Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 6th Nov 2005 11:45 UTC
Windows Microsoft's Windows AntiSpyware technology has been renamed "Windows Defender" and has been expanded to detect and remove rootkits, keystroke loggers and other forms of malware. The revamped application will be bundled into the Windows Vista operating system, but users will be free to choose a competing spyware protection product from a redesigned Windows Security Center.
Order by: Score:
Rootkits eh?
by Anonymous on Sun 6th Nov 2005 12:25 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Can it remove Sony's rootkit yet?

Reply Score: 4

RE: Rootkits eh?
by Anonymous on Sun 6th Nov 2005 16:21 UTC in reply to "Rootkits eh?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

The key question is, why was that piece of software able to modify something it shouldn't have?

-bytecoder

Reply Score: 0

RE: Rootkits eh?
by drewunwired on Sun 6th Nov 2005 21:59 UTC in reply to "Rootkits eh?"
drewunwired Member since:
2005-07-06

Better yet, does it remove the rootkit without crippling your CD drive?

Reply Score: 1

StephenBeDoper
Member since:
2005-07-06

I tried the Beta, it works fairly well. When I manually ran a batch file by double-clicking it, and got the "do you want to let this script run" warning, it ended up putting the output of the batch file into windowssystem32.

Reply Score: 1

tummy Member since:
2005-09-14

I had a batch file which was supposed to delete a whole load of files in the current directory. Microsoft Anti-spyware executed it inside System32!!

Luckily windows file protected prevented my system from imploding but Microsoft should be more careful...

Reply Score: 2

Anonymous Member since:
---

Err... weren't they being careful by protecting all the Windows files?

Reply Score: 0

tummy Member since:
2005-09-14

That's pretty retarded. I was lucky cause I was only deleting files in the current directory (and not parents).

It still blew away some config files and drivers. It just didn't stop windows from booting.

Reply Score: 1

v ...
by Anonymous on Sun 6th Nov 2005 16:18 UTC
RE: ...
by Anonymous on Sun 6th Nov 2005 16:20 UTC in reply to "..."
Anonymous Member since:
---


if people actually tried to prevent them proactively instead of defensively, e.g. antivirus software.

That's a bit vague now that I look back at it. I was listing antivirus software as an example of defensive virus protection.

-bytecoder

Reply Score: 0

The only Defender I want is...
by shotsman on Sun 6th Nov 2005 16:19 UTC
shotsman
Member since:
2005-07-22

A Land Rover Defender.

Seriously though, what a useless name. There are lots of products that to paraphrase a UK Paint Advert "Does what is says on the Tin"
I expect some marketing borg thought this one up.
I'll watch this space as they say to see if it gets a realistic uptake. I can't help wondering is Microsoft is going to sell it to PC Manufacturers at some silly OEM price ( < $1 ) so it gets included with new PC's for "Free" and thay way they can buy market share.
Personally, I'll stick with AVG on Windows.

Reply Score: 1

Anonymous Member since:
---

Personally, I'll stick with AVG on Windows.

Windows anti-spyware is in no way a replacement for full virus scanner. They are *meant* to be two technologies that complement each other.

In reality they are just two more processes using up cpu cycles.

Reply Score: 2

Antispyware Beta expires in 55 days
by pben on Sun 6th Nov 2005 16:29 UTC
pben
Member since:
2005-11-06

AntiSpyware Beta expires in 55 days, what is it going to cost a XP user? Vista is at least a year off given Microsofts incompetentence.

I haven't see the price for XP users in any of the annoucements.

Reply Score: 2

Anonymous Member since:
---

According to the FAQ found on the product's website, it will remain free.

Reply Score: 0

Should have been named...
by Anonymous on Sun 6th Nov 2005 17:07 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

..."Windows Protecton Racket".

Sounds like the old Slashdot joke...

1) Sell insecure OS.
2) Sell security system for insecure OS.
3) Double-Profit !!!

