Why is microsoft ignoring some potential threats?

[Jens]

First I would like to say that it is high time that
microsoft recognized and is addressing this issue. Kudos
to you.

Now, some issues I have:

1. Even though microsoft views cookies as a positive,
that is not always the case. My opinion is that MS
Spyware should detect these, identify them and then let me
decide if it is a threat or not. The presumption that
cookies are "ok" and not spyware is somewhat disconcerting.

2. I have been reading this list and have noted that
several persons associated with companies that make
software products complain that they are being incorrectly
labled as spyware. My here is that they are correctly
identifying that they may in fact not be spyware but I
disagree that microsoft should automatically put them on
the "ignore" list. If a program, a BHO or otherwise is
going to load itself onto my machine, I want to know and I
want the option of deciding whether to ignore it or not.
One example was VNC. It correctly alerted on it contrary
to the presence but mis identified it. I would want it to
identify it. Same with the ADP eliteplus et al. I am
quite capable of selecting "Allow always" if it needs to
stay.

3. as previously mentioned, unwelcome DLL modifications
should be blocked by MS Spyware detector.

4. Active monitoring (and innoculation) would be a real
boon to this software. Spybot S&D is a good example to
follow.

5. ActiveX are spyware unless I am specifically asked to
decide whether it should be installed or not. I set my
browser to "prompt" but feel that the antispyware should
also be asking the question.

Thank you

Jens

 

[Bill Sanderson]

I don't believe any final decision about how cookies will be handled has
been made.

Yes, it is important that items that are identified are described
accurately--VNC has been on my machines, I believe.

There is a great deal of active monitoring in this application--read under
Tools, real-time protection, and pick one of the three protection types and
read up on the agents involved--just reading the descriptions is a useful
learning experience in how Windows is architected and what the various
integration points are that are used by software, both good and bad.

I'm not a Microsoft staff person, and I don't speak for them. I know your
feedback was meant for Microsoft, and I don't mean to interfere in that
conversation, but I thought I'd express my thoughts on a few of your points.

 

[Robin Walker [MVP]]

4. Active monitoring (and innoculation) would be a real
boon to this software.

That is what all the "agents" are doing.