) between the Windows desktop and programs downloaded from Web pages or opened from e-mail messages in Microsoft Outlook.

    Dear GreenBorder,

    Thank you for doing work we should have done years ago.
    Unfortunately this level of work requires considerable resources
    which would drive down our bottom line and
    shareholder confidence.

    William Gates III
    Microsoft Corporation

    • Since when do slashdoters need to be informed that DMZ is short for "demilitarized zone".
      • by empaler ( 130732 )

        Posted by Zonk on 2007-05-29 18:01 CET
        Well...
        • Well... what? Seriously? "troll", comeon'. I just thought it interesting that on slashdot, of all places, the author thought it nessesary to inform the readers . . . on slashdot . . . that DMZ is short for demilitarized zone. And "newb" isn't a deragatory term, it simply means the person is new (in this case 'networking') to a subject and simple skills/knowledge aren't there yet. I was a newb once at all of this, and so were you.
          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            by empaler ( 130732 )
            Well, I bet we've all read /. summaries with abbreviations that we've wondered about. The summary just courteously saved those people a lookup, even if just to brush up.
          • Among intelligent and educated people it is widely understood that good writing style calls for the inclusion of explicit definitions for acronyms used. It's easy and helpful.

            Oh, and I find it necessary (not "nessesary") to say - only a newb would try to BS us by saying that the term 'newb' is not derogatory (not "deragatory"). Maybe that lie works with your intellectual peers but we know better. So does Wikipedia, the Urban Dictionary and many other sources.

            Back under your bridge, newb.
  • by LiquidCoooled ( 634315 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @11:08AM (#19310163) Homepage Journal
    Harry Kim: "Borg Attack!"
    Janeway: "Raise shields"
    Paris: "Its no good, they have adapted, they are firing sunloungers"
  • by athloi ( 1075845 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @11:08AM (#19310167) Homepage Journal

    ...proving that corporations aren't evil, but trying to stay on top when you're top dog might corrupt absolutely. This would not have happened in "Lord of the Rings."

    I refuse to demonize corporations, because I know that people run them and do the best they can with an often paradoxical set of goals. I remember when one boss I worked for sold his company to a larger technological concern, and suddenly all the rules changed. Image became more important than reality. We did everything we could to inflate figures. And the guy who once spent hours thinking about "the next cool thing we'd all like to use" stayed up late looking over spreadsheets, metrics, indicators and other spaced-out crap that has no relevance to reality.

    We might call this time "the devirginization of Google," as they are inducted to the weird malevolent world of corporate politics as the top dog in the Darwinian internet struggle for virtual world domination.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by palewook ( 1101845 )
      or the new yahoo. in a few years we'll be using something else for a search engine. google is buying so much crap and utilizing so little of it. example: google buys dodgeball and leaves it for dead, along comes twitter. so now google buying doubleclick then buys an anti malware company. go figure. theres a few kids in school at the moment that will be millionaires in a few years after they start a new search engine that doesnt have bloat and doesnt sell listing results. google gets to join yahoo in the a
    • I can't wait for the "All-Seeing Eye" Google toolbar for Firefox!
    • by Paulrothrock ( 685079 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @01:55PM (#19312261) Homepage Journal

      Corporations aren't evil in the same way that sharks aren't evil. They're just doing what comes naturally. Sharks eat furry little sea lions; corporations make money. If either stopped doing what came naturally, they'd die.

      The key is to harness the corporation in such a way that it improves the lives of individuals without running roughshod over society. And that is the point of regulation. Well, that *should be* the point of regulation.

  • by rs232 ( 849320 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @11:10AM (#19310201)
    When did Linux steal this innovative technology and rename it chroot [onlamp.com].
  • by xxxJonBoyxxx ( 565205 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @11:12AM (#19310227)

    GreenBorder's software creates a DMZ (demilitarized zone) between the Windows desktop and programs downloaded from Web pages or opened from e-mail messages in Microsoft Outlook. The early speculation is that Google will add the sandbox technology to the Google Toolbar or release a rebranded version as a standalone download.


    So...is it like the plain old Java sandbox?

