Microsoft's security meeting ends in suspicion.

[zekrahminator]

Since 1997, Microsoft has met with Anti-Virus software manufacturers to determine how best to protect consumers. This year, however, Microsoft's twice-a-year meeting went a lot different then previous meetings. Microsoft disclosed a lot less about it's operating systems then it has in previous meetings, causing distrust from companies that were required to sign a contract allowing Microsoft to use any and all ideas that were presented during the meeting. Companies were also made uneasy by Microsoft's entry into the Anti-Virus business. However, Microsoft's Griesi says "The fact that we now offer security products does not change our commitment to work collaboratively with all of our security partners".

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Jimmy 2004]

Aren't M$ in trouble already for not sharing info on how Windows works? This is just them trying to get a stronger position in the anti-virus market, but in reality it is likely to lead to less secure OSes, just another reason to start getting used to linux.

 

[cjoyce1980]

as i remember windows 3.1 had its own anti-virus program, so they would only be re-entrying a business which they were in, in the first place

 

[Alec§taar]

as i remember windows 3.1 had its own anti-virus program, so they would only be re-entrying a business which they were in, in the first place

You're right - they licensed Symantec technology iirc (could have been another no longer existing tools called PC Tools AntiVirus solution though, now that I think on it (editing)), for AntiVirus in Windows 3.11 (Windows for Workgroups).

APK

 

[Alec§taar]

Aren't M$ in trouble already for not sharing info on how Windows works? This is just them trying to get a stronger position in the anti-virus market, but in reality it is likely to lead to less secure OSes, just another reason to start getting used to linux.

Personally I think it is WRONG to "force" Microsoft into divulging trade secrets of how they did their OS itself via its sourcecode (which some business & academic entities are privy to, via NDA restraints etc.)...

HOWEVER, not unfair regarding their document formats OR protocols (this is for coders who wish to extend upon or use these formats &/or protocols in their own work/wares).

When I see this going on?

Heh, all I can think of is what Howard Hughes went thru @ the hands of Juan Trippe from the film "The Aviator"...

I.E.-> The rats (MS' competition) are ganging up & paying off U.S. politicians & others ("the best money TRULY CAN buy" no doubt everywhere) worldwide in other nations to take MS down, because their works cannot, point-blank!

* It's how the world works after all, especially in the world of business competitiveness... right up there with disassembly/reverse engineering types (lamos imo practice it & trade it off as somekind of "special know-how" or creativity - they are THIEVES, point-blank!)..

(LOL! What a shitty testament to the human persona, because the sad thing is it goes on all the time in manufacturing environs & yes, software engineering)

APK

P.S.=> The only REAL time I think that reverse-engineering or disassembly is needed, TRULY needed? Is for antivirus companies imo who have to research HOW & WHAT a particular viral strain is operating if unique & not "knockoff" variation of already existing ones... OR, maybe, in the case of what W1zzard here is doing in his SysTool/ATI Tool, if the oem doesn't provide sufficient info. or documentation/SDK's for doing tools like it! apk