Microsoft Anti-Spyware to Be Free of Charge 470
fubar1971 writes "During his keynote speech at the at the RSA Security Conference Bill Gates announced that the MS antispyware will be offered for free. From his speech: 'We've looked hard at the nature of this problem, and made a decision that this anti-spyware capability will become something that's available at no additional charge for Windows users -- both the blocking capability, and the scanning and removal capabilities.' Additional information at Government Computer News." Update: 02/16 16:57 GMT by Z : Microsoft was previously considering charging extra for this service.
Watch for the Error.log file (Score:5, Informative)
Hopefully MS are reading (Score:5, Interesting)
IDIOT PROOFING
Right now, the software is far too intrusive in many modes. I just want something that will run when the screensaver comes on (or the PC is locked) and eliminates a predetermined "level" of crap. This would be a blessing for anyone who has to remove this crap all of the time.
Re:Hopefully MS are reading (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Watch for the Error.log file (Score:5, Insightful)
For the next two points, I have never thought the MS multi-user model was worth its weight in rat shit. YMMV
Last point? Well, I have always wondered if MS developers put their beta-ware out for testing, then sit back and go "hey, no bugs yet" for three months, then release it, all the while never even noticing that they forgot to build the feedback mechanism
Justin.
Re:Watch for the Error.log file (Score:2, Interesting)
I suspect the one on WU is an earlier beta than you have... I have no error.log file.
It's true it doesn't find much... I've even tried deliberately infecting myself. Missed it completely... maybe I have to log in as administrator first
Re:Watch for the Error.log file (Score:5, Informative)
http://communities.microsoft.com/newsgroups/defaul t.asp?ICP=spywareus [microsoft.com]
Re:Watch for the Error.log file (Score:5, Insightful)
MS has a newsgroup for this purpose. Yeah its lame, but its findable and web accessible.
Fun bug: Put your task bar on the side of the screen (I keep mine there hidden but wide, when it pops out, lots of tasks are very readable). Now write a batch script and try to run it. A popup is triggered asking if you really want to do that, problem is it "scrolls" into the screen, but since there's no task bar in the way it keeps scrolling right off the screen! So you can't run your script and you can't clear the popup, which remains in highest in your - list till you reboot :)
Mmmm, Microsoft goodness
Re:Watch for the Error.log file (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Watch for the Error.log file (Score:2)
I run mine at the top because, well, that's where it should be =)
and the amount of times I've had to turn on auto-hide or somesuch just so I can ge to the control boxes of applications. The stupid "we know best" attitude where they don't enable alt-space (Winamp for instance) for moving windows via the keyboard really winds me up.
Makes it worse after using elightenment and pressing alt-left-click to move windows ar
Re:Watch for the Error.log file (Score:4, Insightful)
Word DOC (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Watch for the Error.log file (Score:2)
Re:Watch for the Error.log file (Score:2)
I think it is a problem specific to his PC, as mine was about 4 KB.
It wasn't a big change... (Score:5, Insightful)
rscrawford writes "CNN reports that Microsoft may charge extra for security software. So first they edge their competition out of the browser market, then they tie IE into the OS so tightly that a crash in IE can crash the computer, and then they make IE so vulnerable that just using it is hazardous to the typical computer's health, and now they want to CHARGE users to fix it?"
From today's Slashdot article blurb:
Quite a turnaround from charging extra to free.
Looks like they never said for sure that they were going to charge extra. As you can see above it said "may". Now, are we all going to whine that MSFT shouldn't be distributing software with their OS to combat spyware because it "may" edge out competition in the spyware removal market or are we just going to complain that they considered charging people to use it when they aren't now?
Because MSFT software (browser, OS, and extras like ActiveX) should have been programmed correctly in the first place I would expect MSFT to distribute this software for free. People should be able to clear their computers out of what shouldn't have been there from the get go.
Personally, I don't care. I will likely continue to use what I have been using all along (although I have been trying to use the Mac for most surfing) as recent testing has shown MSFT's solution to not be quite as good as third party offerings.
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:5, Informative)
Perhaps you forget, this used to be a third party offering. [giantcompany.com] And the reason MSFT bought them is they were the best at remeoving the spyware, and had the best detection methods.
I was using Giant Antispyware for a few months before MS bought them. And I've seen very few changes (maybe because the Giant Company developers are still working on it.)
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:5, Interesting)
While active-x, IE, and windows has its security holes - your statement makes it sound like it MS's fault for all of these spyware/virus programs. In all reality, it is the fault of the spyware/virus writers - they just found exploits in MS. So lets pass the blame accordingly.
