Microsoft's Anti-Spyware

Microsoft has released the beta version of an anti-spyware.

http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/spyware/software/default.mspx

The issue is that most people have second thoughts about having
Microsoft taking more control of their computer. Later in the
week, they're going to release an anti-virus program as well.

What's your take on this?

f**k this

Hate michrosoft, cant wait till PCs switch to another operating system.

If your worried about security, get a mac, OSX has less holes than XP does in their operating system (A LOT LESS).

Dude, what is it with you today? You're full of nothing but bad information.

Windows wont go anywere because A) Consumers buy it and B) Companies
have contracts with MS to develop for it. Amongst many, many, many
other reasons.

I use Spybot Search&Destroy as Anti-Spyware software - maybe I'll give Microsoft's software a try.

And what about changing the OS you asked?
I use SuSE Linux 9.2 Pro alternatively as OS. Sure, it is very stable, it includes a lot of software packages and it offers almost the same comfort of my primary OS, Microsoft Windows 2000, but I still want to stick to Windows because of many things like games, office applications, and other stuff.

I don't trust Microsoft enough to install Service Pack 2. Ad-Aware is good enough protection for me.

Aren't/weren't they actually planning to charge people for this program?

i have service pack 2 on three comps. no discernible issues so far, but it is not fool proof either.. my son's pc has some sort of an issue i cannot even begin to explain. most likely due to a warez site :sad:

if you think MS fixed all the holes, it didn't, but if you are not the type to visit questionable sites, it seems to work fine.

i think its one of those decisions you can make or avoid and not be hurt by either.

/ 2 cents

I have SP2 on my machine, the only problem is that I have blank logon passwords on all my comps so they just turn on and go right to the desktop, but SP2 won't let you access any of the other computers on the network of you have a blank password.

I dunno If I'll install the antispyware thing or not. But i'll say this it cant be any worse than f**kin' steam.

i dunno if its relevant, but you can set XP to not display the logon password screen.

it was one of the tweaks from the link i posted last month on XP tweaks.

i know you said it was because it was a blank password, but blank is still considered acceptable. perhaps you forgot to reset printer/fileshare when the new pack installed. shrugs

home networks, as far as i know, do not require a password.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Orpheus</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>
home networks, as far as i know, do not require a password.

</DIV></DIV>
they sure as hell do now!!! My JOB is networking. I know how to set this stuff up, and the only way to get them to be able to access eachother is to set a passwor dof at least 1 character. Individual computers can have blank passwords, but if u wanna network them it won't let you.

That's the NT charm.

I hate Windows, but then, don't we all?

FYI: Bill Gates dropped out of college to start Microsoft.

Oh, my, gawd. That is utterly ridiculous. I've used the microsoft
firewall, which is abysmal, but the iriony behind it, is that microsoft
is taking advantage of the holes in the operating system to generate
even more profit. Sickening.

They're are plenty of alernitives out there if you're prepared to give up gaming to some extent.

An OS is only as secure as its owner.

CONSPIRACY THEORY:

Bill Gates deliberately puts security holes in Windows so that he can release updates and make BONUS PROFIT while creating the impression his software is MORE SECURE when in fact it's THE OPPOSITE! Bill Gates is EVIL! EVIL!!!

Please excuse my caps, but Microsoft justifies it.

Theory? Please, everyone already knows that!

It's not like we pay for the updates or anything...so the argument that
patching an OS makes them money is garbage. There are kernal updates
and numerous add-ons updates for Linux...way more than for Windows but
nobody says anything because it's just selective arguing.

Bill gates is conspiring with the hindu god Brahma. He will be releasing windows longhorn (the next windows) in a few years. any computer that has this Longhorn installed will actually transform into a portal that will allow millions of Brahma's long-horned minions to take over the earth. These minions call themselves "the Cowmbine." In exchange, Bill gates gets to take over as "administrator" of earth which gives him the power to save the earth from global warming with his new cooling technology but it actually causes another ice age on accident. This earns him the name "Breen" which means "glacier" in norwiegian.

Actually, updates do make money because it gives the impression that Microsoft is proud of their work and then more people buy their products. Eventually, Microsoft will rule the world through their sheer size and popularity.

OMG! Microsoft is exactly like Microsol in Tyrian!!! OMG OMG OMG

I get that MOST of your post was sarcasm, but the first sentence came
across as both honest, and bulls**t. If I've picked up on your
intentions wrong then let me know, but how the hell do updates make a
company seem proud of their product?

Something to do on the holidays: write an operating system (or any software), never release any updates and see how much the users like you. If you don't release updates, it looks you just write something, then don't care enough to follow through with it.

And I think Linux must be Gencore in Tyrian...

In the not-so-distant future, Microsoft will own all of our first-borns. And all of our kids will have the lastname "Gates". G. W. Bush will sign a business contract with Gates and sell all future Americans to Microsoft to fix Social Security and fill up the budget deficit.

That's even crazier than what I said (I assume your joking, of course).

foxpup, if the windows "updates" were actual updates that would be
another story. The only updates microsoft does are security
patches to fix bugs. That is much different than say.... freeBSD
where it is constantly developed and worked on, but not to patch
security flaws, but to make it better. Something that microsoft
knows nothing of.

Microsoft sucks
Okay?

An OS is only as secure as its owner.

So, what did owners do wrong when they got hit by MSBlaster?

