Microsoft is trying to dampen speculation that it will make a major acquisition in the antivirus market.
Microsoft easing into antivirus efforts
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
If they want to combat viruses they could start by building a secure, limited use email client and shipping it with windows?
NTFS has the ability to use restricted user accounts, sandbox the thing and block all ability to open any executable attachments.
Build anti-virus support on it, and make the thing check for any new critical bugs and update everytime it downloads new mail unless it already checked in the last 40 minutes.
A virus scanner that takes starts 4 process with windows and updates once a week is all but useless against fast spreading email viruses, if anything they have only proven to be a false sense of security.
“We’re still working on integrating that technology,” he said. “In the antivirus space, we have to work really closely with the antivirus vendors because we don’t want to negatively impact their business.”
Great more anti-competiive whining about how Microsoft might package anti-virus into Windows. I think i would still use Norton even if they did though.
I am making a prediction here, when I say that the Anti-Virus will be a bundled feature of Longhorn, prolly due in 2007 now.
I also think Microsoft will go with a slimmed down version of McAfee, since McAfee has made the efforts to include the windows update feature in their product. Kind of like a I wash your back, You wash mine.
But so far in my uses with WinXp Pro, and McAfee software I have nothing but good praises to say about this combination.
I hopefully don’t want to use Norton products, simply because I have delt with customers that has Norton, and they have done nothing but disable all access to the internet, not able to fetch updates and other problems that affect users in different manners.
The problem with virus’ and the spread of them, are that users whom buy OEM machines (Dell, IBM, Gateway) are using the OEM System account. AKA they are all admins, even for the people who should not drive, are allowed admim access on thier computer.
But lets hope that Longhorn, whichever virus detection system they use, lets all hope that it is secure enough to be able to run much smoother.
Windows Should create a jail, or at least a detection system where as, out of the box experience could detect most strains of viruses and their varient.
– heres a Quarter –
Happy Canada Day
moves to 250mb storage and free anti virus scanning both in and out starting in the month of July 04. thats a good start.
I still think that they should include built in anti-virus software with Longhorn. They used to include their own anti-virus software back in the DOS days when they still had nearly all of the desktop OS market, and the other anti-virus folks still did just fine (just like the other media player folks are still in business despite the fact that Windows has had Windows Media Player for damned near ever).
Besides, the extent of the virus problem on Windows is due in no small part to Microsoft’s historical lack of interest in security, and I ersonally thing that they should be the ones to fix it.
Many many years ago Gates should have taken a billion of his own money and said to the appropriate people: “Build the best antivirus component into Windows that is possible. Many many years ago.
I remember there was a big fuss here in my country when MS bought an inovative and upstanding antivirus from a company called GeCAD, the name of the product was RAV and really hit the news those days , but now it seems that features of that software are no where to be talked about in future windows longwallbanger.
That product as i remember was one of the first tools to have an antivirus engine running on linux or on different *nix that could repair infected files without the need of a running windows host behind it.
native angine , usable interface ,not bloated.
i compared it with what ms intended for win xp’s basic firewall & nat tool before SP2 , and it seemd a good deal , a product that could have been easely adopted and integrated into windows.
but now … complete silence …
“In the antivirus space, we have to work really closely with the antivirus vendors because we don’t want to negatively impact their business.”
That is exactly why Microsoft will continue to leave their operating system and programs open to viruses.
MS antivirus requires security patches! that’ll be funny!
“It’s really just a perception problem,” he said. “The number of vulnerabilities in our products is coming down. On average in open source, there is at least one kernel patch every month and you have to reboot those systems.”
Well a couple of pharse.
1) Number of patchs coming down? How about announcing them so that users can protect their systems. The last few security risks have evoloved because MS has released patchs yet.
2) Reboot? MS is talking about other systems having to be rebooted after a patch is installed. Not all OS operating systems have to be rebooted. Its based on the skill of the user and the type of patch.
Won’t this have a matter/antimatter effect?