    "But in my tests, some minor spyware modifications, such as desktop shortcuts and new menus, did make it to the underlying host. GreenBorder says this is because the malware mimicked a normal user's modifications too closely, as compared with most malware's programmatic accesses. Still, the fact that malware can modify the host desktop at all means there are other potential weaknesses." --http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/03/18/12TCgr eenborder_1.html


    Hmmm...I guess not. GreenBorder's "sandbox" appears to have some pretty big holes.
    • by rs232 ( 849320 )
      I thought Vista had User Account Control (formerly known as LUA) and Internet Explorer ran in Protected Mode, so why do you need this again?

      How about running the whole OS in virtualization mode, that gets flushed at each boot.
      • by misleb ( 129952 )

        How about running the whole OS in virtualization mode, that gets flushed at each boot.


        Wouldn't that suck.

        For fuck's sake, just stop using Windows. This is ridiculous. I can't believe things are getting to the point where people start to seriously consider what is essentially a fresh install of the OS at every boot.

        -matthew
        • by rs232 ( 849320 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @12:20PM (#19311123)
          Wouldn't that suck .. For fuck's sake, just stop using Windows

          Well yea, but the average Windows wouldn't notice. And the average non technical user flies in to a technological panic when confronted with anything new. For instance a writer who is still on Wordperfect on Windows 98. She copies and pastes into her email prog to send, otherwise her clients can't read the doc .. :)

          Did I mention the one who has msWord set at 75% zoom and the fonts at 20, as she never learned to adjust the font size. At print out she selects 'reduce by 60%' ..

          • by misleb ( 129952 )

            Wouldn't that suck .. For fuck's sake, just stop using Windows

            Well yea, but the average Windows wouldn't notice.


            They wouldn't notice that all their documents the apps and they installed are gone? Do you think the "average WIndows user" is an Alzheimer's sufferer or something?

            -matthew
            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              They wouldn't notice that all their documents the apps and they installed are gone? Do you think the "average WIndows user" is an Alzheimer's sufferer or something?

              I do run Windows in a VM and do revert to a clean version once a day. Windows has read/write access to a version controlled directory for storing data, but it cannot delete the history thereof.

              • by misleb ( 129952 )
                So what does it take to install applications and have them around when you "revert?" Sounds like a huge, unnecessary pain the ass to me. The question becomes: "Is it worth it?" I find using Windows annoying enough WITHOUT the hoops you need to jump through to keep it clean.

                -matthew
                • So what does it take to install applications and have them around when you "revert?" Sounds like a huge, unnecessary pain the ass to me.

                  If I want a new application I install it and save a new VM image, then make that my default. It only takes a minute or so more than it normally would. There could be an issue if I was compromised by malware after I started the session but before I installed the new app, but I generally will restart the session from a know good copy before I install anything.

                  Sounds like a huge, unnecessary pain the ass to me.

                  Security is not my primary motivation. I'm running Windows on top of OS X. I only use Windows for a handful of applications, mostly for compatibili

                  • by misleb ( 129952 )

                    Security is not my primary motivation. I'm running Windows on top of OS X. I only use Windows for a handful of applications, mostly for compatibility testing and for one old, irreplaceable specialty app.


                    So basically your situation is relatively unique and has very little relevance to regular Windows users. But thanks for sharing.

                    -matthew
                    • So basically your situation is relatively unique and has very little relevance to regular Windows users. But thanks for sharing.

                      Anyone looking to run Windows securely is a huge exception. People with a clue as to how to go about it are even rarer. Running the entire OS in a VM is one way, probably one of the very few ways a normal or slightly above average user could do it and still have all the functionality they expect. It is quite a bit better than simply "don't run Windows" as that is not a viable option for a great many of us.

                    • by misleb ( 129952 )

                      Anyone looking to run Windows securely is a huge exception. People with a clue as to how to go about it are even rarer. Running the entire OS in a VM is one way, probably one of the very few ways a normal or slightly above average user could do it and still have all the functionality they expect.

                      Not all the functionality. I presume you're using Parallels on a Mac for your VM. And in my experience the video acceleration is pretty poor. Not suitable for games.

                      It is quite a bit better than simply "don't run

                    • Not all the functionality. I presume you're using Parallels on a Mac for your VM. And in my experience the video acceleration is pretty poor. Not suitable for games.

