

Microsoft Apologizes for Serving Malware 171
dark_15 writes "Microsoft has apologized for serving malware via its websites and Windows Live Messenger software. APC reader Jackie Murphy reported the problem: 'With Microsoft launching Vista along with their Defender software to protect users from viruses and spyware, it seems therefore to be an oxymoron that they have started to putting paid changing banner advertisements for malware, on the popular MSN groups servers.'"
Say what? (Score:5, Funny)
Does anyone proofread anything anymore?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
SystemDoctor 2006?? (Score:5, Funny)
Personally, I'm downloading SystemDoctor 2007.
Re:SystemDoctor 2006?? (Score:4, Insightful)
really meant that 20% of dentists wanted you chewing the stuff that rots your teeth
If you polled system utilities firms, I'm not sure whether they WANT you to buy Vista,
or run an old rotten O/S that turned AV from a cottage industry to a major profit center.
Re: (Score:2)
"4 out of 5 dentists surveyed, recommend sugarless gum for patients who chew gum"
...
really meant that 20% of dentists wanted you chewing the stuff that rots your teeth
No, it could also have meant that those 20% preferred to tell their patients "don't chew gum" - or "chew whatever gum you want, but brush your teeth afterwards" or "sugarless gum really doesn't have any significant benefit compared to normal gum." The phrase doesn't say anything about what that 1 out of 5 recommend with regard to gum - if anything at all. It just says that when dealing with a patient who chews gum, 4 out of 5 recommend sugarless.
5 dentists isn't a very large sample group anyway...
Re:SystemDoctor 2006?? (Score:5, Funny)
OK, how about this:
35% of all road accidents are caused by drunk drivers. Therefore, 65% must be caused by sober drivers. Therefore, you're safer driving drunk than sober.
Re: (Score:2)
And don't worry, Vista is hardly the sugarless gum of operating systems.
Re: (Score:2)
There are these incredibly irritating ads that are always about what some celebrity has done (as if anyone cares) or some American football game. Then there's the window's skin, which is blue and shiny and stands out from everything else; if you thought GTK+ on Windows would look bad and out of place compared to something MS comes up wit
Somebody else said it ... (Score:2)
Just one question ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Even if this were true, how does proliferating malware on Windows hurt Google?
In Soviet Russia... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:In Soviet Russia... (Score:5, Funny)
I kid, I kid.
Re:In Soviet Russia... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
ISR, malware serves you to Microsoft.
Please choose one (Score:2, Redundant)
1) it seems therefore to be an oxymoron that they have started to put paid changing banner advertisements for malware, on the popular MSN groups servers.
2) it seems therefore to be an oxymoron that they have started putting paid changing banner advertisements for malware, on the popular MSN groups servers.
3) it seems therefore to be an oxymor
Re: (Score:2)
Either way, it's not the
Re: (Score:2)
If it was the editors, we could chalk it up to laziness. But this is coming from a supposedly reputable source with paid editors and other bells and whistles.
Re: (Score:1)
4) it seems therefore to be an oxy*HEAD EXPLODES*
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Cor, I'm getting nasty in my old age.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Cor, I'm getting nasty in my old age.
You're that old and still a virgin? No wonder you're cranky
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
or Bush Administration...
or Microsoft Works...
etc...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all."
Re: (Score:2)
No Conspiracy But Still Stupid (Score:4, Interesting)
Regardless, this is a really stupid oversight on Microsoft's part. Reminds me of the p2plawsuits.com thing [wired.com]. Shouldn't a person knowledgeable about ads be approving these beforehand (at least in Microsoft's case)?
Re: (Score:2)
I believe that was followed by the usual "deal with it, it's no big deal".
Re: (Score:2)
Fu.., if I wrote password stealing trojans, I'd grab the money and wouldn't be sitting here anymore! Even I can survive on 900k for a while!
Re: (Score:2)
Is M$ going to be prosecuted, are any of the executives going to jail, so what was the downside for this whole smarmy marketing scheme. M$ has a whole extensive track record of pursuing the dollars first and then letting their un-war
Slashdot is the worst malware (Score:1, Troll)
Re:Slashdot is the worst malware (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
That's a known Mozilla bug. Instead of crashing when clicking on a link, the browser attempts to open the URL listed in the href of the A tag, and will actually do so if the server is reachable and returns a page.
