On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 10:11:26AM -0700, Eric Paynter wrote: > On Thu, June 17, 2004 8:51 am, DAN MORRILL said: > > Does it really matter who is in the anti-virus market? If Microsoft goes > > that way, and they have the best knowledge of what they created... > > (puts on tinfoil hat) > > >From a paranoid point of view, "best knowledge of what they created" is a > little scary. With MS in the virus prevention market, and with their > history of unethical anti-competitive behaviour... I'd bet they'd always > be the first to recognize a new virus. How? Because they could build in > the vulnerability and create the virus and the signature in the AV all at > the same time. Then anybody who has MSAV is unaffected, while the *real* > AV companies are always one step behind... Zero day viruses already > detected by MSAV - MS are Gods! How did they know? The other vendors lose > market share because they suck compared to MS... Eventually, MS owns the > AV market, the competition declares bankrupcy, and we have no choice in > what AV tool to use. > > (takes off tinfoil hat) > > OK, it seems paranoid. And if they were found out, it would mean (several > more) years in anti-trust court. But when has that stopped MS before? > [...]
Recently, an audio tape was released of Enron employees frankly talking about stealing millions of dollars per day from the people of California. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/01/eveningnews/main620626.shtml So, if there was any doubt before whether a large corporation can brazenly gouge customers, I think it's safe to say that such behavior is quite possible. -- "There isn't enough darkness in the world to douse the light of a single candle." _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