It is very nice of MS to offer this program "free" - considering they paid a big chunk of change for it. I don't actually consider it free, just an add-on to the OS that I already paid for.
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe there are more exploits to be found in MS code than should really be the case, but that doesn't mean we should be knocking them for sandbagging the leaks as best they can.
It seems to me that things are improving in MS land and, while I'll always prefer free/open source software, I won't be actively trying to find things to criticise when the beast actually does something right.
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:3, Interesting)
Quite frankly, valuing one anti-spyware software over another is foolish. It has been proven over time that no anti-spyware software has been a true solution, and that using more than one is the best way to go. I would never replace one anti-spyware product with another in any near future. Rather, I would add it
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:5, Insightful)
Okay. Microsoft Windows is like an expensive car parked in a bad part of town with the door unlocked and the keys in the ignition. The only thing lacking is the owner's signature on the title showing the transfer of ownership. Where Microsoft comes in is that it is not completely the owners fault: the car locks don't work all the time and the key is welded in place.
There really are no "safe surfing" guidelines for new users. Do PC suppliers walk the user through buying the proper AV software and a dedicated firewall box for every sale? Do they or Microsoft tell people up-front to avoid websites with ActiveX? Wasn't it only recently that Windows XP firewall was even active by default?
I feel fairly safe on the Internet--but I run UNIX on a non-Intel computer with a hand-tuned set of services and stack execute protection and a dedicated firewall running BSD. It took days to set this up, and I have a degree and work experience in IT. And I still worry, a little. Who knows when a JavaScript anomoly will be found, for example.
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:5, Interesting)
I like the software, too. I'm not sure it catches everything, but it seems to do a pretty good job. Plus, for the features present in Microsoft/Giant Antispyware alone, I had been running a whole host of free tools (spybot, adaware, spywareguard, spywareblaster, hijackthis!). I thought it was good software when made by the Giant Company, and so a free (and hopefully improved) version should be a nice thing to have.
It is very nice of MS to offer this program "free"...
Well, like I said, it's nice that it's free, but I wouldn't say that Microsoft is "being nice" by releasing it. They're merely protecting their business interests. People/businesses really are looking at OSX and Linux more and more as feasible alternatives to Windows, and with all the frustration people are experiencing associated with spyware, Microsoft is looking at a problem that could potentially be huge. They have a much better chance of maintaining their market dominance if they can demonstrate that Windows is a secure platform and that Microsoft is committed to keeping up with new security threats.
BTW, I'm not complaining. I'm not saying, "Microsoft if evil because they're only doing this to keep their OS on top!" I don't think it's bad for a business to try to please their customers for the sake of long-term profitability (which this seems to be). What I have a hard time with is when businesses try to screw their customers for the sake of perceived profitability (which MS seems to do as well). In neither case, however, is Microsoft being "nice".
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:4, Interesting)
Uhhh... I don't think anybody's complaining that it'll "edge out" the competition. I'm all for the complete elimination of this entire industry. Spyware should not exist, and solutions to Spyware shouldn't be necessary.
Here's why it's psychotic for them to have even considered charging for it: remember those Firestone tires that were blowing up left and right and killing people? What if Firestone had "considered" charging people to get those tires replaced? "On second thought, we figured it'd be nice to fix them for free." NO SHIT, Firestone/Microsoft.
To even entertain a glimmer of a notion of a possibility of a thought of charging for this would have been moronic.
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's kind of sick that in your mind you can justify equating possible HUMAN DEATH to spyware infections.
Tires blowing out due to design flaws can end someone's life. Spyware infecting a computer due to design flaws can cause someone to format their hard-drive.
Two entirely different worlds that are not comparable.
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't be naive. The risks of spyware go far beyond lost data. I could write a piece of software than installed itself on my enemy's system and downloaded a bunch of kiddy porn. Or, I could install something onto the workstation of an FBI agent and manipulate data pertaining to a capital investigation. Or I could leak the identities of government agents. Need I continue?
Spyware is a lethal risk. Just because nobody has written spyware of the sort I just described (actually, it probably does exist, we just don't know about it) doesn't mean the risk isn't there.
Free? (Score:2)
Change Caused by FireFox (Score:5, Insightful)
So, in order to make IE competitive with FireFox, the management of Microsoft was forced by the economics of the market to give anti-spyware software away -- for free. Basically, FireFox and its startling growth in marketshare forced Microsoft to be generous.
Bill Gates once said that your computer screen is the most valuable piece of realestate in the world. The management at Microsoft intends to continue to be the owner of that realestate.