I understand you're point, but some things are actually the fault of the OS maker.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting fraggard</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quote:</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>An OS is only as secure as its owner.
</DIV></DIV>

So, what did owners do wrong when they got hit by MSBlaster?

I understand you're point, but some things are actually the fault of the OS maker.
</DIV></DIV>

off topic:

fragman, any updates on the situation at home?
not morbid updates, i mean are you ok?

what about Brahma? He's coming, you know.

Most of these problems could have been prevented just by updating, one
reason that Linux OSes seem more secure is because the people who use
them generally need to know what they are doing and thus are much more
inclined to be updating and "in the know" so for that fact alone the
majority of computers running a unix based system are more
secure...those people will take the extra steps. In the Windows world,
it's really not that hard to make it secure, and it's your own fault
for not taking the time. People are either under-educated about it, or
ignore it since the whole package works fine out of the box
essentially. Not everyone's grandma is into hotfixes and service packs
you know.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Gorbachev</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>Most of these problems could have been prevented just by updating, one reason that Linux OSes seem more secure is because the people who use them generally need to know what they are doing and thus are much more inclined to be updating and "in the know" so for that fact alone the majority of computers running a unix based system are more secure...those people will take the extra steps. In the Windows world, it's really not that hard to make it secure, and it's your own fault for not taking the time. People are either under-educated about it, or ignore it since the whole package works fine out of the box essentially. Not everyone's grandma is into hotfixes and service packs you know.
</DIV></DIV>
Right you are, my hott-avatar-having friend! I have more to add though: Unix based systems are more secure for the same reasons that FireFox is more secure. The reason IE gets spyware and FireFox doesn't is because spyware-ers know that EVERYONE uses IE, so to maximize thier profits they go with the most commonly used program to affect more ppl. No one wants to make spyware that affects only Opera or Netscape or something... The same with viruses and worms; If the jerk knows that everyone uses windows XP then they are going to exploit the holes in Windows XP, not in a unix-based system that only 10% or less of ppl use. Especially when there are numerous TYPES of Linux and only ONe windows.

Another issue is merely the defaults, there are lots of websites and
business that revolve around Windows...so with Firefox the site doesn't
work properly. Both the OSes and Browser arguements often deal with
defaults...both are frequently capable of the exact same thing, but
their aim and user base is pretty much opposite.

Or maybe all the hackers and virus writers out there are plotting some kind of attack against Microsoft?!? Now that'd be cool.

Or maybe all the hackers and virus writers out there are
plotting some kind of attack against Microsoft?!? Now that'd be cool.

There might be some truth to that assumption, knowing how many enemies Microsoft has in the computer community.

Or maybe all the hackers and virus writers out there are
plotting some kind of attack against Microsoft?!? Now that'd be cool.

Uh ... Believe that's been happening
for a few years now.

I think "Malicious Coders"
sounds better then "Virus Writers", because it makes more
sense.

For those who didn't know: This MS AntiSpyWare thing isn't created by
MS. It's actually Giant AntiSpyware, and has only been repackaged.

I tried it, and it doesn't seem too bad. It's still in Beta though. It
totally ignored all my settings during installation, and proceeded to
enable Real Time Protection, run on Startup and run every night at 2:00
AM. So watch out for that. It found two registry entries that every
other app i've run didn't find, and it's quite fast.

Also, the default scan is a "Smart Scan", so don't go clicking "Next" blindly. Force it to run the full scan.

I just hope they don't screw up this scanner. It seems pretty good.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Foxpup</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>Or maybe all the hackers and virus writers out there are plotting some kind of attack against Microsoft?!? Now that'd be cool. </DIV></DIV>

actually, it seems to me if the asswipes would put this energy into a constructive solution the issue would resolve itself sooner. :rolleyes:

hackers are not stupid people, just disruptive, why not channel it to more noble ends?
anyone who thinks hacking microsoft is a good thing, supports messing up my home pc, AND I DISLIKE PEOPLE MESSING UP MY HOME PC!

I use all my own firewalls, anit-virus software and anti-spyware
software because quite frankly Microsoft can't do security for s**t.
Despite all the stuff I've got running, due to a giant hole in Service
Pack 2, I got hit with some malware. I did a bit of searching and found
a site that tells you exactly how to do it. The method meant that it
wasn't the kind of intrusion that would trigger anti-virus software or
get blocked at a firewall, making use of a giant hole in XP system
security and file types that have no use except in hacking, which Microsoft failed to remove from SP 2.

Here's the link.

http://freehost07.websamba.com/greyhats/sp2rc-analysis.htm

If Microsoft can't stop this kind of simple s**t, ain't no way in hell are they gonna be in charge of all my system security.

I'm sticking iwth my norton and ad-aware :smile: it works, so there's no need of taking such a risk

No single anti-spyware solution catches all the tonnes of crap running
around. I would advice everyone to use more than one. Especially if
you're on a PC where you're not the only user.

Lol! that is quite explanitary, but I wouldn't reccomend linking to this here, its hacking...

Just saw this on slashdot. MS has released a "Malicious Software Removal Tool"

http://www.microsoft.com/security/malwareremove/default.mspx

The one above requires IE and ActiveX enabled. Firefox users can download it directly from

http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=40587

methinks it should be a Malicious-Software Removal Tool and not a Malicious Software-Removal Tool like it seems to suggest :biggrin:

Yet, I consider ActiveX in the catagory of "malicious software"

I forgot how much fun it is to listen to people whine about Microsoft.