Microsoft 'taking security risks'

  • Thread starter Thread starter imhotep
  • Start date Start date
I

imhotep

"With its upcoming Vista operating system, Microsoft is embracing the flawed
logic that computers will be more secure if it stops co-operating with the
independent security firms," wrote George Samenuk, McAfee's chairman and
chief executive in the advert.

'Preventing releases'
McAfee says Microsoft is stopping security firms from accessing the core of
the operating system, called the kernel, and is therefore preventing them
from releasing third-party security add-ons."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/5399534.stm

Imhotep
 
In
imhotep said:
"With its upcoming Vista operating system, Microsoft is embracing the
flawed logic that computers will be more secure if it stops
co-operating with the independent security firms," wrote George
Samenuk, McAfee's chairman and chief executive in the advert.

'Preventing releases'
McAfee says Microsoft is stopping security firms from accessing the
core of the operating system, called the kernel, and is therefore
preventing them from releasing third-party security add-ons."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/5399534.stm

Imhotep
Click to expand...


Well, ordinarily I'd raise my left fist and shout "Fight the power!", but
this is McAfee we're talking about here. I don't want them accessing
anything at all. Eeeuw.
 
"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
In


Well, ordinarily I'd raise my left fist and shout "Fight the power!", but
this is McAfee we're talking about here. I don't want them accessing
anything at all. Eeeuw.
Click to expand...

Too funny darling !!

Myself, I call it a disease if it latches into the kernel whether if comes
uninvited or from purchased software (even if from a company known
to never cause hangs, blue screens, partial uninstalls, etc..).
 
Hi Roger,
Myself, I call it a disease if it latches into the kernel whether if comes
uninvited or from purchased software (even if from a company known
to never cause hangs, blue screens, partial uninstalls, etc..).
Click to expand...

It's impossible to comment, we don't know the full details, but I have
to say I've found McAfee VirusScan Enterprise extremely well behaved
over the years, and way superior to Symantec in terms of low-level
system interaction. I also would say it un-installs much cleaner than
Symantec. I trust it far more than Microsoft AV.

As for Vista, I say Microsoft don't have a clue about the basics
computer security, but that's nothing to do with the McAfee claim,
that's my own claim.

They have a saying in America; "Making the same mistakes and expecting
different results", that's how I see it with Vista.
 
From: "Gerry Hickman" <[email protected]>

| Hi Roger,
||
| It's impossible to comment, we don't know the full details, but I have
| to say I've found McAfee VirusScan Enterprise extremely well behaved
| over the years, and way superior to Symantec in terms of low-level
| system interaction. I also would say it un-installs much cleaner than
| Symantec. I trust it far more than Microsoft AV.
|
| As for Vista, I say Microsoft don't have a clue about the basics
| computer security, but that's nothing to do with the McAfee claim,
| that's my own claim.
|
| They have a saying in America; "Making the same mistakes and expecting
| different results", that's how I see it with Vista.
|

Miicrosoft's AV falls way short of all vendors in the anti virus industry.

When I test it it averages a 40% ~ 60% catch rate and is always less than; Sophos, Krend
Micro, McAfee, Kaspersky, Ewido and others.

The funny thing (well it really isn';t that funny) is that I keep sending Microsoft samples
and then retest and Microsoft takes weeks to create signatures, if ever.

Virus Total is an excellent way to make simple virus industry comparisons. Too bad it is so
busy these days :-(
 
Gerry Hickman said:
Hi Roger,


It's impossible to comment, we don't know the full details, but I have to
say I've found McAfee VirusScan Enterprise extremely well behaved over the
years, and way superior to Symantec in terms of low-level system
interaction. I also would say it un-installs much cleaner than Symantec. I
trust it far more than Microsoft AV.

As for Vista, I say Microsoft don't have a clue about the basics computer
security, but that's nothing to do with the McAfee claim, that's my own
claim.

They have a saying in America; "Making the same mistakes and expecting
different results", that's how I see it with Vista.
Click to expand...

My experience with the corp version of Virus Scan is similarly
without any memorable, ill events.

Roger
 
It's impossible to comment, we don't know the full details, but I have
to say I've found McAfee VirusScan Enterprise extremely well behaved
Click to expand...

Your joking...
I also would say it un-installs much cleaner than Symantec.
Click to expand...

<BLOL>. Maybe. Maybe Symantec's uninstall amounts to leaving everything
still installed but removing the icons.
But hey, McAfee's is no better. I am about to thow their way a lengthy
complaint.
Part of that is how having upgraded twice over 3 years, I can see the
remnants of previous inactive Virusscan components littered all over
Windows. WHY WERE THEY NOT REMOVED ON UPGRADING????
I trust it far more than Microsoft AV.
Click to expand...

In terms of what it does, yes. But the interface is crap. It frequently
scans when it is not asked to even with all task scheduling switched off.
And numerous McAfees components other than the engine upgrade and DAT file
downloads constantly ask to be connected to the Internet (e.g. HackerWatch
which I did not want or ask for). It constantly says "I am not protected"
yet in the Manager everything is Green. It is the first Windows app I know
that does not close on the left -hand corner being double-clicked. And I am
astonished to find there is no "Help, About", hence no easy way to check the
version detail (but it is there if you click around). They seem to have
redesigned to resemble the way the Security Sheild behaves in XP, SP2
control panel.

Very disenchanted witn McAfee with the latest upgrade.

