M$ denies its antispyware favors Claria

The beta version of Microsoft AntiSpyware previously recommended that users quarantine several products from Claria, but this changed last week.
According to a statement published by Microsoft, the downgrade in threat level merely represents an effort to be "fair and consistent with how Windows AntiSpyware (Beta) handles similar software from other vendors."
The news comes at a sensitive time, as Microsoft is reportedly in acquisition talks with Claria.
The statement notes that Claria, previously known as Gator, asked Microsoft in January to review AntiSpyware's classification of its products. Redmond apparently decided that continued detection was still appropriate--but that it would give users the choice whether or not to remove Claria software. This was a change from the previous policy in which AntiSpyware recommended users remove Claria products.
"All software is reviewed under the same objective criteria, detection policies, and analysis process," Microsoft said. "Absolutely no exceptions were made for Claria.
"Windows AntiSpyware (Beta) continues to notify our users when Claria software is found on a computer, and it offers our users the option to remove the software if they desire...We firmly believe that people should have complete control over what runs on their computers."
By Renai LeMay
CNET News.com
-
- Login or register to post comments
Printer-friendly version
- 1215 reads
PDF version
More in Tux Machines
- Highlights
- Front Page
- Latest Headlines
- Archive
- Recent comments
- All-Time Popular Stories
- Hot Topics
- New Members
GitLab Web IDE
| Record Terminal Activity For Ubuntu 16.04 LTS Server
At times system administrators and developers need to use many, complex and lengthy commands in order to perform a critical task. Most of the users will copy those commands and output generated by those respective commands in a text file for review or future reference. Of course, “history” feature of the shell will help you in getting the list of commands used in the past but it won’t help in getting the output generated for those commands.
|
Linux Kernel Maintainer Statistics
As part of preparing my last two talks at LCA on the kernel community, “Burning Down the Castle” and “Maintainers Don’t Scale”, I have looked into how the Kernel’s maintainer structure can be measured. One very interesting approach is looking at the pull request flows, for example done in the LWN article “How 4.4’s patches got to the mainline”. Note that in the linux kernel process, pull requests are only used to submit development from entire subsystems, not individual contributions. What I’m trying to work out here isn’t so much the overall patch flow, but focusing on how maintainers work, and how that’s different in different subsystems.
| Security: Updates, Trustjacking, Breach Detection
|
Recent comments
1 hour 6 min ago
1 hour 18 min ago
8 hours 10 min ago
1 day 10 hours ago
1 day 11 hours ago
1 day 16 hours ago
2 days 17 hours ago
3 days 23 hours ago
3 days 23 hours ago
4 days 11 hours ago