3 ms·

I think the realistic situation is that they're desperately trying to fix it at one end and selling protection at the other end. There's no malicious causality

by hvgk 5y ago

I think the realistic situation is that they're desperately trying to fix it at one end and selling protection at the other end. There's no malicious causality here. It's just a typical human evolutionary shit show. Really it sucks for the end users because the security solutions are a shit show and vastly destroy the usability of devices for technical and power users and the architectural flaws of windows are just horrible to start with. As much as I am no fan of Microsoft, at least they're trying though.

hulitu 5y ago
> I think the realistic situation is that they're desperately trying to fix it at one end and selling protection at the other end. There's no malicious causality here. It's just a typical human evolutionary shit show. Microsoft did not care about security until ca. 2001. Then some viruses came which prompted MS to address some issues. The only security step taken later by MS was to integrate Defender in windows. But this came late, at the time when the so called AV products were basically rootkits (which Defender is also). With the rise of javascript and the browser as a (virtual) machine, came a lot of remote exploits. Of course MS does not care, it is your data that you have to protect. > Really it sucks for the end users because the security solutions are a shit show and vastly destroy the usability of devices for technical and power users and the architectural flaws of windows are just horrible to start with. The security solutions are a shitshow because there are no real security companies. They mostly offer security as a certification - install our software and you will reach certification X. > As much as I am no fan of Microsoft, at least they're trying though. I don't think so. Their aim (like every company) is to make a lot of money from all their departments. Thei sell everything, even "security".

by hvgk 5y ago

hulitu 5y ago

> I think the realistic situation is that they're desperately trying to fix it at one end and selling protection at the other end. There's no malicious causality here. It's just a typical human evolutionary shit show. Microsoft did not care about security until ca. 2001. Then some viruses came which prompted MS to address some issues. The only security step taken later by MS was to integrate Defender in windows. But this came late, at the time when the so called AV products were basically rootkits (which Defender is also). With the rise of javascript and the browser as a (virtual) machine, came a lot of remote exploits. Of course MS does not care, it is your data that you have to protect. > Really it sucks for the end users because the security solutions are a shit show and vastly destroy the usability of devices for technical and power users and the architectural flaws of windows are just horrible to start with. The security solutions are a shitshow because there are no real security companies. They mostly offer security as a certification - install our software and you will reach certification X. > As much as I am no fan of Microsoft, at least they're trying though. I don't think so. Their aim (like every company) is to make a lot of money from all their departments. Thei sell everything, even "security".