Microsoft exec: "Tax the internet to fight malware"

[techs]

http://www.computerworld.com/s/arti..._for_hacks_horrible_idea_say_security_experts

Microsoft's tax-for-hacks 'horrible' idea, say security experts

Suggestion that Internet users pay tax to fight malware, botnets gets thumbs down.

Computerworld - Microsoft's idea that the fight against malware could be funded by an Internet tax is "horrible," an analyst said Thursday as other experts weighed in on a recent comment by the company's security chief.

Earlier this week, Scott Charney, Microsoft's vice president for its Trustworthy Computing group, said that while there are plenty of ways to combat malware, scrub infected PCs and take down botnets, no one wanted to foot the bill.

"Maybe markets will make it work," Charney said, but then added that an Internet usage tax might be the solution. "You could say it's a public safety issue and do it with general taxation," Charney said.



What do ya think?

 

[dguy6789]

Ridiculous. Security is a complete non issue for anyone who has a basic understanding of using a computer.

 

[VinylxScratches]

Better idea? Write an OS that doesn't suck at security or not use it.

 

[santz]

Better idea? Write an OS that doesn't suck at security or not use it.

its not as easy as you think, in fact its impossible to make an "OS" program completely without security loopholes

 

[shortylickens]

2 replies and already mass amounts of stupidity.

 

[MotF Bane]

No.

 

[lxskllr]

I'd rather see fines for people with zombied computers if it can be shown that their machine was out of date with patches. Should be easy enough. $100 fine the first time it happens, and the fine gets doubled every time. $100, $200, $400....

 

[geno]

Let me get something straight, Microsoft, producer of the most targeted software for malware, is suggesting passing the buck by taxing internet usage?

HEY MICROSOFT : Dig into your own pockets and make your own shit more secure before holding your hand out to ISPs.

Granted, I've seen improvements in malware resistance from XP -> Vista -> 7, but XP's vulnerabilities just made a bad name for them. It just strikes me as humorous that their lack of security is prompting them to pass the buck.

 

[spaceman]

fine MS for GFWL!

 

[Red Squirrel]

No the way it should work is the people who let their PCs get infected for days+ with bots and spam crap, should be legally responsible, and charged. People have to learn not to let their systems be infected, and if they do get infected, clean it up now! don't just let it be!

 

[Bateluer]

No the way it should work is the people who let their PCs get infected for days+ with bots and spam crap, should be legally responsible, and charged. People have to learn not to let their systems be infected, and if they do get infected, clean it up now! don't just let it be!

Is it okay when the manufacturer does it? Ever get a new Acer, HP, or Dell? Will the OEMs get fined when they load the machine up with crap?

 

[geno]

Is it okay when the manufacturer does it? Ever get a new Acer, HP, or Dell? Will the OEMs get fined when they load the machine up with crap?

I guess that depends on where you draw the line between malicious and extra features.

 

[mallik]

If I remember correctly, Microsoft had a similar idea to fight spam; charge a penny to send emails.

For the average user it wouldn't amount to much. But for the POS spammers that send millions of emails, it would add up.

 

[AnonymouseUser]

Fuck Microsoft.

 

[spidey07]

This is terrible, this idea.

 

[theevilsharpie]

No the way it should work is the people who let their PCs get infected for days+ with bots and spam crap, should be legally responsible, and charged.

This. Put end users on the hook for poor security, and this problem will disappear within a year.

 

[geno]

This. Put end users on the hook for poor security, and this problem will disappear within a year.

It's a double-edged sword though, then the developers are off the hook for writing secure software.

 

[lxskllr]

It's a double-edged sword though, then the developers are off the hook for writing secure software.

Not really, people will speak with their wallets. If they're getting pwned through no fault of their own they'll pick a more secure solution. That would be like me tying my house shut with rope, and getting my stuff stolen when a burglar just cuts the rope. I can keep using rope, or I can buy a decent lock. In the end it's my choice.

