Microsoft Security: Conflict of Interests?

11 comments

Microsoft is to take on Symantec and McAfee, offering a subscription based security service aimed at fixing holes in their broken operating system.

A new security service from the software leviathan will charge users $49.95 per year to better protect its Windows operating system from worms, malware and other disruptive attacks.

Where is the incentive to keep the regular software up to date if they want OS patches to be a premium for sale offering?

To me that just sounds shitty. Why not just charge more for the OS and make security part of it?

Comments

bollocks

that's absolutely outrageous

it's not just that there's no incentive to keep existing software up to date; why bother beta testing Vista at all?

I'm with Bradley

In fact that might just be the dumbest idea Microsoft have ever had. It's a contender.

Nono I think you're missing

Nono I think you're missing the point. OS security will always be a problem that won't go away. You can close all the vulnerabilities of the system and still leave one wide open - the end user. That particular vulnerability will not and cannot ever be closed. Users will always think "Ohh, free porn executable" and run it, and all the patches in the world won't ever solve this.

That's what Antivirus is. It isn't system patches, it's to check what trash users have installed and make sure all viruses are eradicated.

MS will still release patches for unauthorised code execution. This service just covers the other base - and if users are stupid/careless enough to install viruses, they should pay to have the mess cleaned up. I whole-heartedly support a Microsoft Antivirus program, even if I won't be subscribing myself. And because you have to pay for it, people may opt to subscribe to different AV instead, which prevents over-specialisation.

Good show, Microsoft.

No Worries

I wouldn't worry about microsoft getting lazy about securing your system on the front end so they can make money on the backend. Microsoft is in this game for the long haul, not the quick score. This will encourage microsoft to spend more money and resources working on anti-virus programs, which i'm sure will make their front end more secure, not less.

look at the monkey

I don't know, if MS knew how to do security right then there wouldn't be a market for these security companies.

Are you going to trust the company which created the security holes in the first place?

Nothing New Here

Many software companies charge an initial fee then you pay an annual maintenance fee.

MS has obviously decided that they should be collecting this annual fee to offset maintenance of 5 year old operating systems as the patching and QA processes for old code is quite expensive.

That's why many other companies force people to keep on the upgrade path and those that don't keep up-to-date find themselves with forced end-of-lifecycle products.

I see the logic here, the virus vendors won't like it though.

Not a Problem for me

It's no different than a repair shop at the car dealership you bought your car from.

It's no different than a

It's no different than a repair shop at the car dealership you bought your car from.

Maybe if the car is used, but typically new cars come from factories not owned by the dealers.

Microsoft the used car salesman of software? Nice ring to it.

whatever their intentions,

whatever their intentions, it's extremely bad PR; to demonstrate that its actually worth paying for this ((so that people buy it) they're going to have to NOT FIX bugs for a while and only do it for the few people that go for it straight off the bat. Whilst that may convince a few people to sign up, its going to convince the remainder (a vast majority) that microsoft is leaving them vulnerable for the sake of money when they could instead be helping them. At a time where "Micro$ft" had the chance to pass on the EVIL label onto Google, they throw it all away...

Obvious to me

That most of the posters don't develop software based on these comments and have no clue what it's like to test millions of lines of code for all sorts of problems, including vulnerability.

For the size and scope of what MS does, they do a kick ass job.

Maybe the problem lies with all the vandals in the world, just like theives, as we wouldn't need locks if people could behave like sentient beings instead of animals.

Funny, RedHat charges a fee to keep RH Enterprise updated, people pay it too, myself included.

However, you'll probably blame that on Microsoft too.

Surprise Surprise...

Microsoft's Anti-Spyware program is causing troubles for people who also use Symantec's Norton Anti-Virus software; apparently, a recent update to Microsoft's anti-spyware application flags Norton as a password-stealing program and prompts users to remove it.

Washington Post

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.