Oh. Yes. "Thank you, Mozilla and Firefox! A job, well done!"
Re:Change Caused by FireFox (Score:2)
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:4, Informative)
If it were free for corporate use this would sink Spysweeper and CounterSpy, who both charge a per-seat license for a separate scanning system.
Symantec is talking about adding spyware detection into their existing virus scanning software this March and we'll have to judge how effective the product is vs Microsoft's solution. Since they already offer a virus management solution in the corporate edition, this would allow companies already using it to just get the benefit in a simple upgrade that pushes from a central server to the clients.
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:2)
That's not what I've read. What I've read from several sources is that it PROTECTS more than Spybot, but finds little more than Ad-Aware and Spybot used in combination - and does not find things that the other two do - just like the other two.
In other words, run all three to enhance your protection.
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:3, Informative)
Jesus Christ, you act like it just goes ahead and deletes VNC without even asking. I think it's great that it lists VNC. You are just too self-centered to see the re
Next week's news (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Next week's news (Score:5, Insightful)
How effective this tool is remains to be seen, of course. But what's notable, IMHO, is that Microsoft is making a responsible gesture to their customers.
It's OK to show a little appreciation sometimes, even for Microsoft.
No. The "right" thing would be to fix IE. (Score:2)
IE needs to, by default, deny ANY apps, unless specifically added to a white list.
Re:No. The "right" thing would be to fix IE. (Score:2, Insightful)
And keep in mind that the beta of IE7 is due out this summer, so we may get just what you're suggesting.
Whatever. (Score:5, Insightful)
That's the same bullshit I hear from them with every single problem.
"Wait until the next version."
"You should upgrade to the newest version."
Why is it so fucking hard for them to just issue a patch for their existing versions?
Re:Whatever. (Score:3, Insightful)
Why does the local phone company suck ass? Why do products break shortly after their warranty expires? Why do people dread returning stuff at Giant Box Retailer?
The answer to all these questions is that they have your money already, and there is little incentive for them to care about you after the fact. In perfect competition, post-sale satisfaction is as crucial part as any, but in monopolistic, nobody really cares
Re:No. The "right" thing would be to fix IE. (Score:2)
And burglars are more likely to get in through a window. But I still lock my doors.
Re:No. The "right" thing would be to fix IE. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:No. The "right" thing would be to fix IE. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Next week's news (Score:2)
As for the grandparent poster - his analogy was poor - MS didn't leave the dirty sponge inside the patients body. It might be better to say that MS didn't seal up the cut to the persons body very well, allowing malware to enter it. In actuality, Windows and all its apps are huge - there is bound to be errors, bugs,
Re:Next week's news (Score:2, Insightful)
*boggle*
Re:Next week's news (Score:3, Insightful)
So, um, where's the owner's manual for Windows that tells me that if I don't have a firewall, anti-virus, and anti-spyware running, it's going to be like running a car with no oil in it?
Yeah, I know, you and I don't need to be told. We aren't average computer users, though, and Microsoft isn't aiming their OS at us. It's aimed at the non-techie user (which is a brilliant move by Microsoft, by the way, since there are lots more of them). But the
Re:Next week's news (Score:3, Interesting)
The right thing to do would be to fix or remove the entry points malicious software uses to compromise a system. Since I.E. and Active-X are the entry points for the vast majority of malicious programs, and Microsoft has been unable to fix them after many years, the right thing to do would be to remove Active-X and and to remove I.E.'s ability to automatically execute code.
Re:Next week's news (Score:3, Informative)
Provide a control panal app or a button on IE that shows and allows removal of IE BHO's. Take it a step further and only allow BHO's to be installed through that button or CPL. How about a single function or button that shows ALL locations and all programs that are set to start on bootup (even the ones that can hook and hide themselves from showing when using regedit). Not make the users trudge through 20 or so different hidden loca
Re:Next week's news (Score:2, Insightful)
Your analogy doesn't hold water. Spyware/Adware is a malicious program maliciously written by someone to take advantage of a lack of total, perfect security. A more apt analogy would be holding a truck manufacturer responsible if someone slashes your tires because they manufactured an insecure truck insomuch as they didn't prevent the malicious person from maliciously slashing your tries.
I'll n
Re:Next week's news (Score:3, Insightful)
Security holes get left in software by accident, and by sloppiness on behalf of programmers. If that happens, bad things can happen (malware gets in).
