Microsoft security VP suggests Net tax as cure for spyware problem

By on Mar 4, 2010 at 9:01 AM
News March 4, 2010

spyware

As part of his presentation at the RSA Security Conference currently taking place in San Francisco, Scott Charney, Microsoft’s Corporate Vice President for Trustworthy Computing, discussed different tactics for combating the scourge of spyware that is infecting computers by the billions. One such proposition applies a health care paradigm to the problem and views spyware as a disease that requires a social program to identify, quarantine, and cure afflicted computers. The bulk of the cost to identify and cure these sick computers would be shouldered by the Internet service providers who could pass this cost onto consumers by presenting the problem as a public safety issue and funding it with general taxation. Would you pay a stupid computer user general tax to help better the Internet and keep it clean or is Microsoft just drunk with success at its recent victory over the Waledac botnet and spewing forth wild and crazy ideas?

Read

Tags:
, , ,
59 Comments

Related Articles

  • http://web.me.com/mel.tan/ThoughtForFood/Journal/Journal.html Mel

    Microsoft made the OS. Why is it that they make it our problem that they can’t get shit right the first place?

    Oh right, because they can just get free money from all of us to fix their broken bloated code that they didn’t write to be secure in the first place.

  • http://talkingtotoddlers.com Chris

    Hmmm – pay another tax to be stuck on Microsoft’s horrendous OS, or simply use a Mac, enjoy a great user experience and avoid these problems? Hard choice :)

    • http://usemac/linux/unix/bsd Joe

      anything but windows. would I still have to pay another tax if I have no win box @ home?

  • ChrisVS

    I could be completly misguided here, but couldn’t you require that all applications be digitally signed before installing (with a trusted third party, e.g. Verisign)? If they are not, than the OS would essentially make it very cumbersome to install with multiple warnings. This wouldn’t catch everything, but it would greatly limit the exposure.

  • cm

    Is this guy serious? I don’t know anyone who “allows” malware to run on their computer.

    I’m all for looking for additional ways to fight malware, but when malware exploits flaws in software written by mainly Adobe and Microsoft, then shouldn’t the MAIN focus be on identifying and removing the flaws?

    “When a computer user allows malware to run on his computer, “you’re not just accepting it for yourself, you’re contaminating everyone around you,” he said.

  • bill

    Who’s the spammer here? I’m confused.

  • Microsoft

    What a dick (small-d). Now go crawl back under your rock!

  • mrdudeguy

    i want to be your friend if you live near me… that way when you snap from all of the conspiracy’s going against you…. you wont shoot me along with the mass crowds of people

  • George

    Can you shut the fuck up? I don’t visit this site to be entertained by the comments. I come to read the stories.

  • Michael B

    For those keeping score: “Readers Aren’t Stupid” fails at life.

  • MonkeyCheese

    Fuck off spam poster.

  • Anonymous

    Here’s a better question, who gives a fuck?

  • StevenGlansburg

    yet you’re commenting….

  • George

    And you’re a dumbass. I didn’t say I come here ONLY to read the stories. I skim the comments and contribute when I want to. And you’re also a perfect example of the mindless jerkoffs that troll this site.

1 2
blog comments powered by Disqus