[LINK] Microsoft to offer AntiVirus software

[Rick Welykochy]

r.polanskis at uws.edu.au wrote:


> Microsoft had an AV "solution" included in Windows quite some time back,
> that was spectacularly unsuccessful (IRRC) mostly because there were
> never any updates provided to guard against new types of attack.
> Also it was very resource intensive, slow and prone to just hanging
> and never completing it's task.   A token effort to say the least.

Indeed. Have a chuckle about MSAV and lots of other "abandonware" by reading

http://home.pmt.org/~drose/aw.html

and more specifically

http://home.pmt.org/~drose/aw-win3x-31.html

for the lowdown on MSAV. A dreadful failure in AV history.



> I don't personally like the idea of the town drunk being barkeeper
> myself.
> 
> I also do not believe that anything MS does with respect to security
> will change, until they throw out the design philosophy that Windows
> is based upon.

Agreed 110%. It is far too easy for Microsoft to act corruptly
(and this goes undetected). Even when Microsoft's corrupt activities
are exposed, little is done about beyond a bit of chest pounding
and cries of "Foul!".

Also consider the Microsoft business model (as admitted by MS itself
as well as the US DoJ). They take over a market by undercutting or
dumping free product onto the desktop they control, add FUD and
stir. This drivse out the competitors (sound familiar?). Repeat this
cycle as often as required. Symantec and McAfee have a snowflake's
chance in hell of surviving in the AV market once MS bundles their
AV "solution" with their OS. (That was the whole point of breaking
MS into separate OS and Application companies ... a move woefully
discarded by Bush and Co. in 2000).

Business ethics aside, the monoculture argument should be sufficient to
warn those who are security concious that an MS-only anti virus
marketplace means little or no security. The conflict of interest
is glaring.



cheers
rickw



-- 
_________________________________
Rick Welykochy || Praxis Services

For years, Microsoft has had a policy of announcing products that don't
exist yet, to cause customers to stop buying a competitor's product.
That's Vapourware.  Is it really any shock that they would want to prevent
customers from using more robust OSs and tools, by offering Vapoursecurity?
      -- David Maxwell on Full Disclosure