Surgical instruments get left in bodies by accident, and by sloppiness on behalf of doctors and theatre staff. If that happens, bad things happen (bacteria gets in, the contents of your bowel seep into your stomach).
Now MSFT's programmers aren't to blame for the existence of scumbags
Re:Next week's news (Score:2)
I can see it now.
Microsoft trucks!
Just look at our huge fluffy tires made of tissue paper...and loaded with flammable hydrogen to make them light and airy...
A uniguely friendly consumer experience...
Where do you want to go today on our tires?
Re:Next week's news (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Next week's news (Score:2)
Please nobody tell Microsoft. It might give them ideas.
;)
Re:Next week's news (Score:4, Insightful)
So I submit this tensor:
Difference ( Good Guy, Bad Guy ) == The Good Guy can do what the Bad Guy does, but doesn't.
IE vs M$ Spyware App (Score:3, Funny)
Re:IE vs M$ Spyware App (Score:2)
What is up with the current Antispyware log file? (Score:2, Interesting)
Anybody know if this is a bug that was fixed, or how to stop it?
Makes sense to me (Score:2, Funny)
not a 'turnaround' (Score:3, Insightful)
This is not a turnaround; the linked slashdot article simply cried wolf. MS hadn't ever released a statement committing to a pricing-model for MSAS. At most they had said they were investigating the options. Now they have finished their investigation, and the price is $0.
Re:not a 'turnaround' (Score:2)
It did not require an investigation. Do you think that when Firestone produced a whole run of shitty tires that blew up and killed people that they "investigated" whether they should charge to get them replaced?
Maybe the law doesn't require Microsoft to warrant their products, but in all ethical and moral s
you know the best spyware tool... (Score:4, Insightful)
Not with IE. (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft needs to fix IE's security model.
Instead, they're promising band-aids for removing the crap they allow to be installed in the first place.
Too Bad for Ad-Aware (Score:5, Insightful)
I hope MS doesn't turn around and start charging once the competition is eliminated.
Re:Too Bad for Ad-Aware (Score:3, Insightful)
G
Re:Too Bad for Ad-Aware (Score:5, Interesting)
Can you say "Libel"? (Score:5, Informative)
Lavasoft has put out something on that in their press release [lavasoft.de] yesterday. The removal is not because of bribes, but because apparently WhenU no longer meets their threat threshold to be included in the spyware definitions database.
Re:Too Bad for Ad-Aware (Score:2)
Outlook Express? Still free.
IE? free.
Messenger? Free.
Re:Too Bad for Ad-Aware (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps continue to provide a superior product?
Re:Too Bad for Ad-Aware (Score:2)
Well, if we use IE as an indicator, they won't start charging, they'll just halt development.
Kidding (mostly). The thing is, it's in Microsoft's best interest to provide security tools to consumers. It seems this may be different from many of their other products, in that it's a utility-- a support for the OS. When a large percentage of Windows users are so infected with spyware that their computers won't work anymore,
Free capabilities (Score:2)
What about the updating capability?
Enterprise WILL be Charged (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Enterprise WILL be Charged (Score:4, Insightful)
Considering the wealth of free for home/expensive for enterprise software out there, I wouldn't be surprised, but the articles never mentioned the difference.
Duh! (Score:5, Interesting)
--Bill Gates
Yes, its called AdAware [lavasoftusa.com] and SpyBot S&D [safer-networking.org]. Free spyware killing tools on Windows has little to do with MS putting one out for free.
my bet is in... (Score:2)
Want a cookie? (Score:5, Interesting)
Disagree (Score:2)
A call for objectivity (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, how cool would it be if this was rolled out as an automatic update?
I'm all for any solution that might stem the tide of adware/spyware-filled systems, and the bot-driven-spam & "my computer's broke" complaints that they bring.
This probably isn't said very often on
Re:A call for objectivity (Score:2)
Of course, anti-competitive is probably better than the extortion scheme they were planning originally. It's that PoS browser that started the problem in the first place. Why would I want to pay the company that created the problem to remove it? I do agree with you that despite the anti-competitive nature of giving away the product, this is a good move by MS.
A
So it sucks? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'll pass (Score:5, Insightful)
It may be a good product, but it is no longer necessary for me!
M$ controlled Spam White List (Score:2, Interesting)
Sounds like they plan to have their own White List of ISPs that play nice with M$. I wonder M$ will leverage this new
Re:M$ controlled Spam White List (Score:2)
It sounds like what it's doing is comparing the alleged sending domain against the IP address. If the lookup or reverse lookup fails, it rejects the e-mail as bogus. This would theoretically prevent zombie spam relays.
