Page is a not externally linkable
jdMorgan - 1:46 pm on Nov 19, 2008 (gmt 0)
Critics will likely minimize this change of direction, and say that MS *should* do this, since security flaws in their own Windows operating systems and applications are responsible for allowing many of the exploits that viruses and other malware depend on to spread. Others will probably target the anti-competitive angle -- never mind that other free security suites are readily available. I'd like to see more communication between the MS OneCare group and the operating system development groups at Microsoft as well as other organizations, so that some of the attack vectors can be closed by changes to OS designs, rather than relying on after-the-fact malware discovery and removal. So, I see the providers of free anti-malware programs as part of the solution; For-profit security providers have no incentive to wish for improvements in prevention, since it undermines their potential profits. It's the old, "Why sell a cure if you can make more money selling on-going treatment?" problem. But nevertheless, this is something that Microsoft didn't have to do, and their community-oriented decision deserves to be lauded. Jim
This is great news... Thank you, Microsoft!