Full credit to Microsoft in this instance. (And if you know me, that's not something I say often or easily.) This is very welcome news.
Microsoft has updated the methodology it uses to define adware, a move designed to make it clearer just what the company considers worthy for removal by its malware tools. Redmond's new rules are simple: an application is adware if any of the following criteria are met: It breaks the “unwanted behaviour” rules (in more …
"Man, the MS shills are getting up early these days! What are they paying you to say these things?"
I'm an information security professional, but a former BOFH.
My very first thought was yours, followed instantly by "what if" licensing bullshit.
Knowing quite well Microsoft's leverage habits and licensing games, I call bullshit and suggest it's a ploy to either extort other software providers fees to support their software and updates or the most laden in support requirements feature in the history of mankind.
Consider how many updates there are for the shitware Adobe Flash, Java and its seventeen million fixes, then consider smaller company software, such as Autocad and open source software.
Knowing Microsoft's history, it's either the most laden for support good idea or it's a poison pill, as any who refuse to pony up and is popular will lower the usage of the OS.
In one, I'm thinking in particular. Adobe Flash, as Facebook is built upon it and requires incessant updates for their nonsense games to work.
And to be honest, is the quickest reported problem in an the update system.
When the worker is pissed off that their favorite "program" doesn't work, the helpdesk overflows. We get notification.
So, with no due respect to either fanboy calls or fanboy denouncer nonsense, I'll sit back and kick into play either side of the aisle and see who remains standing.
My preferred vote is for one of the *BSD, though not Apple's version.
And for full disclosure, I'm using a MacBook Pro. Which gave me major heartburn to properly secure, but retain operational status.
Know *my* first thought?
Adobe has to pay up or be blocked for updating by SCCM or other remote update.
The same for Oracle for Java.
Leaving all non-Microsoft software not updated and leaving *all* systems not using 100% Microsoft products vulnerable.
Well, unless they and all open source product producers pay up.
A future brother-in-law bought a new PC last week and tried to set it up himself, but had problems.
When I got there, I found 30 instances of 5 differrent click-jackers on the machine! It seems many came over from his old XP machine, which had around 200 instances of malware on it! :-O
Malwarebytes managed to clean up the mess, but Avira said both PCs were clean!
"When I got there, I found 30 instances of 5 differrent click-jackers on the machine! It seems many came over from his old XP machine, which had around 200 instances of malware on it!"
Well, I had a brand new XP box and deployed to the Middle East.
Within a minute of *modem* connection, I saw connection to my $C.
I terminated connection and examined what Gateway sold me, software wise, in rather a bit of detail.
When I reconnected, I had already ascertained no rootkit nonsense, no new connections to C$ and admin$ was long gone (thank the Gods of careless Computing for letting me miss that!).
One burst of intracranial flatulence is all that it takes.
As for Microsoft, my wife had a Vista64 box that was incorrigibly slow. *Nothing* this old BOFH could do could make it run reasonably.
I upgraded to Linux.
The 64 bit system operates as advertised. Even her Facebook bullshit games work far, far, far, far better. Which means attempts at consuming 100% memory, but failing to and still operating.
Even better, it plays moving pictures of our grandchildren quite well!*
*Intentional use of a relatively ancient term. I'm equally comfortable in a low tech, no tech or high tech environment, operationally. I far prefer high tech for comfort. ;)
Will the Malicious Software Removal Tool uninstall Windows next ? Because anytime I open internet explorer, for example, I get a popup that takes me to some unknown website to setup my browser - no idea why it wants to go online, I close the bugger immediately anyway. Since sir BG said ie is integral part of windows, I wonder how the previously mentioned tools will remove the browser with the OS and without removing itself ... Like the UNIX "sudo rm -rf /" dilemma.
DISCLAIMER: All I want to do in ie is see if window cleaners can access my site ...
The reason that I abandoned Windows was that I spent more time running programs to eliminate malware than actually using it productively.
Last week I saw the first pop-under in years while running Chromium on Xubuntu and visiting yify.tv. (Warning! It's best not to visit this site if you're running Windows)
They're keeping us safe, from ourselves.
I only read this as brick number 1 in their soon to be coming "Walled Garden". So if you like the Apple App store you'll love this.
Soon we'll all need to be "hackers" if we want to install a 3rd party non-approved Minesweeper game.
I once had to field a help desk call from a new PC user who had barely got his brand new computer on line before getting pop-ups telling him his machine was low on memory and he should buy some more.
It took me ages to convince him it was just an advertisement, and that there was nothing wrong with what we'd just sold him.
Malware makers are getting better than that. I recently received a file on Skype - something like image_2039847rcs.jpg.
Harmless jpeg? Not quite. Because what you can't see is the unicode text direction control character inserted before the 'rcs' that makes everything following it display in right-to-left order. The real filename is image_2039847(UNI-WEIRD)gpj.scr. Windows screensaver, executable.
The obvious partial solution would be for MS to release a patch that makes Explorer ignore unicode direction control characters in filenames, and refuse to load any executable that has one.
The provider of the software has to be clearly identified, you have to be able to close advertising windows, and the software has to be uninstallable “using the same name as shown in the ads [the software] produces”, Microsoft states.
The software is the technically-free Fluffy Mice Dice game, it produces ads for the Fluffy Mice Dice game, and if the software is honestly named FluffyMiceDice.exe and labeled Fluffy Mice Dice, it must be impossible to install the software?
Anything from CNet certainly fails. Microsoft would be good just to block that DOWNLOAD*COM website totally. To download freeware one needs an installer program. It is insane that MacAfee is installed with everything as well as other useless junk. Many of these freeware sites have turned into malware installers. Toolbars for tools and foolbars for fools!
It cracks me up when I see all these guys with this story...
" I used to have Windows but got so many pop ups I had to go running to Linux/Mac/another OS"
Really? You don't know what a firewall is? You don't know how to install another browser? You are not familiar with ad blocking? Pop up blocking? You click on every advertisement, is that what you do? You go surfing for naughty bits on your main PC? Oh boy...Hahaha....
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019