Not a bad concept, but I'm sure MS would find a way to screw it up.
They can't charge for it anyway (Score:2)
Between the Lines . . . (Score:2)
I mean, I turned down their "update" for their product because I didn't want to have to pay for it when they decided to.
Besides, MS security products seem to have a pinchant for being thwarted. I like a 3d party tool to keep MS honest and my computer safe.
Let see (Score:5, Insightful)
they were evil because they wanted to charge for something everybody using their crappy OS needs.
AFTER
they will be evil because they will bundle useful software with their OS killing competing third parties.
Have another good day on
Spyware BAD! Spam zombies GOOD! (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, Microsoft refuses to provide security patches for free. If you haven't paid for a license, they will not provide you with security patches. If spam zombies and worms find their way onto your unsecured system, Microsoft doesn't care. I presume that this is because the spam does not appear to be a problem with Windows.
But it is. I conclude that Microsoft is not concerned with security, but with the APPEARANCE of security.
In related news (Score:2)
Conspiracy theory suggestions (Score:2, Funny)
Wouldn't you guys be upset... (Score:2)
I think this is kind of like America in the days prior to WWII. We all kind of wished it would all go away and that if just left things alone nobody would come and bother us. It did not work, and after Pearl Harbor, we awoke to t
Brilliant on so many levels (Score:5, Insightful)
Now all we need is for somebody to explain to us why we should devote resources toward getting out virus definitions in less than our own sweet time.
In related news... (Score:5, Funny)
With it's 7.x version, Red Hat is offering free of charge SSH, an application which encrypts communication between two computers enhancing security
Debian started to include for free a verifier for weak passwords, integrated with "passwd" command.
Novell/Suse, in order to remain competitive, included a firewall in it's Linux kernel, named iptables. No extra charge.
In a special offer, ending never, Mandrake included free of charge Tripware, which checks integrity of the most important system files.
However, none of Linux distributions include a free Spyware or antivirus. Windows is still ahead.
Is this a legal risk for Microsoft? (Score:3, Interesting)
MS Anti spyware contains spyware! (Score:5, Interesting)
The.Aviator.FullDVDRip.avi 793MB
it will autmatically flag it as suspicious and by the same token share that information with "the MS Anti Spyware Community".
The lesson is, if you use this program TURN OFF THE COMMUNITY UPDATE FACILITY.
Will MS get spanked for this? (Score:5, Interesting)
Clearly there is a thriving market for anti-virus/ anti-spyware software, so MS jumping in with a free product doesn't bode well. If MS had added this product before they they created a market for it, fine. Really what MS should do is remove the market - then it's difficult to complain they are competing unfairly. That would mean producing a more secure OS, which I thought was their top priority [slashdot.org] for over 3 years now.
I don't mean to bash, the more antispyware the better, I'm just curious... where will this lead?
H.
Re:Will MS get spanked for this? (Score:3, Insightful)
But if the above conditions were true, then it is possible that the auto maker in question, like Microsoft, would be governed by a consent decree that restricts its options in an effort to reform it and prevent further injury to consumers and competi
Re:Will MS get spanked for this? (Score:3, Funny)
They knwo that if they let MS do what MS is good at (technology, improvements, getting things right over time) it will crush Linux. The only hope they have is to run to the goverment for help.
My god, Agent Z-X9, we've been discovered! Even our Hidden Island Fortress of Zealotry was no match for their best, if somewhat dyslexic, minds! Grab every distro you can before they're crushed, and somebody start pleading with Washington! There'll be no stopping MS if
Bill's hopes THIS subscription service sells (Score:3, Insightful)
I'll bet that this mechanism will be used for system and application patching too. They already said they were considering a fee based security patching system.
After all, did Bill say the software AND SERVICE were going to be free? I recall only hearing that the software would be free....
None of this is good for McAffee or Symantec investors or employees. Nice knowing you.
LoB
Re:Okay that's a start... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Okay that's a start... (Score:2)
Re:Okay that's a start... (Score:2)
Re:Okay that's a start... (Score:2)
Re:Okay that's a start... (Score:2)
No need to dissect it, just run strace and see what it's doing. There's nothing of any consequence a program can do that won't be revealed by strace.
Re:isnt antispyware an oxymoron.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Also a bit of common sense while browsing / collecting email on a non-secure OS (read: any OS) doesn't hurt either.
Also, if I want to get really picky (which I quite clearly do), antispyware is NOT an oxymoron since merely using a few cpu cycles does not make a program spyware. QED.
Re:WOOT (Score:2)