Several interesting news items regarding Microsoft today. Thinking about it,
with some smarts, it seems quite possible Microsoft will remain the dominate
world ICT player. For example, free mobile phone etc operating systems that
readily function as fully networked remote extensions to home Windows networks,
complete with now reasonably effective Microsoft security, will be very
attractive.
In future, who knows what features a tight home-network/mobile-device
technology OS coupling might enable?
Especially if Microsoft also fosters the development of a large and
private/secure mobile app ecosystem. (Compared with and unlike Android apps ...
by design with almost zero privacy).
1. "Microsoft to give away Windows for phones, small tablets." The move is an
attempt to increase the OS' presence in those devices, where Android and iOS
rule. By Juan Carlos Perez (IDG News Service) 03 April, 2014
2. "IE easily beats Chrome, Firefox, Safari in malware detection." NSS Labs
tests showed IE with a 99.9 per cent block rate for socially engineered malware
(SEM). By Antone Gonsalves (InfoWorld) 03 April, 2014.
Microsoft's combination of application reputation technology and URL filtering
gave Internet Explorer a malware block rate that blew pass Google Chrome,
Mozilla Firefox and Apple Safari.
The latest tests from NSS Labs showed IE with a 99.9 per cent block rate for
what the security tester calls socially engineered malware (SEM). Chrome had a
rate of 70.7 per cent while Firefox and Safari hovered around 4 percent.
In general, SEM includes all malware that a computer user is tricked into
downloading on the Web through a malicious link in an email, instant message or
other vehicle. Malware delivered as an email attachment is excluded.
Microsoft and Google use a combination of application reputation technology and
URL filtering in detecting malware. The difference is Microsoft relies more on
URL filtering, while Google does the opposite.
"They both use the same approaches, but the recipes are different," Randy
Abrams, research director at NSS Labs, said.
The low rates of Firefox and Safari are due to the browsers only using Google's
URL filtering through its Safe Browsing service available to application
developers, Abrams said. Neither browser uses an application reputation system,
which scans all downloads for attributes that indicate malware.
Chrome's latest block rate was substantially lower than the previous NSS Labs
test, when the browser's score was 83.17 percent. Abrams did not know the
reason for the significant drop, but suggested two possibilities.
Google might have lowered the aggressiveness of its application reputation
system, if it was preventing too many legitimate applications from being
downloaded. Another possibility is hackers have profiled how the system works
and have figured out a way to game the system.
Google did not respond to a request for comment.
NSS Labs also tested three leading browsers from China. The Liebao Browser,
developed by anti-virus vendor Kingsoft, came in second behind IE with a block
rate of 85.1 percent.
Liebao does not use application reputation technology. Instead, Kingsoft
depends on its cloud-based malware detection system to scan all downloads.
Liebao surpassing Chrome is unexpected because most browser makers have turned
toward application reputation, also called content-agnostic malware protection
(CAMP), because it is believed to be the most effective.
Kingsoft's approach uses URL filtering with cloud-based file scanning, which
Abrams found "very interesting."
"I thought application reputation was going to be the predominant technology
for protection, and it really is a surprise to see this cloud-based file
scanning perform so well," he said.
As of last month, IE held nearly 58 percent of the browser market, with Firefox
and Chrome each with slightly more than 17 percent, according to Net
Applications.
--
Cheers,
Stephen
_______________________________________________
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