This is technically correct according to HTTP and HTML specifications, but unexpected behavior with users used to IE's 'crash feature'. As a workaround, instead of clicking on a link, you can press Alt+F4 or click on the X in the upper-right corner of the browser window, which will close your brow
Another reason to rush out and buy Vista? (Score:2, Funny)
AKA microsoft doing business as usual, is it not? Which is why in my book Vista et. al will be
System Doctor (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We are also very sorry for... (Score:2, Funny)
Intriguing. (Score:2)
Re:Intriguing. (Score:4, Funny)
Windows.Vista malware (Score:5, Funny)
Risk Impact: High
Systems Potentially Affected: All PCs
Behavior:
Windows.vista is malware that gobbles up all resources on a machine and renders it unusable. Suggested solution is to visit the following malware cleansing site : http://fedora.redhat.com/ [redhat.com]
Re:Windows.Vista malware (Score:4, Funny)
Known side effects: Steals personal data, installs backdoors, downloads code from the internet, has the ability to infect further files to prevent their use on different PCs.
Protection: None
Removal: Install a clean OS.
Re: (Score:2)
Risk Impact: High
Systems Potentially Affected: All PCs^H^H^H^H^H^H^HPC's with vast amounts of RAM
Re: (Score:2)
In other News (Score:5, Funny)
Symantec on SystemDoctor: Pot, meet kettle... (Score:5, Interesting)
I completed the unpleasant task of helping my wife get started with a new HP computer, preloaded with Windows XP Home and a plethora of shovelware. We spent hours watching dialogs pop up suggesting that we download this, register that, and update the other.
Practically the first thing that happened was that Norton Internet Security popped up a huge scary dialog warning us that we hadn't turned it on. The next thing was a huge scary dialog saying that it had found a security risk in her system. The problem it had found was that it apparently ships with no virus definitions at all, and required about twenty minutes over broadband to download and install some seventeen thousand of them. The next thing was a huge scary dialog saying that we needed to register with Symantec (presumably so that it can give us a huge scary warning at the end of the free 60-day trial).
The next thing was a huge scary warning that we needed to turn off Windows Firewall, which to Microsoft's credit is apparently preinstalled turned on and functioning, so that we could use Norton Internet Security's firewall instead.
The next thing was a huge scary warning that we had attempted to change Internet Explorer's home page from an AOL signup offer to my wife's existing "my Yahoo" page.
Every time she launched an application a little yellow flag would rise up from the taskbar to tell her that Norton Internet Security noticed that she had launched an application.
And from time to time it puts up a message box with no apparent purpose other than to tell her that Norton Internet Security is running properly. "Exaggerated reports of threats on the computer?" "Prompts the user to purchase a registered version of the software in order to remove the reported threats?" To be fair, although it did prompt her to register, I don't believe it will prompt her for a purchase until the end of the sixty days.
But the thing is the most intrusive, obnoxious, offensive piece of crap I've ever seen. It makes Clippy look adorable by comparison.
Presumably she needs more than just an antivirus program (ClamAV). If anyone has any recommendations on a well-behaved, friendly security program for Windows XP that isn't in your face all the time, I'd love to hear it.
P. S. The reason we bought a machine with XP is that my wife has been stalling on a much-needed upgrade for about three years now, and what she read about Vista was what convinced her that we needed to run out immediately while we could still get a machine preloaded with XP. Do you think she is being included in these statistics that show that Vista has boosted PC sales...
Re:Symantec on SystemDoctor: Pot, meet kettle... (Score:4, Informative)
I'm also a big fan of Kaspersky antivirus. It seems to only call your attention to something when it really needs it, and has intelligent things to say, rather than seeming to act like it's trying to justify being there. Stick to just A/V (that picks up spyware like Kaspersky does) and a little hardware firewall - it'll generally do the trick very nicely.
Re:Symantec on SystemDoctor: Pot, meet kettle... (Score:4, Informative)
Recent review here [biosmagazine.co.uk] and when searching for reviews just now (never seen a bad one), I just discovered it's user rating [cnet.com] blows away that of Kaspersky [cnet.com].. rightly so, IMHO. This is a nerd's AV if ever there was one.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The other poster in this thread level said that Kaspersky was a resource hog. I've never found that (except that big downloads on broadband can be made slower by Kaspersky doing its scanning during the download). Plus, its definitions a
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
AVG Free antivirus [grisoft.com]
LavaSoft Adaware [lavasoftusa.com]
and Spybot Search and Destroy [safer-networking.org].
Very little can get by this trifecta. When I suspect that a machine has received an inf
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I gladly trade beauty for quality.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/Fil
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
boot to safe mode command prompt? or boot off the windows CD and use the recovery console?
Re: (Score:2)
Then, (if you're really brave, or just stupid), boot back into Windows.
