Microsoft offers free security program

[afparent]

Microsoft offers free security program

Thursday, January 6, 2005 Posted: 11:31 AM EST (1631 GMT)

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/01/06/microsoft.antivrus.ap/index.html

Microsoft is offering a free security program updated monthly to remove the most dangerous infections from computers.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Microsoft Corp., whose popular Windows software is a frequent target for Internet viruses, is offering a free security program to remove the most dangerous infections from computers.

The program, with monthly updates, is a step toward plans by Microsoft to sell full-blown antivirus software later this year.

Microsoft said Thursday that consumers can download the new security program from the company's Web site www.microsoft.com and that updated versions will be offered automatically and free each month.

It will be available starting Tuesday.

Also being offered is a free program to remove "spyware," a category of irritating programs that secretly monitor the activities of Internet users and can cause sluggish computer performance or popup ads.

Microsoft said the virus-removal program will not prevent computer infections and was never intended to replace the need for traditional antivirus software, such as flagship products from McAfee Inc. or Symantec Corp.

But a senior Microsoft executive confirmed the company's plans to sell its own antivirus software, which would compete against programs from McAfee, Symantec and others.

Microsoft purchased a Romanian antivirus firm, GeCAD Software Srl., for an undisclosed amount in 2003. Industry rivals expect Microsoft's formal entry into the market as early as the spring.

"We will have a standalone antivirus product that is one of the things you can buy from Microsoft, but we're not announcing anything today," said Rich Kaplan, vice president for Microsoft's security business and technology unit.

The offers of free virus and spyware removal tools were intended to convince consumers that Microsoft is working to improve its software's security, Kaplan said.

Microsoft and other companies occasionally have offered separate programs to disinfect specific viruses. Microsoft promised its new removal tool will target a variety of infections and will be updated each month to recognize new ones.

Microsoft is sensitive to criticism about the susceptibility of its Windows operating system software to computer viruses. It has responded by tightening security for its popular Outlook e-mail software and improving the protective firewall utility for Windows.

But its reputation largely has hinged on consumers' effective use of antivirus products and other security programs outside Microsoft's control.

Microsoft has proceeded more cautiously in recent years as it moves to compete against its one-time partners. European antitrust regulators last year fined the company euro497 million (U.S. $613 million) over charges it abused its software monopoly. Microsoft is operating under restrictions from a U.S. antitrust settlement with the Bush administration until 2007.

Kaplan encouraged consumers to buy updated antivirus software from vendors such as Symantec and McAfee. He also expressed confidence that an industry organization formed to share details between Microsoft and leading antivirus companies about virus outbreaks would survive Microsoft's decision to compete directly against those same businesses.

Antivirus vendors have warned investors about the fallout as Microsoft enters the market. McAfee, for example, said in its most recent annual report that its own products could become "obsolete and unmarketable" if Microsoft were to include antivirus protection in Windows software.

A Symantec executive, Vincent Weafer, said Microsoft's success as an antivirus company at Symantec's expense was not guaranteed. Weafer noted that some leading security companies have decades of specialized experience and skilled researchers.

"This is an area we certainly think we can differentiate ourselves from Microsoft," Weafer said. "We've worked hard over the years to build trust with customers."

Microsoft disclosed last month that it planned to offer software to remove spyware programs that are secretly running on computers. But in a shift from past practice, Microsoft said it may charge consumers for future versions of the new protective technology, which Microsoft acquired by buying a small New York software firm.

Kaplan said the free version of Microsoft's new spyware-removal software will expire July 31 and pricing for future versions is still undecided. Rival anti-spyware tools, such as Lavasoft Inc.'s popular Ad-Aware product, offer similar functions to Microsoft's, and many are free.

[Larry]

Anybody want to bet that their new, free, anti-spyware won't mention, when it scans your system, that Media Player has spyware built-in by Microsoft?

Granted, I'm one of those anti-capitalist kooks, but I'd be willing to bet 50-50, that their anti-spyware software, itself, contains spyware. (Or, at least, requires you to agree to a contract that says they can, later, if they want to.)

[Joe Sick]

Why doesn't Microsoft just build better products in the first place?

A monopoly is never good for consumers.

...As I'm typing on my Macintosh G5.

[BG]

Originally posted by Larry

Anybody want to bet that their new, free, anti-spyware won't mention, when it scans your system, that Media Player has spyware built-in by Microsoft?

Granted, I'm one of those anti-capitalist kooks, but I'd be willing to bet 50-50, that their anti-spyware software, itself, contains spyware. (Or, at least, requires you to agree to a contract that says they can, later, if they want to.)

Ha-ha!

That is exactly what I was thinking......

[stevenaa]

Why doesn't Microsoft just build better products in the first place?

This is easy to say, but you must realize that the current code base was developed at a time when there weren't security threats that exist today. Windows Server 2003 has made great strides in this regards, and has had to have a ton fewer security updates released to date when compared to Linux Server products released in the same time frame. The next code base, will be many steps forward in this area. Also, systems that get infected, do so because administrators fail to apply updates properly. A part of this has been due to the crazy release schedules and the amount of work required. Microsoft has streamlined this process to make update installation much easier. THe large scale attacks that have hit the last few years would have been prevented if users had installed the available updates to protect themselves.

