Coffeehouse Thread

49 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Spyware: Why Microsoft Must Act

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    jamie

    from what i remember they want money to fix it though
    unlike adaware or spybot
    * but they detect free - is that the co.?

    regardless

    By the power not vested in me I hearby declare Spyware and Adware and Malware the problems of Microsoft Windows

    I "integrated" them

    like MS does Wink

    PS - think of the headlines:  "MS First true open source project combines forces with adaware team / spybot team to end all internet Malware"


    ..maybe you dont even need to buy them - just integrate them Wink

    (btw - if i ran ms - this would be in progress with a press release by next week)

  • User profile image
    JParrish

    Jamie.. you dont agree with legislation to stop invasive software from doing things that are unethical and most likely in violation of a user's rights? What side of the fence are you one?

    You are advocating MS buy these various companies that produce software that scan for spyware, much like anti-virus companies? Viruses are illegal, spyware currently isnt. Instead you think it is worth Microsoft's time to play cat and mouse with scum marketing companies, releasing constant updates to try and protect users from things that they brought upon themselves?

    I think you need to draw a distinct line here between exploits, whereas a user has no choice in the installation of said spyware, and spyware in general where the user has actively installed software ignoring the EULA and causing themselves great distress when their home page repeatedly resets, or pop ups appear no matter where they surf.

  • User profile image
    jamie

    but where do you draw a reasonable line between what you need to know to run a personal computer with internet and being computer literate?

    the only internet legislation im aware of is the dmca which is bad

    other legislation from what i know is very region specific - state by state - province by province - heck country by country

    this is why law and internet do not work
    unless you want to go down the global government road - WTO - one world one internet etc


    my point stands as - users are not to be blamed for exploits apon them - that they are the responsibility of Microsoft - not to be IGNORED anymore - and that your CUSTOMERS deserve and demand better

  • User profile image
    JParrish

    jamie wrote:
    but where do you draw a reasonable line between what you need to know to run a personal computer with internet and being computer literate?

    the only internet legislation im aware of is the dmca which is bad


    I agree DMCA is very bad.. it is a very broad law designed to restrict the rights of users rather than protect them. That is why I said "carefully drafted law" I mean that in the sense that unlike other technology laws, it can be written such that it protects average users, without limiting their rights whatsoever.

    Imagine this for a moment, you are most likely aware that the Video and Video game industries have created rating systems. What if by law a software company must provide a series of criteria that when translated to icons during a user prompt would display:

    1. This application collects information regarding your web surfing habits
    2. This application collects information regarding your music listening habits
    3. This application modifies your web surfing experience
    4. This application collects personal information regarding online purchases

    If this was a universal and easily identifiable system, it would make educating the masses easier so that they wouldn't install software that is really more malware than they realize.

    jamie wrote:
    this is why law and internet do not work
    unless you want to go down the global government road - WTO - one world one internet etc


    Surf outside of an organization under U.S.A. jurisdiction and you are subject to all kinda of illegal activity.


    jamie said:
    my point stands as - users are not to be blamed for exploits apon them - that they are the responsibility of Microsoft - not to be IGNORED anymore - and that your CUSTOMERS deserve and demand better


    I respectfully declare that you are absolutely wrong in the regard that if a user installs malware and the EULA specifically states the intent of the software, MS has no responsiblity to protect that user. It is very unreasonalbe to expet such.

    If you want to limit the scope of your argument to the exploitation of vunerablilties in the MS operating system, then I think you have a more solid case, but also be aware that MS is focusing more on this area, and there are reasonable steps that can be taken to limit the possibility that you would fall victim to one of these exploits.

  • User profile image
    manickernel

    Jamie, as a precaution you should tell your wife to change her online password. What some people don't seem to get is that the exploits last week (download.ject) were going on for some time and being used to install spyware, only when they modified the exploit to start stealing financial info did MS really react to the problem. I would imagine there is a rather heated discussion going on right now internally at MS as to the direction taken when IE was fully integrated....or not.

    Opinions expressed here are only those of a deranged ragbum. Give me my ship a a bottle of Pusser's...

  • User profile image
    JParrish

    Jamie.. I will respectfully bow out of this converstation with you now. I really don't think that you and I will ever see common ground.

  • User profile image
    value

    Well, my comment is very shot, simple, but in my humble oppinion it's all what needs to be said.

    Don't use IE.

    Since i've stopped using IE, around 2 months ago, i don't have any spyware, ad ware or any other unnecssary stuff on my pc. Even with the best possible attention i had like 3 tools ending up on my system every month.

  • User profile image
    lars

    By buying companies that build scumware, isn't that infact rewarding such activity? All of a sudden there is money to be made setting up companies doing nasty stuff just to be bought out by MSFT.

    /Lars.

  • User profile image
    jamie

    not the companies that build it ... the companies that stop it

  • User profile image
    lars

    Ahhh. My bad. Tough one. I think Microsoft should make every effort to make it harder to write spyware. And it would also be good if the antivirus vendors added a warning system that flagged the same kind of problems that Adaware finds.

    /Lars.

  • User profile image
    jamie

    "If you want to limit the scope of your argument to the exploitation of vunerablilties in the MS operating system, then I think you have a more solid case, but also be aware that MS is focusing more on this area, and there are reasonable steps that can be taken to limit the possibility that you would fall victim to one of these exploits."


    my whole thread is about  a spy/ad fighting team at MS - sp2 - as "good" as it is wont do anything
    holes will be found and ex-ploited

    Also - the user never KNOWS they are installing malware

    AND MS COULD protect these users if they "deemed" it prudent to do so
    ie; set up the consortium / buy the companies that fix the number ONE problem with Windows computers today and get on with it

    sorry not in agreement

    ( * i think you are thinking more of Spam and email legislation- not browser trickery by over 3000 companies)



  • User profile image
    manickernel

    Symantec is actually doing this in the version 9. Of course, since *some* adware is legal, such as Gator, it just tells you what an idiot you were without deleting or disabling the program due to legal issues.

    Oh, more on this:
    http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39159868,00.htm

    and the demo is still on the "So now we wait..." thread.

    And just remember:

    A SAFE PC IS A FUN PC!

    (where's that butterfly when you need him?)

  • User profile image
    BHpaddock

    Jamie... Microsft, I think, doesn't want to add Spybot-type software to Windows because that's a crummy solution to the problem!


    I think SP2 goes a LONG way toward preventing users from getting any malware in the first place.  That should be the goal... prevention and protection.  Not cleaning up afterward.

    I do think it would be nice if they could update IE with the SP2 features for all supported Windows OSes (2000, 98/Me, XP SP1, etc.).

    I've heard that MS is considering a virus scanning product... I certainly think that if they do that, they should include spyware removal tools as well.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.