How many times have you been told that when one door closes, another one opens? Probably a whole bunch, but what no one ever bothered to disclose is that this idiom isn't always an inspirational motivator to carry on with life and can sometimes apply to those with less scrupulous intentions. Case in point: a security firm warns that the Koobface worm is no longer spreading through social networks and is now slithering its way across BitTorrent sites.
Google is confident that its cloud-based Chrome OS will change the computer security landscape beyond recognition. That the many layers of security built in to the operating system will be enough to render third-party anti-virus solutions useless.That you will no longer have to “spend hours fighting your computer to set it up and keep it up to date.” But not everyone - least of all computer security companies - is convinced.
Security firm Trend Micro says it is currently monitoring a large-scale SQL injection attack that continues to spread to more websites. Compromised sites are being injected with a malicious script designed to redirect visitors to URLs laced with malware, including fake antivirus software. Trend Micro says it can't find any common denominator as to which industries are being targeted. Infected sites run the gamut from astronomy, clubs, hospitals, sports, funeral homes, electronics, and so forth.
According to security software maker Trend Micro, Apple's iPhone trumps Google's open-source Android platform when it comes to viruses.
"Android is open-source, which means the hacker can also understand the underlying architecture and source code," Steve Change, chairman of Trend Micro, said in an interview with Bloomberg. "We have to give credit to Apple, because they are very careful about it. It's impossible for certain types of viruses" to operate on the iPhone.
Chang believes Android users will spend more on security software for mobile devices, and of course Trend Micro sells a a $3.99 app that promises to protect Android devices. And what about an app for the iPhone?
"Apple has a sandbox concept that isolates the platform, which prevents certain viruses that want to replicate themselves or decompose and recompose to avoid virus scanners," Chang said.
Starting November 1st, Microsoft began making its free Security Essentials antivirus software available to Windows users through its Microsoft Update service, a move which has sparked outrage among at least two AV vendors.
"This will end up in action taken, especially in Europe," Panda Chief Executive Juan Santana told CNet in an interview. Santana went on to say that Panda "will monitor the situation," and Panda isn't the only one. Trend Micro isn't happy about the move either.
"Commercializing Windows Update to distribute other software applications raises significant questions about unfair competition," Carol Carpenter, general manager of the consumer and small business group at Trend Micro, told Computerworld last week. "Windows Update is a de facto extension of Windows, so to begin delivering software tied to updates has us concerned. "Windows Update is not a choice for users, and we believe it should not be used this way."
In a blog post on Monday titled "Microsoft just doesn't get it... Security is about diversity," Panda took things a step further in its criticism of both Security Essentials and how it's being distributed.
"Microsoft recently started installing its Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE) free antivirus product via the Operating System update mechanism to computers which don’t already have an antivirus installed. Basically Microsoft is saying they are worried about the security of its users and they need to make sure they are protected... We agree with Microsoft; it’s better to have some protection than not having any at all. However the way the guys in Redmond are executing the idea is risky from a security perspective and could very well make the malware situation much worse for Internet users. That’s why we encourage Microsoft to continue using Windows/Microsoft Update but instead to push all free antivirus products available on the market, not just MSE."
You can read the entire blog post here, then hit the jump and tell us whether you agree with Panda and Trend Micro, or if competing AV vendors should 'leave Microsoft alone!'"
Intel last month snatched up security firm McAfee for a cool $7.68 billion in a deal that was unanimously approved by both boards. As it turns out, McAfee isn't the only one being suited.
Trend Micro CEO Eva Chen admitted that several first-tier companies have shown interest in acquiring the security outfit. For the time being, Chen contends that Trend Micro would rather remain an independent entity, but since it's a publicly listed company, it's conceivable that an offer too good to refuse could come along and have shareholders clamoring to sell.
So how much would it take to buy a company like Trend Micro? Quite a bit. Though Intel paid McAfee a 60 percent premium over the company's market value, Chen says that Trend Micro would command even more, much more. The company has already ponied up $300 million to build a cloud computing infrastructure, and in 2009 Trend Micro set an internal goal of raising annual revenues from $1 billion to $2 billion within the next three years.
In other words, yes Trend Micro is open to offers, but only companies with money to burn need apply.
Trend Micro should come with a warning label that reads, “Caution: May be hazardous to your system’s boot time, overall performance, and system security. Use at your own risk.”
Instead, Trend Micro promises “the most comprehensive, easy-to-use protection for your personal data,” which just isn’t true. We have so many complaints its tough to decide where to begin, so let’s start with system performance.
Trend Micro added more than half a minute to our test bed’s boot time—long enough for some PC components to become obsolete. It also turned in the lowest PCMark score, although there were other products with scores nearly as bad.
Has anyone ever asked you where you see yourself in five years? If we were to pose that question to Trend Micro, the security firm would say it sees itself ahead of Symantec.
According to company founder and chairman Steve Chang, Trend Micro, currently the world's second largest security software and services firm, has set a goal to jump ahead of Symantec in five years through its development for cloud computing.
Trend Micro has already spent $300 million in R&D over the past four years building a cloud computing infrastructure, and going forward, Chang believes this will be key in taking the No. 1 spot. Chang says there's a ton of market potential in the security of server virtualization, mobile Internet connectivity, and handheld devices, all of which his company is in position to provide for.
But will it be enough to overtake Symantec? We'll have the answer for you in five years.
Security firm Trend Micro last week announced a new wholy owned cloud computing subsidiary, TCloud Computing, which the company says will provide technological expertise, system integration, consulting, and training for clients to establish their own cloud computing architectures.
Trend Micro has raised about $3.8 million in initial capital and 60 staff members for its new venture, and plans to add some 200 more to its TCloud Computing workforce in 2010, targeting mostly those with an engineering background. But that investment's a drop in the bucket compared to the $300 million Trend Micro has spent over the past four years to conduct R&D to build an infrastructure for cloud computing.
Setting its sights mostly on telecom carriers and enterprises in Taiwan and other countries in Asia, Trend Micro says its TCloud Computing business should generate about $3.74 million over the next two years.
The headline sounds quite a bit more sensational than the content, but bear with me here folks. According to Raimund Genes, CTO of the security firm Trend Micro, the User Account Control changes in Windows 7 make it significantly less secure out of the box than Vista was. Genes claims Microsoft has made design choices that sacrifice security, primarily in the name of usability.
"I was disappointed when I first used a Windows 7 machine that there was no warning that I had no anti-virus, unlike Vista," Genes said. "There are no file extension hidden warnings either. Even when you do install anti-virus, warnings that it has not been updated are almost invisible." "Windows 7 may be an improvement in terms of usability but in terms of security it's a mistake, though one that isn't that surprising. When Microsoft's developers choose between usability and security, they will always choose usability," Genes argued.
This is an interesting theory, but is Windows 7’s really less secure? Some might argue that when dealing with the general public, security and usability is a delicate and important balance. If you nag and warn users too much about non-critical security issues, they tend to eventually tune out or pay less attention to them. For example, if UAC prompts are so frequent that they interfere with your work, you’re less likely to stop and examine each one to determine its validity.