Rivals dismiss MS Forefront security push
Microsoft released the final version of Forefront Client Security, its anti-malware software for enterprises, to manufacture on Wednesday.
Security rivals were quick to suggest that the software will prove little better than the company's consumer anti-virus software, which performed disappointingly in independent tests earlier this year.
Launching Forefront Client Security and System Center Essentials 2007 at an event in Los Angeles on Wednesday, Microsoft senior vice president Bob Muglia said the software would deliver deeper integration and simplify security management for its customers.
Microsoft Forefront Client Security is designed to protect PCs, laptops, and servers from viruses, spyware, and Trojans. The software features management hooks into System Center IT management software, Active Directory directory services, and other Microsoft technologies.
Muglia said Forefront Client Security had already achieved West Coast Labs's Checkmark certification. This certification cut little ice with security rival Symantec. While saying Microsoft is on the right track in focusing on improving endpoint security and ease-of-use, Symantec argues that Microsoft's software is riddled with shortcomings.
"From what Microsoft has said publicly, Forefront Client Security is based off the same anti-virus and anti-spyware technology as its OneCare product. OneCare has failed multiple third-party anti-virus tests, including the latest Virus Bulletin, which is widely considered the benchmark test for AV [anti-virus] engines," it said. ®
... hasn't anyone posted an analogy with "Foreskin" yet...?
So, if after having installed Forefront, the user feels that
- many people who have it don't want it;
- it's largely useless; and...
- there's evidence that life is more pleasurable without it, then...
...maybe someone will?
"Microsoft senior vice president Bob Muglia said the software would deliver deeper integration"
Oops. Doesn't that mean that when (not "if) the major security holes in Forefront are discovered, they can be exploited to compromise an entire enterprise through a single point of entry?
Hasn't Microsoft learned *anything* about security in the past decade? Oh, never mind, silly question. After all, Marketing is far more important than actual product functions.
Nice to see AV companies doing what they do best
It's Symantec's job to scare you into buying their after-the-fact product instead of Microsoft's after-the-fact product.
Fortunately for Symantec, Leyden forgot that Norton AV ALSO failed the Virus Bulletin 100 tests here, though he wrote that himself earlier:
And you can have all this after-the-fact security-blanket software even though Vista's more than capable of stopping this stuff before the fact, as can XP and 2K:
That is, of course, if you're smart enough to let them.