Reply Score: 2

v RE: Should have been named...
by Anonymous on Sun 6th Nov 2005 19:33 UTC in reply to "Should have been named..."
RE[2]: Should have been named...
by Anonymous on Sun 6th Nov 2005 20:20 UTC in reply to "RE: Should have been named..."
Anonymous Member since:
---

Please provide examples to your claims.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Should have been named...
by AllTom on Sun 6th Nov 2005 21:22 UTC in reply to "Should have been named..."
AllTom Member since:
2005-11-06

I don't understand why this software is separate from the OS. I can see them giving it a codename internally, but why not silently include it as a service, thus avoiding the 'sell insecure OS -> sell security patches' claim?

It seems to me that they're going about repairing their tarnished name. Why "Windows and Windows Defender" instead of "Windows--Now More Secure"?

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Should have been named...
by n4cer on Mon 7th Nov 2005 03:31 UTC in reply to "RE: Should have been named..."
n4cer Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't understand why this software is separate from the OS. I can see them giving it a codename internally, but why not silently include it as a service, thus avoiding the 'sell insecure OS -> sell security patches' claim?

Windows Defender is not a commercial product. It'll be available as a free addon.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Should have been named...
by AllTom on Mon 7th Nov 2005 03:33 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Should have been named..."
AllTom Member since:
2005-11-06

Windows Defender is not a commercial product. It'll be available as a free addon.

Yes, an add-on. Thus why I said it was separate from the OS. ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Should have been named...
by n4cer on Mon 7th Nov 2005 03:39 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Should have been named..."
n4cer Member since:
2005-07-06

But you also implied it was being sold.

but why not silently include it as a service, thus avoiding the 'sell insecure OS -> sell security patches' claim?

No one can make that claim since they aren't selling patches or Windows Defender.

Edited 2005-11-07 03:56

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Should have been named...
by AllTom on Mon 7th Nov 2005 11:55 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Should have been named..."
AllTom Member since:
2005-11-06

But you also implied it was being sold.

Ah, now I see the confusion. Thanks. ;)

Reply Score: 1

Windows Defender ???
by ankitmalik on Sun 6th Nov 2005 17:31 UTC
ankitmalik
Member since:
2005-07-06

That means Windows Defender is defending Windows [or trying to] from the [security] holes in Windows ? Strange !

Defending yourself from yourself and (duh) making a living out of it !!! Kewl !

'Windows Bandaid' [ to cover up those security wounds!] could be relevant nomenclature !

Edited 2005-11-06 17:38

Reply Score: 0

v Download Windows Vista
by Anonymous on Sun 6th Nov 2005 17:56 UTC
Personally,
by Anonymous on Sun 6th Nov 2005 19:15 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I don't run any anti-virus, firewall, or spyware removing software. Why? Because I am not an idiot.

Here are a couple of tips:

1) Install Firefox, use exclusively, do NOT install any ActiveX plugins.

2) Do not use an email client (such as Outlook/Outlook Express, Thunderbird, etc). Use web-based email such as Yahoo or others. DON'T DOWNLOAD AND RUN EXECUTABLE ATTACHMENTS!!

Your system will stay nice a clean, free of spyware and viruses.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Personally,
by Anonymous on Sun 6th Nov 2005 20:00 UTC in reply to "Personally,"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Or just donīt do your surfing or mailreading on an administrative account.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Personally,
by Bending Unit on Sun 6th Nov 2005 21:58 UTC in reply to "Personally,"
Bending Unit Member since:
2005-07-06

3) Unplug your computer.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Personally,
by Anonymous on Sun 6th Nov 2005 22:30 UTC in reply to "Personally,"
Anonymous Member since:
---

I am not an idiot either.

1. I use Firefox exclusively and I still get spyware. You don't get spyware only from browsing. You cannot imagine how much software out there is bundled with spyware.

