According to Microsoft, there are 3.8 million infected botnet computers worldwide, 1 million of which are in the U.S. They are used to steal sensitive information and send spam, and were a launching point for 190,000 distributed denial-of-service attacks in 2008.
ALL of which run some version of the Microsoft Windows operating system.
So what is Microsoft Corporate Vice President for Trustworthy Computing Scott Charney’s proposed cure?
“I actually think the health care model … might be an interesting way to think about the problem,” Charney said. With medical diseases, there are education programs, but there are also social programs to inspect people and quarantine the sick.
This model could work to fight computer viruses too, he said. When a computer user allows malware to run on his computer, “you’re not just accepting it for yourself, you’re contaminating everyone around you,” he said.
Oh, I see. It’s the user’s fault. Uh huh.
The idea that Internet service providers might somehow step up in the fight against malware is not new. The problem, however, is cost.
Yes, Microsoft has ALWAYS wanted someone else to pay the price for their shitty OS.
Customer calls already eat into service provider profits. Adding quarantine and malware-fixing costs to that would be prohibitive, said Danny McPherson, chief research officer with Arbor Networks, via instant message. “They have no incentive to do anything today.”
Oops, look like you made a mistake.
“Customer calls already eat into Microsoft’s profits. Adding quarantine and malware-fixing costs to that would be prohibitive, said Danny McPherson, chief research officer with Arbor Networks, via instant message. They have no incentive to do anything today.”
There, I fixed it for you.
So who would foot the bill? “Maybe markets will make it work,” Charney said. But an Internet usage tax might be the way to go. “You could say it’s a public safety issue and do it with general taxation,” he said.
So, the botnets and viruses exploit the shoddy Windows OS and instead of fixing the problem (because they can’t) they want Internet users to “pay for it”.
How about Microsoft pays for it since they created the problem?
Ahem… I’m going to fix your sentence for you and hopefully you’ll see why I’m currently attempting to browbeat you over the Interweb Tubes
Unless you are saying Microsoft created the viruses, I don’t see how they are responsible for them any more than Beretta is responsible for some hoodlum misusing their product.
Commence with the 2 Minutes Microsoft Hate, but don’t blame them for the viruses.
P.S. Microsoft can guzzle my man chowder if they think I’m paying for someone else’s inability to secure their own computer.
Microsoft didn’t create the viruses, they just created the environment where they exist.
It’s not Microsoft’s fault criminals misuse their product, and my “Make Microsoft Pay” line was in response to the idea of a tax, not an assignment of blame.
The fact is that Microsoft was well aware of the virus problem (It predates Windows) and did nothing about it for decades. To now argue for a tax because of a problem they created is punishing the victim.
And like I said – They can eat a dick over that 😉
Yep.
Robb, they parked their car at the top of the hill, didn’t set the parking brake, and didn’t turn the wheels to the curb. OK, they didn’t actually push the car down the hill, but c’mon.
And can I just say that while I’ve heard of the “Microsoft Tax”, this is ridiculous …
There – my 2 minutes of M$ Hate! I feel so … cleansed!
I’m sorry, but ANY OS can and will be exploited when there is a big enough advantage to do so.
It’s simply that Microsofts OS’s dominate the market. Why make a virus that attacks only a tiny percentage of that market? Go after the big boy!
My friends at one of those alphabet agencies charged with watching over the internet say there are some major holes that COULD be exploited in Apples software, but its so much more productive to go after MS that it doesn’t make sense to those that propagate malware.
That’s why I own a Mac…
Well then … I guess we need to impose a tax on unsecure operating systems.
I guess that would be Windows.
Bill: that’s MS promoted bullcrap.
Windows is inherently unsecure. The OS originally assumed that the person sitting at the machine owns it. Much of the software still does.
UNIX can be hacked … but it can’t be hacked by some spamming retard using an off-the-shelf software tool. A UNIX cracker has to actually have a clue or two.
Use a Mac.
Less / no viruses/malware/spam.
No tax.
Problem solved.
Eat me, MS!
Oh good. The “macs are secure” line again. How are those drive-by downloads working out, or the dnschanger trojan, or “Back to my Mac” or logging in as admin then as someone else, or….
Yeah, it’s all MS’s fault.
The tax idea is utterly retarded, but let’s not pretend that ignoring problems is an MS only mindset, hmm?