Stephen Howe
 
Stephen said:
Your joking...


<BLOL>. Maybe. Maybe Symantec's uninstall amounts to leaving everything
still installed but removing the icons.
But hey, McAfee's is no better. I am about to thow their way a lengthy
complaint.
Part of that is how having upgraded twice over 3 years, I can see the
remnants of previous inactive Virusscan components littered all over
Windows. WHY WERE THEY NOT REMOVED ON UPGRADING????


In terms of what it does, yes. But the interface is crap. It frequently
scans when it is not asked to even with all task scheduling switched off.
And numerous McAfees components other than the engine upgrade and DAT file
downloads constantly ask to be connected to the Internet (e.g. HackerWatch
which I did not want or ask for). It constantly says "I am not protected"
yet in the Manager everything is Green. It is the first Windows app I know
that does not close on the left -hand corner being double-clicked. And I am
astonished to find there is no "Help, About", hence no easy way to check the
version detail (but it is there if you click around). They seem to have
redesigned to resemble the way the Security Sheild behaves in XP, SP2
control panel.

Very disenchanted witn McAfee with the latest upgrade.

Stephen Howe
Click to expand...

I agree and our systems at school have McAfee Enterprise and I am not
that impressed. It is loaded bloatware.
 
From: "Dan W." <[email protected]>


| I agree and our systems at school have McAfee Enterprise and I am not
| that impressed. It is loaded bloatware.
|

McAfee Enterprise is NOT bloated !

What version atre you using ? V7.1E or v8.0i ?
 
David said:
From: "Dan W." <[email protected]>


| I agree and our systems at school have McAfee Enterprise and I am not
| that impressed. It is loaded bloatware.
|

McAfee Enterprise is NOT bloated !

What version atre you using ? V7.1E or v8.0i ?
Click to expand...

I will have to check and the computer that had been compromised David
was one that had McAfee damaged and it needs to be fixed again to work
properly. I will have to get the cd from the computer head lady, ASAP.
AVG is installed now as a temporary solution.
 
Hi David,
Miicrosoft's AV falls way short of all vendors in the anti virus industry.
Click to expand...

No argument from me:)
The funny thing (well it really isn';t that funny) is that I keep sending Microsoft samples
and then retest and Microsoft takes weeks to create signatures, if ever.
Click to expand...

Yes, I posted about this a few weeks back. I find it hard to see that
Microsoft will become a front-runner in the AV game...

Why?

I think they'll just get bored of it, it's not the glossy magazine stuff
they like; it's dull and highly technical.

Perhaps for some home users, a built-in AV will be useful, but will it
become a corporate standard?
 
Hi Dan,

I don't think you know what you're doing, or you'd have known your
version straight away, software, engine and DAT.

McAfee VirusScan Enterprise it's not bloated, it's very well written and
very fast, every DAT comes with a highly detailed set of release notes,
you are supposed to uninstall before you re-install (OBVIOUSLY!).

If you still want to claim it's bloat, tell us the DLLs you consider to
be bloated, or post benchmarks of what you scanned and how many file
accesses it made and how long it took, see also Roger's post where he
agrees it's "well behaved".
 
Gerry Hickman said:
Hi David,


No argument from me:)
Click to expand...

Microsoft's AV is Antigen. They bought out Antigen and the Antigen
employees came with the deal. Antigen uses the scan engines of Symantec,
McAfee, CA and several others. Antigen gained the licenses from those other
vendors to use their scan engines. This happened a year ago and my memory is
fuzzy as to exactly what scan engines they use, what is default, and what
you can "pay extra" for.

--
Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
www.wandtv.com

The views expressed are my own (as annoying as they are), and not those of
my employer or anyone else associated with me.
 
From: "Phillip Windell" <@.>


|
| Microsoft's AV is Antigen. They bought out Antigen and the Antigen
| employees came with the deal. Antigen uses the scan engines of Symantec,
| McAfee, CA and several others. Antigen gained the licenses from those other
| vendors to use their scan engines. This happened a year ago and my memory is
| fuzzy as to exactly what scan engines they use, what is default, and what
| you can "pay extra" for.
|

No. If anything it is based upon RAV which was bought about 4 years ago.

The Microsoft, so-called, AV solution for the desktop is not based upon a multitude of other
scan engines. LOL

You are thinking about the purchase of Sybari which is a Exchange Server (email and
messaging) anti virus solution.
 
It was definately Antigen.
If I sat through one more powerpoint presentation from that woman (formerly
from Antigen) that week I was going to have to ask her out so she would
leave me alone. (they always leave me alone when I ask them out). This was
at the last MVP Summit which was just over a year ago.

Surely other MVPs here were at the Summit and remember that,...it was
impossible to escape. We (the ISA MVPs) on the next day to avoid another
presentation arranged to change the schedule and found another room no one
was using and did "our own thing" with someone from the ISA team until
someone else needed the room. I think it was April and the Office MVPs that
came in later and we had to let them have the room.
 
Hi Phillip,

You're missing the point; it won't make any difference what they bought
from who. The company politics changes as soon as a company is bought
out; the original zeal and zest is LOST at that point.

At that point it's "just another Microsoft department", everyone will
get paid (and get long holidays) regardless of whether signature 'X' was
added or forgotten. In the old company they'd be fired on the spot.

The other problem is they'll lose all their old contacts from the AV
world, no one is going to talk to them (and help them) once they're part
of Microsoft.
 
Back
Top