2. Thunderbird will not open any pictures or attachments if you don't open them yourself, the same way Yahoo Mail does.

I am sure that you think your system is clean and free of spyware. If you run SpybotS&D or AdAware you'll be suprised by the amount of spyware they will detect.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Personally,
by Anonymous on Mon 7th Nov 2005 03:55 UTC in reply to "Personally,"
Anonymous Member since:
---

You can surf with Firefox and read your Gmail, but if you don't have a firewall, you're just inviting worms in.

You may not be an idiot yourself, but if you run your Windows machine without a firewall, you're betting that Microsoft doesn't have any exploitable bugs in the network services. Which is a bet only an idiot would take.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Personally,
by Anonymous on Mon 7th Nov 2005 22:36 UTC in reply to "Personally,"
Anonymous Member since:
---

"You may not be an idiot yourself, but if you run your Windows machine without a firewall, you're betting that Microsoft doesn't have any exploitable bugs in the network services. Which is a bet only an idiot would take."

i agree at least run the windows xp sp2 firewall.

Reply Score: 0

Anonymous
Member since:
---

well, if it was part of the OS, then the anti-trust litigation would start flying.

Wow, all the antispyware companies suddenly shut down because they can't get on the desktop? Hmmm sounds a lot like the media player debaucle in the EU.

Reply Score: 1

v LOL
by Anonymous on Sun 6th Nov 2005 21:53 UTC
Windows Defender eh?
by junior on Sun 6th Nov 2005 22:25 UTC
junior
Member since:
2005-07-07

I already know plenty of Windows defenders.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Windows Defender eh?
by Anonymous on Mon 7th Nov 2005 21:28 UTC in reply to "Windows Defender eh?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Exactly. The net is flooding with Windows defenders, without MS inventing their own artificial ones.

Reply Score: 0

Rootkits
by JohnX on Sun 6th Nov 2005 23:04 UTC
JohnX
Member since:
2005-11-06

Since rootkits originate and are more common on UNIX/Linux maybe it's time Red Hat and Novell start thinking about rootkit protection as well.

But wait... If UNIX was actually secure, rootkits would've never happened!

Reply Score: 2

RE: Rootkits
by Anonymous on Mon 7th Nov 2005 04:44 UTC in reply to "Rootkits"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Agreed.

-bytecoder

Reply Score: 0

v no need
by Anonymous on Mon 7th Nov 2005 00:44 UTC
Don't Support Convicted monopolies
by Anonymous on Mon 7th Nov 2005 01:25 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Recipe for disaster:

1 Handful of money
1 document signed with the beast of redmond

Masturbate with money until soul has vanished. When the flames close in and the mad chuckles of the convicted monopoly begins to sound more like pleasant circus music, you have reached orgasm.

Reply Score: 0

TusharG
Member since:
2005-07-06

Product name sounds like BitDefender anti virus! Anyway... Product is good and is rated better than Anti spywares on most of the sites by users.
Now the question is, is this product going to remain free?

Reply Score: 1

Re: Rootkits
by Anonymous on Mon 7th Nov 2005 15:33 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Novells latest SuSE 10 (the paid version only) ships with rootkit detection/prevention.

Reply Score: 0

Re: Personally
by Anonymous on Mon 7th Nov 2005 15:36 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I have to disagree on this one. While Firefox over IE will definately cut down on your spyware, it certainly won't prevent it. Most of what you're saying will hold true with Virus, but not spyware/malware.

Case in point, my new laptop is only 3 days old, is fully patched, and I only use Firefox. I decided that it would be prudent to get Spybot on my system sooner than later, and low and behold, it finds 31 pieces of spyware from 10 different categories.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Re: Personally
by Lettherebemorelight on Tue 8th Nov 2005 16:28 UTC in reply to "Re: Personally"
Lettherebemorelight Member since:
2005-07-11

Dont be so sure it didnt just come preload with it.

Reply Score: 1