                      It is rue enough that neither of the major players (Parallels and VMWare) have the video acceleration working in their current releases, although both claim it as "coming soon."

                      How about "don't run Windows as your primary OS" then? It is definitely a lot easier to keep a system clean if it isn't your primary desktop even without maintaining a "clean" VM. I mean if you're only running Windows/Parallels for IE to access your Bank and some obscure, but irreplacable Win32 app, then there really isn't much room for infection no matter what you do. Especially since Parallels puts your VM behind NAT by default.

                      Being behind a NAT does not protect you from Web-based exploits, nor from all of the current crop of automated worms that attack services you may be running. If you're using a VM already, I consider restarting from a clean image to be pretty low hanging fruit when it comes to security.

                • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

                  by Some_Llama ( 763766 )
                  "WITHOUT the hoops you need to jump through to keep it clean."

                  Why is it so hard to keep your windows box clean? I run XP semi updated (every so often i check for updates, not regularly) and don't have "MASSIVE" problems that i hear people like you complaining about all the time...

                  Maybe it is because i am careful? I use firefox (because i prefer it over IE), I scan anything i download or get emailed with online scanners and i use a lot of game/program cracks, i don't scour the net for pron, and i have my bo
                  • by misleb ( 129952 )

                    Why is it so hard to keep your windows box clean?

                    It isn't hard, per se. It is just annoying. I could keep a WIndows box clean if I *really* wanted to. I just don't want to. Simple as that.

                    I run XP semi updated (every so often i check for updates, not regularly) and don't have "MASSIVE" problems that i hear people like you complaining about all the time...

                    Well hurray for you. You get a biscuit.

                    Maybe it is because i am careful?

                    Maybe. But I'd rather move out of a dangerous neighborhood that be "careful" my w

                    • "As I said previously, I'm not a regular user of Windows, so it is kind of moot."

                      Then why are you complaining about it so LOUDLY?!? I would have thought that with as much to say against it you would have been familiar with it...

                      "It isn't hard, per se. It is just annoying."

                      Well actually, it isn't either, but i guess you wouldn't know since you "rarely" use it.

                      "Maybe. But I'd rather move out of a dangerous neighborhood that be "careful" my whole life. But I suppose if that dangerous neighborhood is what you c
                    • by misleb ( 129952 )

                      Then why are you complaining about it so LOUDLY?!? I would have thought that with as much to say against it you would have been familiar with it...

                      How much have I really said against Windows? That I find it annoying to have to be so "careful" when using it? I think that is about it. Are you confusing me with someone else?

                      Well actually, it isn't either, but i guess you wouldn't know since you "rarely" use it.

                      I never said "rarely." Don't quote me on something I didn't say. I use Windows enough to be annoyed

                    • "So either Mac users are just naturally endowed with great computer savvy or Windows really is a more dangerous platform and requires that you take special steps to stay safe."

                      Which is obvious with the recent MOAB...

                      Mac OS has flaws, so does unix, every piece of manmade software is vulnerable but i would say Windows is a target due to the high market share as virus writers are not the fame seekers of old but rather looking to create botnets.. hard to do with ~8% of the market.
                    • by misleb ( 129952 )

                      Mac OS has flaws, so does unix, every piece of manmade software is vulnerable but i would say Windows is a target due to the high market share as virus writers are not the fame seekers of old but rather looking to create botnets.. hard to do with ~8% of the market.

                      So because you can find an explanation for *why* Windows is a more dangerous platform, that is supposed to make up for the fact that it is? I don't really care if it is Microsoft's fault, the user's fault, spammers' fault, global warming's fault

                    • "WTF!? That doesn't bother you?"

                      Nope, it also doesn't bother me that I have to cook pork thoroughly or look both ways before I cross the street. I guess you like a false sense of security.

                      Do you also tell people not to buy door locks but cement all holes in their walls because someone might break in and steal stuff?

                      I don't think it is a more dangerous platform, i don't have problems with it, you're the one who can't use windows because it's scary. Just because you say something is a fact doesn't make it so,
                    • by misleb ( 129952 )

                      Nope, it also doesn't bother me that I have to cook pork thoroughly or look both ways before I cross the street.

