Abstractly speaking, it is always a vendor problem. If Windows was perfect you would not need an AV. Now jump back to reality and we realise that security is about multiple levels of security and never rely on a single one.
-
-
Replying to @MarcoErmini @4Dgifts and
FWIW, I don't think AV is about "patching Windows" (though it probably was more like that in the past). It's about helping users make decisions.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @martijn_grooten @MarcoErmini and
AVs are not about helping users making decisions. AVs are sold as tools to forget about the security of your computer, "the tool does it for you".
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @matalaz @MarcoErmini and
I don't care what they're sold as. Lots of AV marketing has been poor and that's not been very helpful. I do care what it does in practice.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @martijn_grooten @MarcoErmini and
I do care a lot about how are them sold, as AV marketing campaigns have always been a damn cancer for information security.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @matalaz @MarcoErmini and
Sure, but that's an entirely separate discussion.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @matalaz @MarcoErmini and
Yes. We're talking about whether average home users on most OS's should use AV for what it does in practice. Not whether implicit or explicit marketing claims are correct.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @martijn_grooten @MarcoErmini and
Most people believe they need an AV because of marketing campaigns, not because they really need one.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @matalaz @martijn_grooten and
The antivirus industry is 99.99999% marketing.
7 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
Actually, "can you go and look for this file across the whole corp for me, mhkay" is kind of useful. Not sure about the tradeoff vs. AV vulns, though.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.