Comments on: FAQ: Inside Microsoft's Client Protection

Product marks company's entry into market for desktop security products for businesses, but not much is known about it yet.

[Bill Dautrive]

Classic Protection Racket

Cause trouble and charge your victims money for protection.

[Andrew J Glina]

I agree

I hate to say it, but I hate the idea of a company selling something that fixes problems in its product. To me it is like a car company selling a car with a hole in its fuel tank, but providing a cork at extra cost.

The problem is that it reduces motivation for the company fix the problem.

[Bill Dautrive]

Classic Protection Racket

Cause trouble and charge your victims money for protection.

[Andrew J Glina]

I agree

I hate to say it, but I hate the idea of a company selling something that fixes problems in its product. To me it is like a car company selling a car with a hole in its fuel tank, but providing a cork at extra cost.

The problem is that it reduces motivation for the company fix the problem.

Great Marketing - Bad Security

Steve Ballmer and Rob Enderle will tell you whatever you want to hear...

but in the end, you will be the one who pays for their mistakes and lies.

educate yourselves or get out your wallet.

1st lesson: Linux can help.

Great Marketing - Bad Security

Steve Ballmer and Rob Enderle will tell you whatever you want to hear...

but in the end, you will be the one who pays for their mistakes and lies.

educate yourselves or get out your wallet.

1st lesson: Linux can help.

[System Tyrant]

I'm jumping off the deep end.

Ok be forwarned that I am going to jump off the deep end here.

I don't think Microsoft should be able to include any of it's software with the OS (IE, WMP, Anti-Spyware, Antivirus, etc). Further more I don't believe they shouldn't be allowed to give away any software out side of promotional venues for retailers, partners, etc. Microsoft and companies like Microsoft should be forced to compete fairly. In the case of Microsoft they should not be allowed to include software for free in their OS or allow it to be downloaded when the equivalent is available to purchase by their competition.

Now that I'm back from the deep end. I realize that laws or regulations that would do all that would have a much greater impact on all markets than it's potential benifit to fairing up big business sales. It's unfortunate that any company can squash competition by giving away the same tools that others have to sell. But the law works the same for them as it does for you and me. They can just afford better lawyers and lobbiest.

[System Tyrant]

I'm jumping off the deep end.

Ok be forwarned that I am going to jump off the deep end here.

I don't think Microsoft should be able to include any of it's software with the OS (IE, WMP, Anti-Spyware, Antivirus, etc). Further more I don't believe they shouldn't be allowed to give away any software out side of promotional venues for retailers, partners, etc. Microsoft and companies like Microsoft should be forced to compete fairly. In the case of Microsoft they should not be allowed to include software for free in their OS or allow it to be downloaded when the equivalent is available to purchase by their competition.

Now that I'm back from the deep end. I realize that laws or regulations that would do all that would have a much greater impact on all markets than it's potential benifit to fairing up big business sales. It's unfortunate that any company can squash competition by giving away the same tools that others have to sell. But the law works the same for them as it does for you and me. They can just afford better lawyers and lobbiest.

[Steven N]

All rubbish

As long as these apps keep on working with blacklists, they will always be running behind the virus makers.

Working with whitelists would be a good start. Only allow approved applications to run, and there will probably be no more virus able to execute on your machine. Of course it means you'll have to educate your PC...

[jasonemanuelson1]

Okay, sort of...

Steve, though this sounds great initially, there is an inherent
problem with this method. That is absolutely not to say there are
not ways around this, but it places control on one or a select few
organizations to maintain a whitelist, which gives them the
control completely. So, the question is this, what would happen
if the controlling agent of the whitelist was Microsoft? What if it
was another company? Self-interests will always come ahead of
whatever may be for the greater good of the people affected by
the whitelist. This means that if Microsoft or any other company
controlled this whitelist, it would be squarely in the eyes of
those that aim to persuade or manipulate that list, much like a
lobbyist or a even that company's sales efforts. In a more
trustworthy world, I would be all for your idea, but then if it were
more trustworthy, maybe we would not be in this mess at all.

But, I want to add on last thing. THis is the best thing we can do
though. Coming up with ideas, rather than just taking it as the
way the world is going to be is the right track. Too many have
already given up the fight and just submit to what is going on.
To all of those that are willing to take the time, energy,
resources, etc. to try to find solutions, I commend you all. It is
about time we saw another leap forward in both thinking, and
responsibility.

[Steven N]

All rubbish

As long as these apps keep on working with blacklists, they will always be running behind the virus makers.

Working with whitelists would be a good start. Only allow approved applications to run, and there will probably be no more virus able to execute on your machine. Of course it means you'll have to educate your PC...

[jasonemanuelson1]

Okay, sort of...

Steve, though this sounds great initially, there is an inherent
problem with this method. That is absolutely not to say there are
not ways around this, but it places control on one or a select few
organizations to maintain a whitelist, which gives them the
control completely. So, the question is this, what would happen
if the controlling agent of the whitelist was Microsoft? What if it
was another company? Self-interests will always come ahead of
whatever may be for the greater good of the people affected by
the whitelist. This means that if Microsoft or any other company
controlled this whitelist, it would be squarely in the eyes of
those that aim to persuade or manipulate that list, much like a
lobbyist or a even that company's sales efforts. In a more
trustworthy world, I would be all for your idea, but then if it were
more trustworthy, maybe we would not be in this mess at all.

But, I want to add on last thing. THis is the best thing we can do
though. Coming up with ideas, rather than just taking it as the
way the world is going to be is the right track. Too many have
already given up the fight and just submit to what is going on.
To all of those that are willing to take the time, energy,
resources, etc. to try to find solutions, I commend you all. It is
about time we saw another leap forward in both thinking, and
responsibility.