                      Given two streets, a quiet country road and a busy 6 lane freeway, which one would you allow you children to cross on their own (assuming they are of age to be outside on their own in the first place). Heck, which one would YOU want to cross on a regular basis?

                      I guess you like a false sense of security.

                      What is false about it? If I am not getting infected by viruses and spyware, I'm not getting i

      • Hmm, that can be done with Qemu or VmWare and is known as a Kiosk. The trouble is that the machine can still do a lot of damage in between reboots.
      • by Gobe ( 113421 )
        They were/still are.

        I think in TFA or elsewhere I've read that papers were signed about two weeks ago. Just about the time I was reading some stuff about the http://www.usenix.org/events/hotbots07/tech/full_p apers/provos/provos.pdf [usenix.org] "The Ghost in the Browser".

        Reckon the guys are using Greenbox as part of their malware tests - they run malware within a virtual machine to monitor the malwares actions.

        If they continue to use the system as described in the doc to test, evaluate and thus detect malware seems to
    • Seriously, how hard is it for an OS to just not allow write access to any application at all outside it's home directory?

      Ok, sure, if you've downloaded it to the desktop and tried to run it it should sandbox but let's assume you've installed something to "programs/theTool". theTool should have full disk access to that folder and THAT's IT.

      if it needs to store per-user details on a multi-user machine let it use cookies. an app could cleverly save a user-cookie that tells itself the name of a sub directory IN
  • Great ... :-S (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SplatMan_DK ( 1035528 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @11:12AM (#19310241) Homepage Journal
    Great!

    Yet another piece of software that interferes with my network layer, slows my PC, and eats half my CPU cycles just to keep malware from infecting my machine.

    When will we see a REAL solution to these problems, and stop implementing obscure security work-arounds that eat more resources than the applications themselves? Anyone?

    When more than 50% of the CPU cycles in my PC go to security software (Antivirus, Antiphising, Antispyware, Antiadware, Antifraud, heuristics scanning, SPAM filter, personal firewall, strange DMZ browser-thingeys) during the display of a simple HTML page in a browser i would say that our current approach is broken. Totally.

    I need an Anti-security-bloatware product. And fast!
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      A fantastic solution exists -- it's called "not using Microsoft products".
    • Lynx (or Links) on GNU/Linux (or OpenBSD, or FreeBSD or whatever) (forget X, who needs it?). You get rid of the vast majority of (if not all) attacks made through the browser. The platform is more secure then Windows, and isn't used much, thus not getting much attention by Malware makers.

      Of course, it doesn't protect you from stupid acts, such as downloading scripts, 'chmod +x'ing them and running them.

      But then again, having GNU/Linux (or whatever) enables you to use chroot (or whatever) to test these u-beu
      • and isn't used much, thus not getting much attention by Malware makers.

        Hmm... With all respect, "sequrity by obscurity" (using an obscure OS with an obscure browser) doesn't really get any better by using an opensource OS. It is still not real security, and it is still a bad approach. I want a solution! An implementation, design pattern, method, whatever, that actually fixes the problem. Not a tip on how to use software nobody knows about. The lack of widespread use is not "security".

        • Re:Great ... :-S (Score:4, Insightful)

          by apathy maybe ( 922212 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @11:40AM (#19310545) Homepage Journal
          I know, it is just an added bonus of using a more secure browser (because of less functionality) with a more secure OS.

          As I said, you have the choice of security or functionality, and in many cases you can't even have either (the scenario of having all the anti-malware products eat up your CPU time, but still doing a crappy job).

          If you want real security, you unplug your computer from the network and remove all other forms of accessing it (including the keyboard). It just depends on what you are willing to put up with.

          Of course, it is perfectly possible to have a functioning MS Windows PC connected to the Internet and even have a decent browser and have no worries. You just need to have security culture and a firewall the rejects all connections from outside (except those related to web browsing, so that would be everything except port 80, and maybe whatever port FTP is on).

          A security culture is the most important thing, and comes from not randomly downloading and installing everything, deleting spam, not opening executable attachments in emails (including in some cases such things as Word Documents!),or at least verifying that the person who sent them to you, really did.

