Microsoft: 1 out of every 14 downloaded programs is malware

Discussion in 'malware problems & news' started by Gobbler, May 18, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Gobbler

    Gobbler Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2010
    Posts:
    270
  2. CloneRanger

    CloneRanger Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Posts:
    4,833
    WoW :eek: That's a heck of a lot more than i would have expected.
     
  3. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    And that's why screening downloads the way that Chrome and IE9 do is so important.
     
  4. noone_particular

    noone_particular Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Posts:
    3,798
    I find that number very hard to believe. I wouldn't even try to guess how many hundreds of files and apps I've downloaded over the last few years. None of them were malware. It does make me wonder just what their reputation based "detection" would say about a lot of them, but I'm definitely not going to install Internet Explorer and download them all again just to find out. I'd bet a good percentage of that "malware" is legitimate apps that they and their associates don't approve of.
     
  5. funkydude

    funkydude Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    6,853
    There's a difference between identified malware and programs without reputation. This is identified malware blocks from what I can see.
     
  6. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    The internet is a dangerous place, as everyone here knows.
     
  7. Rmus

    Rmus Exploit Analyst

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2005
    Posts:
    3,943
    Location:
    California
    Well, I've been using the internet for many (I forget how many) years, and I've always thought that the internet is as safe or dangerous as the user makes it.

    I also find that number hard to believe. Without a breakdown as to "socially engineered" malware sites vs
    "legitimate" (so-called) that statistic has no meaningful value for the reader.


    -rich
     
  8. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    The internet isn't as safe as the average user thinks and it's not as dangerous as the average wilderssecurity user thinks =p
     
  9. culla

    culla Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Posts:
    504
    total ~ Snipped as per TOS ~ scare mongering :rolleyes:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 19, 2011
  10. PJC

    PJC Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Posts:
    2,959
    Location:
    Internet
    Agreed.
    +1. :thumb:

    :D :D :D
     
  11. vasa1

    vasa1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Posts:
    4,152
    I wonder if such "studies" will generate false confidence in a subset of users.
     
  12. funkydude

    funkydude Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    6,853
    I guess there will always be skeptics, even when the facts are presented, "malware attacks". This is identified malware that is on SmartScreen's list, unless you're trying to suggest IE8 also has file reputation. :rolleyes:

    This is results taken from IE8 and IE9 which covers quite a broad spectrum of internet users, so it is believable.

    Last I checked the definition of malware attack, it didn't equal "downloads without reputation". Also note "since the release of IE8", when reputation didn't exist.
     
  13. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    8,029
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    Most definitely.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 21, 2011
  14. Trooper

    Trooper Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Posts:
    2,825
    Interesting article to say the least.
     
  15. Dermot7

    Dermot7 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Posts:
    3,196
    Location:
    Surrey, England.
  16. CloneRanger

    CloneRanger Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Posts:
    4,833
    @ Dermot7

    Thanks for posting :thumb:

     
  17. noone_particular

    noone_particular Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Posts:
    3,798
    I'd be curious to see just what files it flags. Bet it would include P2P apps, unofficial upgrades, and other tools they don't approve of. I don't have IE9 and am not getting it, but it wouldn't take much to find out. If someone who has it would download, WinPcap, NMAP, KernelEX, and a few similar but legitimate tools, it would answer this.

    I'd also question what they call a "malware attack". Reminds me of the old versions of NIS that alerted the user to every lousy port scan, telling them it blocked an attack. If I remember right, it called them WinCrash back then.

    Making decisions based on reputation might be OK for those users who don't know one app from another and have no clue on how to tell a good app from a bad one. For any knowledgeable user who knows how to monitor an install, reputation is of no value.
     
  18. Sully

    Sully Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2005
    Posts:
    3,719
    Has it taken into account the users of systems that they pull the results from?

    Meaning, if they were to monitor my files, they would likely see very few malware samples, lets pretend and say 1 in 100. If they monitored my father-in-law, they might see the 1 in 14, or maybe even 1 in 5 :D

    I have no doubt there are many malicous files out there today, but I have serious doubts that those type of numbers apply to any but the most basic of users - those who tend to click on the "You've Won!" prompts ;)

    Sul.
     
  19. wat0114

    wat0114 Guest

    That's right, no way in the world can those type of stats be determined from users who exercise common sense in their download habits.
     
  20. vasa1

    vasa1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Posts:
    4,152
    Funkydude will hunt me down for this but we are talking of users of Internet Explorer ;)
     
  21. FlimFlam

    FlimFlam Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2011
    Posts:
    42
    It looks more like an ad for IE9.
     
  22. wat0114

    wat0114 Guest

    LOL! good point :D
     
  23. PJC

    PJC Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Posts:
    2,959
    Location:
    Internet
    Hmmm...;)
     
  24. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    If you have to "exercise common sense" than your security setup has failed.
     
  25. xxJackxx

    xxJackxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2008
    Posts:
    4,049
    Location:
    USA
    If that number is correct then there must be people out there downloading nothing but malware as I rarely see any. Does this number account for false positives? I have seen more of those than actual malware.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.