Long fuse for Microsoft's security challenge

As security companies brushed off any immediate threat from Microsoft's plan to give away anti-spyware tools, analysts noted that the software giant could yet become a force in the security market.

On Wednesday, security business leaders responded to Microsoft's announcement of its plan at RSA Conference 2005 by challenging the company's ability to offer technology that rivals existing tools. In that, they echoed Symantec CEO John Thompson, who said on Tuesday that his company's products could "whip" any security software that Microsoft has to offer.

Special coverage
RSA conference

All the latest from the security confab in San Francisco.

While most acknowledged that Microsoft can quickly ramp up to build useful applications for battling spyware and other pests, the consensus among Microsoft's newest rivals was that the learning process would take years rather than months.

"It will take them some time to get to a point where they're truly competitive against people who have real experience in this field," said Gene Hodges, president of security software maker McAfee.

But analysts at Gartner said Microsoft is likely only in the early days of what will become a wider security software effort, including a push into the market for both consumers and businesses.

"Even as Microsoft ships its desktop antivirus and anti-spyware products later this year, this is simply one step in Microsoft's multipart strategy to deliver a comprehensive host-based security platform for its desktop and server operating systems during the next five years," Gartner analyst Neil MacDonald wrote in a research report published earlier this month.

That push could threaten an even wider range of security companies and technologies, as Microsoft moves past spyware, into different areas of the security market, experts said.

MacDonald calculated that the impact on rival security software makers will be significant, as Microsoft's move is likely to drive down prices of many off-the-shelf products and to reduce the cost to customers of renewing licenses for antivirus software and services.

Hodges said Microsoft's potential in the anti-spyware sector should not be underestimated. However, he believes companies such as McAfee have a head start that will

[landlines]

Watch for Microsoft to renounce "Active X"

Yes, get r-e-a-l-l-y comfortable so you can endure the wait for Microsoft's announcement that they have discovered that the whole "Active X" concept was a terrible architectural flaw which creates a "virus super-highway" right into the heart of all of their products.

Then wait for the announcement that, from now on, Microsoft products will conform 100% to W3C standards and that no Microsoft scripting features will allow access to critical system resources without passwords and explicit local operator permission.

Make sure you have access to a comfortable place to sleep, many years' supply of food, and lots and lots of things to read while you're waiting.

[sunergeos]

Eventually, they will be able to predict the future.

I remember reading a quote years ago from a programmer who was reflecting on the current comments from Microsoft competitors. The competitors were making accusations that Microsoft was hiding APIs and that they would change things around so that competitor software wouldn't work (think DR-DOS). Anyway, the quote went something like...

"Why would you license a competitor's development environment, install it onto a computer that run's that competitor's operating system, and build software that will eventually have to compete with that competitor's products"?

In other words, it's a losing proposition anyway you look at it. So, will Microsoft overtake the security companies? Of course they will! Microsoft built the petri dish in the first place, you don't think they know more about their own vulnerabilties than the other guys do? Why fix your own software for free when you can increase revenue by making your customers by the rest of the system for security.

Think about it, they will be able to release software with specific vulnerabilities that can be remedied by purchasing additional Microsoft software. They will be first to market with the fix making the competition look inadequate in their response time. After all, response time is everything in security software. It'll be kind of like having the ability to predict the future.

[Ubber geek]

competitor's operating system

http://www.analogstereo.com/mercedes_s_class_owners_manual.htm

[pkscout]

Can You See Free and Pre-installed?

Microsoft doesn't have to compete. They just have to make
something that doesn't actually cause your machine to burst into
flames. Then they can give it away and bundle it with the OS.
Oh wiat, I'm sorry, since they are a convicted monopolist, they
can't bundle it. But since the Justice Department doesn't get
software, Microsoft *can* add it as an "enhancement" to the OS.
How exactly with Symantec, Cisco, McAffee, or anyone else
compete against free and pre-installed?

The answer is they can't. Chalk another one up for the illegal
monopoly. And it's even better this time, because Microsoft
actually *CREATED THE PROBLEM* they are now going to solve.

Did they?

Microsoft created spyware and viruses? I didn't know that.

[EdShaffer]

Security is part of an OS Responsibility

The operating system is responsible for the security of data placed on it. Why does the IT Industry not have the responsibility to make "safe" products?

When you buy a vehicle, you do not have to go somewhere else for bumbers, somewhere else for air bags, etc. It is as though operating system manufacturers have no responsibility for providing a quality product.