          My mother has managed to only (I think) get one virus (or worm, I'm not sure what it was actually) for years. Yet she runs MS Windows XP (SP1 I think). She has a firewall (outdated ZoneAlarm free I think), and she doesn't use IE (rather Mozilla, again outdated). No worries, because she practices security culture (to the best of her ignorant ability). She has an anti-virus, except because the signatures take so long to download (only slow dial up, no broadband in the country) it doesn't get updated so often. No worries though, because she doesn't run random stuff, doesn't go to random websites and doesn't use IE.

          Security culture will get you everywhere.

          (Also important if you are an anti-state activist. Got to watch out for them police...)
          • Heaven forbid after another virus/spyware clean up, geeks begin migrating their parents and friends to user accounts instead of letting them run as admin the whole time. I'd rather waste 30 minutes doing this and explaining how runas works then visiting again in a couple months.
        • by misleb ( 129952 )

          Hmm... With all respect, "sequrity by obscurity" (using an obscure OS with an obscure browser) doesn't really get any better by using an opensource OS. It is still not real security,

          So what? If it works, it works. Why does it have to be "real" security? Is the security ideal worth more than your personal comfort and/or sanity?

          You don't even need to go so far as using lynx in a text console. Simply running OS X or Linux is generally enough to sidestep the vast majority of nastiness that is out there. As fo

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by grub ( 11606 )

      When will we see a REAL solution to these problems, and stop implementing obscure security work-arounds that eat more resources than the applications themselves? Anyone?

      You would have to ask Microsoft that. These bandaids fix a lot of MS' screwups. Or you could switch operating systems and use Windows only when necessary (games, etc.)

      • I use openSUSE at home, Windows for Gaming and Windows at the office (no choice). So yeah, I know what you mean.

        It's still pretty lame though...
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by grub ( 11606 )

          It's still pretty lame though...

          Yeah, absolutely. However Mom & Pop will still run down to BestBuy and buy a new "Norton IntraTubes MegaDefender 2008 Plus" for $69.99 instead of learning something new and refreshing. It's that kind of inertia that keeps a lot of the clowns in greasepaint and goofy wigs.

          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            Actually they don't. Thats half of the problem. They expect me to come fix things when they stop working - but spend 69.99$ on a security app that really "does nothing" as far as they are concerned? Never!

            So to make matters worse, *I* am the one going down to BestBuy to pick up the latest Trend Micro Take-A-Pill PCCillin (Superinfused edition) because I get tired of saving their machine from the software pests they collect online... :-S
    • Just add another processor! Soon, all home PCs will effectively have 8 processors (or, cores, if you prefer that terminology). Then all of those extra processes won't even make a tick on the usage scale.
    • So is there anything left that Google has not bought yet?

      Speaking of buy outs I wonder when MS will finally suck it up and buy Yahoo

      Webmaster, http://www.seowebsiteadvice.com/ [seowebsiteadvice.com]
    • When will we see a REAL solution to these problems, and stop implementing obscure security work-arounds that eat more resources than the applications themselves? Anyone?

      We have a solution. It's called capabilities, and it's implemented on Linux through an Open Source system called SElinux, developed by the NSA and released to the public. It's available for a number of Linux implementations, including Ubuntu [ubuntu.com] (although no implementation of SElinux seems to have a decent userland/interface.)

      • by drsmithy ( 35869 )

        We have a solution. It's called capabilities, and it's implemented on Linux through an Open Source system called SElinux, developed by the NSA and released to the public. It's available for a number of Linux implementations, including Ubuntu (although no implementation of SElinux seems to have a decent userland/interface.)

        The end user can make modifications to enable additional access. Hence, it's not a solution, but effectively just another layer of "are you sure" dialog boxes.

        (Not to mention the probl

    • When will we see a REAL solution to these problems, and stop implementing obscure security work-arounds that eat more resources than the applications themselves? Anyone?

      When will we elect politicians who are not so easily bribed and who will break up MS's abusive monopoly and restore competition to the desktop OS market? When will people educate themselves and vote the bums out? When will there be a level playing field for desktop OS's so vendors have to rely upon competing for our dollars by giving us the features we want and need instead of relying upon the fact that users are locked in?