 

[techs]

Not really, people will speak with their wallets. If they're getting pwned through no fault of their own they'll pick a more secure solution. That would be like me tying my house shut with rope, and getting my stuff stolen when a burglar just cuts the rope. I can keep using rope, or I can buy a decent lock. In the end it's my choice.

Yeah, I'm going to that other operating system that 95 percent of the people use and that is compatible with over 95 percent of aftermarket software and that sells for a reasonable price and doesn't have a monoply.

Oh, and would I NOT have to pay the internet tax if I have another operating system?

 

[lxskllr]

Yeah, I'm going to that other operating system that 95 percent of the people use and that is compatible with over 95 percent of aftermarket software and that sells for a reasonable price and doesn't have a monoply.

First there's that "no fault of their own" thing. It's the users fault almost 100% of the time when their box gets exploited. All the whining about MS doesn't change the fact that it's YOUR responsibility to properly use maintain your equipment.

Second, it's usually 3rd party apps and extensions that get exploited. You can ither update those, use something different, or use nothing at all.

Third Linux and OSX are perfectly fine choices. People can switch to those. There's always choices, and even with the alternatives, you still have to take the responsibility to maintain YOUR equipment.

 

[geno]

Not really, people will speak with their wallets. If they're getting pwned through no fault of their own they'll pick a more secure solution. That would be like me tying my house shut with rope, and getting my stuff stolen when a burglar just cuts the rope. I can keep using rope, or I can buy a decent lock. In the end it's my choice.

Given the fact that malware security hinges greatly on the integrity of the OS, I don't see too many people voting with their wallet anytime soon, as in switching to a non-MS OS, ya know? If people were voting with their wallet, I think you'd be seeing so many more people moving to Linux (the ultimate "vote with your wallet move - a free OS!) or people moving to Mac in great numbers.

In a perfectly competitive market, what you said is 100% true, but this is a unique industry in which one major player is calling the shots.

Now, if you're talking about 3rd party Malware programs like Malwarebites, et al, then I'm inclined to agree with your sentiments, but if you ask me, malware security needs to be preventative so I don't think we should be driving or encouraging the movement towards cleaning the mess up after the OS fails.

 

[RoloMather]

We should tax everyone and provide health care for all citizens. Prevention is better than the cure.

 

[lxskllr]

Now, if you're talking about 3rd party Malware programs like Malwarebites, et al, then I'm inclined to agree with your sentiments, but if you ask me, malware security needs to be preventative so I don't think we should be driving or encouraging the movement towards cleaning the mess up after the OS fails.

I get security updates every week for my Linux boxes. MSs problem is it has a 20' target, and 10,000,000,000 shooters aiming for it. Linux has a 15' target, and 4 myopic shooters aiming for it. My windows boxes are just about as secure as my Linux machines are. Neither gets exploited.

 

[us3rnotfound]

First there's that "no fault of their own" thing. It's the users fault almost 100% of the time when their box gets exploited. All the whining about MS doesn't change the fact that it's YOUR responsibility to properly use maintain your equipment.

Second, it's usually 3rd party apps and extensions that get exploited. You can ither update those, use something different, or use nothing at all.

Third Linux and OSX are perfectly fine choices. People can switch to those. There's always choices, and even with the alternatives, you still have to take the responsibility to maintain YOUR equipment.

This is kind of like saying that people should properly diagnose problems with their cars and fix them to keep them in original, brand new condition. Now, I know that maintaining a computer can be considered easier, but it's about the same argument.

 

[lxskllr]

This is kind of like saying that people should properly diagnose problems with their cars and fix them to keep them in original, brand new condition. Now, I know that maintaining a computer can be considered easier, but it's about the same argument.

If you can't do it yourself, you can pay someone else to. I'll be happy to remote into your computer to maintain it for you. I can write instructional guides, and give tips for proper operation. It'll cost you, but I'm more than happy to do it. "I don't feel like it" isn't an excuse to not maintain your stuff. Like everything else in life, you do what's right, or you deal with the consequences.