System Safety Monitor Development "On Hold" - Official

From the SSM Forum:

http://www.syssafety.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=5298

Its a sad day.

 

It is sad. I had just bought 2 life time licenses when I realized development was ceasing. It was a great program.

 

Yaa, very sad day. I liked very much System Safety Monitor, how is possible that no one want to buy his code ?

 

It is sad, as this was a fine classical hips. But, it's not a surprise after all. It's tough for a one (?) man's project that requires skilled users to survive in a fierce competition. There are security applications spawning everywhere. And SSM wasn't surely made for the "average Joe".

Most people, unlike Wilder's security addicts, want something simple that can understand and stick with it for at least a year. (That's right fellas, no uncontrollable impulses to buy the "yet another security app" we all feel in here. ). And they choose a widely known product. And with the global economic crisis, for many people, spending money for "exotic" programs, is becoming a luxury. And will be so, for at least the next 2 years. I am afraid, they won't be the only small business in this sector that will suffer a blow.

 

The nature of SSM severely limits its potential market. It's too much for the average user. It's targeting the skilled user who prefers to assemble their own security package, a pretty small group. It's also a one time sale so there's very little repeat business. It's sad when economics overrules quality. It shows a basic flaw in our system when quality and durability are punished by design.

Somebody will buy his code. The big software companies don't want to see SSM become Open Source. As much as I want to see SSM be viable and give them a return for all their work, another part of me would love to see what the Open Source community could do with it.

 

The mother of all HIPS has died

I'm a licensed user from the moment SSM went commercial. I have always thought and still think this is a superb program. SSM proved itself more then once to be an outstanding line of defence.

Thanks Vitali. Good luck and all the best for you.

 

Well, they did adopt a 1 year license sceme, but as you too said, they target the skilled user and these users aren't many. I also think somewhere they got "lost" in PR game. Even in here, nobody talked about SSM for months. Other companies have in the forum a "representative" just to keep things "warm" and keep the product name visible...

And worse of all, once SSM was competing against very few "non av" solutions. Nowdays, you have free classical hips, paid classical hips, behav blockers, sandboxes, up to the new entry, prevx edge who does exactly the opposite of SSM, saying to average Joe "don't worry Joe, we know you aren't skilled, we 'll decide for you". You can't stay "alive" for long like this.

Best of luck to the coder.

 

Thank you for the update Rickster. Too bad the news appears bleak Let's hope some of the "new kids" on the block such as Malware Defender and EQSecure will continue to develop their products, even though the target audience is admittedly a niche market.

If Vitk doesn't have time for it, then I wonder what he is spending his time on instead??

 

Indeed bad news.

But from a commercial point of view it was foreseeable.

Hopefully the talent and expertise of ukrainian developers will not go unnoticed by more established companies such as Agnitum or Kaspersky.

Frank

 

Making a living I'd guess.

True, but that was mainly for updating to new versions. The version that's installed keeps working whether the license is new or not. If the user isn't concerned about having the "latest and greatest", there was no need to pay more than once.

I'll keep using SSM whether there's support or not for as long as it will run on my OS. I've relied on it for years and it has never let me down. It proved itself to me a long time ago, back when Max Burmistrov owned it and just kept getting better.

The one thing I don't want to see happen is for some big company like Symantec to buy the code and kill it. SSM is too good to just die. That code needs to be used, maybe as part of something else.

 

Hello! It's already dead if you still don't understand it. But you still can buy its source code.

 

From an economic viability perspective, I agree. I just don't want to see a big company bury the code. I'd rather see it become Open Source. For you, it means one less competitor.

 

Don't think SSM was a competitor to Defensewall. They use different paradigms. The target group is also different.

 

It the thing we all hope may happen: SSM is one of the most powerful and secure HIPS: wish it may be continued. And Thanks Vitali, good luck for all.

 

It wasn't intended that way. I meant one less option for the users.

 

PG, SSM, NG, PS, AD ......

All dying one after another ..... Too sad but it,s unevitable.

 

Would like to do this as well.

I'm interested in opinions whether SSM will keep its power without further development.

What's the take of the übergeeks?

 

Are you an English teacher? Or is this another chance to diss a competative category of security software?

"Dead" would infer that SSM is no longer useful to any degree as a security app, which is NOT true. Classical HIPS do not quickly go majorly out-of-date. SSM is still very useful at the present time.

The more accurate designation for SSM would be something like "no longer being developed."

Since Vitali is considering putting SSM under open source, buying the code would be pre-mature I think.

 

+1 , Bellagmin

I share your views on this. SSM was a great uber product, in which Vitali poured a lot of work. Its sad to poke fun, at during its downturn. I can understand n00bs spewing on the forum, but Ilaya it was uncalled for.

I hope it goes open-source. A quality open HIPS, will change the game completely.

 

AS long as SSM is compatible with the operating system, it will be just as effective as it is now. As long as software uses the same APIs and system commands, SSM will work the same as it does now. SSM is not dependent on signatures, reference files or any other kinds of lists. It lets the user decide what is and is not acceptable. That will not change.

It is possible that M$ may release an update at some point that will break SSM. Their updates have broken software before. If this does ever happen, the user will have to choose between that update and SSM. I'm out of the update cycle so it's a non-issue for me. If I had to choose, I'd take SSM over one of their updates any day.

Except for the fact that it would be a loss to the developer, I'd also like to see SSM become Open Source. The combined talent of that group would make it even better, and a serious threat to a lot of commercial security-ware. One of them will pay big to keep that code from becoming public.

 

Thank you Bellgamin for clearing out my doubts when i first read that comment. I felt there was something disturbing about it, but i thought i was misinterpreting it at first. I surely wouldn't have joked about it.

 

Yes, macabre sort of "humor".

 

You are my man.

 

This is absolutely wrong statement. "Dead" for any security application means "no support, no further development". In case tomorrow you will find any piece of malware that penetrates SSM, you will never be able to fix it up. Or, even worser, some application will be causing BSOD when interfering SSM. No cure in this case too. Security is a process, not a product.

NG is still available and you can use it, for instance, but it's dead. Or, maybe, you still think this project alive?

2010- Vista 7 will be released. Are you sure SSM will be working there? Or you going to use WinXP for ages?

Tolerant bullshit. The project is dead, because... see my comment below.

Any HIPS development requires world-class developer. Such a person need to be:
1. Enthusiast with low salary or.
2. Professional with high salary.

Open-source project can earn money only with support process, but, in case of SSM, it's target auditory are advanced users who, mostly, doesn't need help with this product for many months/years at least. So, the main problem here is the same issue- low money flow.

Even if Vitaly be able to find an enthusiast high-class developer (I really doubt, but there is still a chance), this project will be only part-time, not a day-job for him. Its development and issue fix process will be very low this case.

Also, lets don't forget there is at least one strong competitor in the field of classical HIPS- Comodo. And its free.

With all this, I believe the project is dead.

And stop blaming me with all this crap! I tell what I think and nobody can stop me from doing this. Is this clear?

 

Sure, Ilya Rabinovich, you are free to say what you think in appropriate words. And I can imagine that a Software House could be happy for the death of another great HIPS. Our point of view is that one of the best HIPS in the market is discontinued. Would you like to respect our opinion ?