      Maybe the EU will solve the problem for the US. I'll consider it payback for the h

      • by drsmithy ( 35869 )

        When will we elect politicians who are not so easily bribed and who will break up MS's abusive monopoly and restore competition to the desktop OS market?

        First we need some competitors.

        When will people educate themselves and vote the bums out? When will there be a level playing field for desktop OS's so vendors have to rely upon competing for our dollars by giving us the features we want and need instead of relying upon the fact that users are locked in?

        Maybe you need to tell your vendor what features y

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by bvankuik ( 203077 )
      You don't need any of it. Just work with a user account (not administrator/root), use firefox, thunderbird and don't install all that crapware.
    • by nsebban ( 513339 )
      All the software you list, that take more than 50% of your CPU cycles, fight a human problem. Being the will of some people to hack your system, display ads to your eyes, have you read spam or things like that.

      It's not an easy problem to solve, because the source is the human nature and the will to make more money, get more power, annoy more people, you name it...
    • "When more than 50% of the CPU cycles in my PC go to security .. during the display of a simple HTML page in a browser i would say that our current approach is broken. Totally.

      Install DRDOS on Novell Netware circa 1993 and run Netscape off of diskless clients.

      Re:Great ... :-S
    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      A few years ago I bought a mac.

      Just this weekend, and largely due to my previous purchase, my dad decided to buy two macs to deal with his frustration.

      None of my immediate family uses MS now. Time to work on my aunts and uncles and friends.

      Of course, I also surf alot on my linux box too, without the bloat.

      I wonder what cpu % I spend on the protections. It isnt near 50%.

      Make the switch. MS will be plagued by this for a long time to come. Switch now before you go Vista, imho.
      • by empaler ( 130732 )

        Make the switch. MS will be plagued by this for a long time to come. Switch now before you go Vista, imho.
        That's exactly what I'm doing. I've been too lazy to really put a lot of time into learning Linux until I saw the Vista betas.
    • Looking at top right now, ktorrent is running between 4% and 10%, amarokapp is running under 4% pretty much constantly, and konqueror spikes to as much as 16%, but only when rendering a page. Earlier, with it open but not doing anything, it didn't even make the top 17 processes, most of which actually list 0.0% as their CPU usage. Total CPU usage hovered around 10% and never went higher than 20%.
    • by foobsr ( 693224 )
      When more than 50% of the CPU cycles in my PC go to security software (Antivirus, Antiphising, Antispyware, Antiadware, Antifraud, heuristics scanning, SPAM filter, personal firewall, strange DMZ browser-thingeys) during the display of a simple HTML page in a browser i would say that our current approach is broken. Totally.

      What do you expect when the asylum is run by those who should be the inmates??

      On a more serious note: All adds up to turnaround, and there we are at the core of all cycles involved.
    • You need a proxy server with a proper filter such as Dan's Guardian or Squidguard with Willowbark or Viralator. Never hook a naked Windoze PC to the internet - Windoze needs to hide behind a penguin.
      • by jafac ( 1449 )
        Okay. Sounds like a good idea.

        For the vast majority of us; the question is - HOW?

        Is there a cheap, easy to set up piece of hardware that doesn't take up a lot of space, and doesn't burn 100+ watts? Is there a "Linux home network proxies for Dummies" book out there?
    • There are really two problems at the root here. One is the human drive to push all of that crap on anyone and everyone on the internet for some kind of personal gain. And the other is a combination of user stupidity to unknowingly accept it combined with software that doesn't always make it easy for your average user to understand what it is they're accepting.

      The way I've solved this problem.
      1. Use Firefox as your default browser with adblock and Noscript, ditch IE.
      2. Use a router with a firewall and d
    • by rm999 ( 775449 )
      It's kind of like how the USA spends 4% of its GDP on the military - for many people, that is worth the comfort of living their lives without worrying all the time. (please don't respond to the previous paragraph, it was merely trying to create an analogy, not trying to spark a political debate...)

      In the case of computers, there is *no* easy way to stop malware without a strong defense. The problem stems from the fact that malware is usually a social engineering problem. Despite what many people think, majo
    • by drsmithy ( 35869 )

      When will we see a REAL solution to these problems, and stop implementing obscure security work-arounds that eat more resources than the applications themselves? Anyone?