[TheSteve]

Microsoft's free software is test software. When they give you free stuff, you are testing it out for them and becoming their ginnypig.

[Mad Mike]

Is Microsoft going to start giving away Macs? :laugh:

[PCS]

Why would they give away hamburgers?

*

Aw geez

[SonnyRules]

Thought this was interesting:

Microsoft's Gates endures PC crash during keynote speech at U.S. tech show

Rachel Konrad

Canadian Press

January 7, 2005

LAS VEGAS (AP) - Despite suffering through an embarrassing computer crash that prompted jokes and guffaws, Bill Gates promised that Microsoft Corp. would help consumers stay plugged into technology, during a keynote speech Wednesday.

In his seventh annual keynote speech at the International Consumer Electronics Show, Microsoft's chairman explained that the proliferation of high-speed Internet access and the falling price of data storage are compelling people to put music, photos, movies and other aspects of their life into a digital format.

"We predicted at the beginning of this decade that this would be a decade where the digital approach would be taken for granted," Gates told hundreds of technology enthusiasts, who gathered for his kickoff to the world's largest electronics show. "It's going even faster than we expected."

But while promoting what he calls the "digital lifestyle," Gates showed how vulnerable all consumers - even the world's richest man - are to hardware and software bugs.

During a demonstration of digital photography with a soon-to-be-released Nikon camera, a Windows Media Center PC froze and wouldn't respond to Gates' pushing of the remote control.

Later in the 90-minute presentation, a product manager demonstrated the ostensible user-friendliness of a video game expected to hit retail stores in April, Forza Motor Sport. But instead of configuring a custom-designed race car, the computer monitor displayed the dreaded "blue screen of death" and warned, "out of system memory."

The errors - which came during what's usually an ode to Microsoft's dominance of the software industry and its increasing control of consumer electronics - prompted the celebrity host, NBC comedian Conan O'Brien, to quip, "Who's in charge of Microsoft, anyway?"

Gates, who was sitting next to O'Brien on a set staged to look like NBC's Late Night set, smiled dryly and continued with his discussion.

-

On the Net:

cesweb.org

© The Canadian Press 2005

[Joe Sick]

Originally posted by stevenaa

This is easy to say, but you must realize that the current code base was developed at a time when there weren't security threats that exist today. Windows Server 2003 has made great strides in this regards, and has had to have a ton fewer security updates released to date when compared to Linux Server products released in the same time frame. The next code base, will be many steps forward in this area. Also, systems that get infected, do so because administrators fail to apply updates properly. A part of this has been due to the crazy release schedules and the amount of work required. Microsoft has streamlined this process to make update installation much easier. THe large scale attacks that have hit the last few years would have been prevented if users had installed the available updates to protect themselves.

I do realize that, but wasn't Longhorn supposed to already be out?

Why haven't they made this switch earlier? Monopolistic complacency maybe?

Maybe they should be more worried about basic security issues than updating the GUI for Office or pushing the newest/greatest thing that doesn't help productivity!

Competition breeds innovation.

[stevenaa]

I do realize that, but wasn't Longhorn supposed to already be out?

No.

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2004/Aug04/08-27Target2006PR.asp

Maybe they should be more worried about basic security issues than updating the GUI for Office or pushing the newest/greatest thing that doesn't help productivity!

Microsoft is not just a developer of OS software. Work in all areas has to proceed. Besides, each product has it's own team of dedicated developers.

Why haven't they made this switch earlier? Monopolistic complacency maybe?

Many reasons.

Current 3rd party applications have to be accounted for. Will they run on a new code base as they currently exist, or will they have to be ported over (re-written). There is a financial burden that will be placed on Software vendors and end users.

Think about device drivers. New drivers will have to be produced for any hardware to run on a new code base. This will be more involved than creating a new driver for a new NT based release. Instead of modifying an existing driver, Hardware Vendors, will likely have to write complete new drivers. A lot of existing hardware may end up unsupported if the Hardware Vendor chooses not to release drivers. This happens with each new Windows release, but it could be huge when a new code base is released.

Any developers currently programming for Windows will have to re-learn a lot of what they do for a new code base. There are many facets to be considered when you think about completely changing the Windows code base.

The existing NT kernel released in 1983 after 4+ years of developement. It was an oversized, slow working OS. At the time, that wasn't so bad because there wasn't really a precedent set for performance. Over the years, NT has become much better, and with the release of Windows Server 2003, it is relatively secure compared to competing products on the market.

Anything that is released today has to be better than what is currently on the market. From both a security and performance standpoint. This is just not a quck endeavor. We're talking about many millions of lines of code. Many years to plan develop and test.

Complacency is not a word anyone can use to describe Microsoft. There are few companies that are as development intesive as Microsoft.

Look at how fast an update is released when an exploit is identified. Microsoft has the fastest to market time for security updates in the industry. If everyone regularly applied released Security Updates, none of the epidemic sized attacks that have occurred would have gotten a foot hold. The argument will be that the exploit shouldn't have existed in the first place, but the reality is that either the technology or methods that take advantage of most of the exploits didn't exist when the OS was designed.

I can't emphasize enough how focused Microsoft is on fixing the security issues that exist in it's products. There is no more important initiative within Microsoft than Secure Computing. It is at the core of any development that goes on.