At that point You may also have to delete references to symantec from the registry. (but hopefully not)
Re: (Score:2)
You've had good responses but none so far have mentioned the most effective security measure you can take on a Windows XP system: don't let the user run under an Administrator account! Make an additional "restricted" user account for her under which she does the normal work, logging in to the admin one only as needed.
Programs that seem to require admin rights to run can often be beat into submission by adjusting the Access Control Lists of the files it needs to write to, or by using "Run As" (which I th
THANKS for the helpful replies. (Score:2)
What are the chances that Norton Internet Security will uninstall itself gracefully via the Add/Remove Programs control panel? (I certainly plan to set a System Restore checkpoint before trying it!)
Re: (Score:2)
One last question.
What are the chances that Norton Internet Security will uninstall itself gracefully via the Add/Remove Programs control panel? (I certainly plan to set a System Restore checkpoint before trying it!)
Try that first, but if it doesn't work, SymNRT [symantec.com] (download [symantec.com]) is the answer.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Even after uninstalling, you need to download and use a special cleaning tool to get rid of all of the files and registry entries that piece of crap software leaves behind.
http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/tsgeninfo.nsf
Alternatively, get it here:
http://www.majorgeeks.com/Norton_Removal_Tool_SymN RT_d4749.html [majorgeeks.com]
Uninstalling Norton has been known to hose sys
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My personal recommendation, which others will certainly disagree with, is to run Norton AntiVirus without any of the other Symantec/Norton crap. Google makes a 6-month trial of NAV available as part of Google Pack. I suggest that after your current 6-month trial expires, you uninstall all your Symantec/Norton software, re-enable the Windows Firewall, and use Goog
Re: (Score:2)
Amazing how different their corporate versions are to their 'clueless sucker' versions.
Re: (Score:2)
In my admittedly (and blessedly) limited experience, it'll start nagging her to purchase from 2-4 weeks before the end of the period. That's based on my parents' installation of the full version, which started nagging from around the 28 days to go mark.
Presumably she needs more than just an antivirus program (ClamAV). If anyone has any recommendations on a well-behaved, frien
Re: (Score:2)
The most frustrating thing is every day I turn on my Windows machine (fortunately that isn't often), Norton cheerfully pops up to tell me "I am not protected from 1 rapidly spreading threat" (the implication being that I need to re-subscribe, since my subscription wore off). It tells me this every freaking day. What is this threat?
It's a
Re: (Score:2)
For all I know, however, it's doing absolutely nothing to prevent viruses, but for now I'll trust their hype. I figure any program that's this polite is worth my money.
Tagging data missing? (Score:3, Insightful)
Too bad there's no flamebait moderation option for the twits who apply pointless tags.
Re: defectivebydesign (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you can show me a single microsoft software product that was released without showstopping MAJOR bugs being revealed within the first 6 months (ie, it was defective by design), I'd be very interested to see what you come up with.
yes, but... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
UserFriendly (Score:4, Funny)
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20050130 [userfriendly.org]
Standard Operating Procedure (Score:2)
It's important to note that in most cases, it doesn't change anything.
[shrugs]
Message to managers (Score:4, Insightful)
Here's what you get: "Whoopsie. Sorry, our bad"
Re: (Score:2)
Sensationalist? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
While a company did get through the cracks here, this is not a "security violation" that we typically ream Microsoft for.
Keep in mind that I can just as easily go to Google and search for "remove spyware" and be served Sponsored Links that will proport to remove my spyware for me, while actually installing more. Why aren't we bashing Google for this?
I don't run Microsoft Operating systems but... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I use EverythingIsn't hosts file to block ads [everythingisnt.com], plus AdBlock in Firefox.
Re: (Score:2)
Is a good start... (Score:4, Funny)
Gee (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Putting Paid (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Serving malware? Nothing new ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Motive? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Motive? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Motive? (Score:5, Insightful)
Plus, their apology and recommendations aren't any less stupid. From TFA : Microsoft recommends customers follow our Protect your PC guidance at www.microsoft.com/protect.
Let's have a look at their guidance: Protect your computer in 4 steps [microsoft.com] :
Step 1. Keep your firewall turned on
A firewall is useless in this situation. The user manually downloaded and executed a piece of software.
Step 2. Keep your operating system up-to-date
See step 1.
Step 3. Use updated antivirus software
That's exactly what the user is trying to do. The message lets the user believe he needs to use this software as a protection against viruses, spyware and whatnot. Plus, it's on a Microsoft.com page. You gotta trust Microsoft.
Step 4. Use updated antispyware technology
See step 3.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Step 5 (Score:2)
Actually, now that I think of it, that should probably be step 3.
Re: (Score:2)
But how do you sexually arouse a firewall? "Baby, you're *so* hot!"?
Re: (Score:2)