      A technical solution ? Never, because the *problem* largely isn't a technical one.

    • by tokul ( 682258 )

      When will we see a REAL solution to these problems, and stop implementing obscure security work-arounds that eat more resources than the applications themselves? Anyone?
      Take a look at the mirror. Best protection is not implemented in software. It is implemented in user level.
  • Google... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Mockylock ( 1087585 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @11:18AM (#19310307) Homepage
    Now, if only they would filter out the sites that CAUSE the malware and spyware. Not only that, but so many garbage/search sites come up when you search for simple things like drug names and such. You would think they could block out other automated crawlers that clog up bandwidth as well.
    • "Now, if only they would filter out the sites that CAUSE the malware and spyware"

      That would be the responcibility of the ISPs and the host providers.

      "so many garbage/search sites come up when you search simple things like drug names and such"

      Try the Product Search [google.co.uk] .. :)

      Google search on viagra (the high blood pressure drug formerly knows as sildenafil citrate and remarketed as an aphrodisiac) .. 64,300,000 hits ...

      was Re:Google...
      • I see what you mean.

        What I was actually referring to is simple searches on interactions or vital information without advertisements.

        I search for interactions between sleep meds and other sorts of drugs for myself, and it gets a bit frustrating with nothing but web crawler sites.
        • "What I was actually referring to is simple searches on interactions or vital information without advertisements"

          Yea, a lot of hits are to fake pages with nothing but adverts and links to other search results. But that to do with website promotion where they put a lot a fake stuff in the meta tags.

          Re:Yea, Google is evil ..
  • by Nymz ( 905908 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @11:23AM (#19310361) Journal
    1) Install every anti-virus, firewall, virtual sandbox DMZ, and toolbar that you can.
    2) Sustain 99% CPU usage.
    3) Protected!
    • 4) ???
      5) Profit!
  • Test (Score:4, Informative)

    by setrops ( 101212 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @11:51AM (#19310739)
    Well I was asked to evaluate this product 2 years ago. At the time it was not very useful as there were some problems. But last year when they did their update it was a good improvement on speed and memory foot print. For what it does the product works well. And with Googles money and resources behind it, it can only get better.
  • Buy a giant ad company, then this? What are they going to do? Poke some holes into it to let their stuff through? I guess I need to make my own crawlers if I want an effective search engine now. The big ones are becoming ever more useless. Can anybody tell me what a toolbar does that a bookmark can't? Besides look all purdy an' stuff? Put enough of them in there, and the web page only has enough space to show one line of text. It's like ESPN with all those stats on the screen completely blocking the action.
  • In soviet russia, google buys you!
  • Sandboxie (Score:2, Informative)

    by Nappa48 ( 1041188 )
    Read about this ealier, and as nice as it is, i'll probably stick with Sandboxie. Does the same thing as this, but also protects other programs.

    If you donate to the project, you can unlock a few more features that allow you to start any program under sandbox ALL the time, even without it being started before the protected program. (well, the main program, not the service)
    Its pretty good, but the file browser that comes with it could do some with some work... tends to lock up sometimes in large directori
  • ...if it will detect the Dell-branded Google toolbar as adware, and remove it?
  • Now I know where we are heading to. The ultimate goal is to load your computer with as many anti-virus, anti-spyware,... etc so that the actual virus/spyware won't have any CPU cycles left to infect your computer.
  • 1.) Create website for vaporware 2.) Promote it and put lots of google ads on it 3.) Collect google money to fun actual development 4.) Give away product for free to make it popular 5.) Sell company to google for millions 6.) Retire at age 20 :)
  • Just what we need, Google making unstable security software. I have not used this particular brand, but in general, such programs are irritating at best, unstable and exploitable at worst.

    Once, I had a bug in my program that caused my XP development system to bugcheck (BSOD). It puzzled me how a bug in my lowly non-Administrator user-mode program could bring down the entire system. I attached a serial cable to WinDbg it and traced to the system calls. It turns out I was passing a bad pointer to a system

Unix: Some say the learning curve is steep, but you only have to climb it once. -- Karl Lehenbauer

Working...