59 ms·
Have you never had a relative (usually your mom) install malware because they didn't know any better? Most people are not so tech savvy as those of us who frequ
by thordenmark 6y ago
Have you never had a relative (usually your mom) install malware because they didn't know any better? Most people are not so tech savvy as those of us who frequent Hacker News.
- flohofwoe 6y agoThere's nothing wrong about a malware scan on download (Chrome does this automatically too), but this scan should be smarter about detecting actual malware (it's called SmartScreen after all).
- _flux 6y agoBut it's basically an impossible problem to solve while not preventing running useful applications. You can only do that well until it becomes too difficult to do better.
- eitland 6y agoJust because it is impossible to solve completely doesn't mean they should get off the hook for conveniently "forgetting" innocent open source packages.
- gambler 6y ago>But it's basically an impossible problem to solve This is not just possible, but relatively easy to solve. Applications can be sandboxed by default. Signing the application or user granting it extra rights can remove some restrictions from the sandbox.
- wtetzner 6y agoBut the message specifically says MS will only trust applications signed by a Digitcert certificate. The problem isn't that they're doing the check, it's that the check is poor. There's no reason it needs to prevent people from installing software that has been signed.