System Safety Monitor Development "On Hold" - Official

Hi my statement was solely focused on classical HIPS. Whether they are free or commercial does not matter. These HIPS will never get popular among the average users because of the expertise needed to answer their pop-ups.

 

Can't remember .

 

100% agree. Since more and more sophisticated malware techniques appear day by day it is nonsense to expect from average users to be up-to-date.
All they want is less pop-ups and more effective work. And quite frankly usually there is not a terribly long gap between new malwares' appearance and new data base updates. One important factor in this competition is the question of quick response. Not to mention that most anti-products are getting complex in protection. And it is a fact: average users take much more in numbers.

 

Very true. However, some freeware programs are not *donation-ware* -- instead, they are loss leaders to draw customers to a fuller-functioned, non-free product. Examples of freebies with NON-free, fuller-functioned versions include: Sandboxie, Avira Antivir-PE, Online Armor, ZoneAlarm FW, & UltimateDefrag.

IMO, it is possible for a stand-alone HIPS to make a profit for its producer, but NOT as a sole-source of income. For example, Torchsoft sells Malware Defender (MD) -- an excellent stand-alone HIPS -- but also has two other products (non-security apps) that evidently are commercial successes. Thus, I assume that MD adds to Torchsoft's cash flow, but is not relied upon to carry the whole show.

Also, it seems possible for a classical HIPS, or behavior-blocker-HIPS, to succeed when packaged with another security app, but only if the aggressiveness of the HIPS module can be user-controlled (or turned off altogether) -- as is the case for the HIPS packaged with Spyware Terminator, as well as the HIPS components of Comodo IS & PCTools firewall (I think).

Possibly, SSM would be a nice add-on module for some well-known AV (such as Avira, DRWeb, etc) provided that they set up good default rules for SSM, & make rule-changes available only on PRO versions for advanced users.

 

another one bite the dust..

very sad day indeed , not much HIPS remain atm
but history shows that HIPS are not profitable .
ppl want software that doesnt give popups period
i think HIPS targeting will be in future for servers not home uses

we can all remember how FDISR die , not coz it was bad software , coz few expert ppl use it ... most ppl dont wana get this "hard" and "complicated" backup/restore technique . it was also a big failed as a commercial project.

wish to better days 2 come

cheers

 

Luckily the current versions seem to work fine from my experience so its still a useful app for the time being.

 

Yes, I'm using it with COMODO CIS and they work fine.

 

As one of SSM's first official beta testers along with Wilder's member herbalist who actually tested SSM before it changed hands to this current group in a buyout which brought it up abundantly and set the stage for plenty of interest and then eventually customers.

It's always hard to watch whats been good reliable and responsible security software and their development teams fall away from project like this no matter what reason, but what troubles me most is that the bottom line always returns to money. But then i get mind boggled over any Windows security product simply because if you sell a safety program (commercialized complete with reasonable support) to a global audience, even at a scant 5 or 10 dollars a sell, that company is drawing on a mammoth population of PC users that can't help to equate over time to great profits so long as sales continue unabated. The issue i see always returns to the way a security or any other product for that matter is ADVERTISED!

You have to sell not just on-line subscriptions but IMHO any company that deals in commercial softwares absolutely must be prepared also to stock shelves with boxes of their programs and then take the early returns (profits) and advertise effectively anywhere and anyway you can.

I agree with the comments that have been brought up here, a company can't long survive making a living as a commercial security entity of any real significance if it's exposure is set mostly in only security forums or even shareware sites.

At least thats how i see it. Maybe not the full or correct answer, but a pretty close speculation if you ask me.

It's a shame SSM is being aborted just like the Classic FD-ISR which also was IMO a World-Class Innovation and one of those that comes along just at the right time.

 

I'm - I was - one the official translators of SSM for Italy. In these years we advertised the HIPS softwares, and especially SSM in our Website. The response of the most part of the users was always something as " Too difficult to use for me... Too boring..." or " I don't need it ( sigh ) ".

Until the friendly users mind will not change, I believe that the advertising can help a bit the HIPS softwares, but their development will be always economically hard.

 

You are right this is pure speculation and you are living in fantasy land here. You can advertize a HIPS as much as you like but if it fails to address the needs of the majority of customers then it will be fruitless.

If they had made a SWOT analysis for their own company as well as for their
environment (competitors, customer potential) then they would have decided not to revive SSM at all.

I attended some MBA courses and can therefore speak at first hand.

 

When you have a lean operation, you can survive quite well in a niche market (as for majority), but it is true that advertising can only address needs already existing in some form (can't be created from scratch by heavy adverstising)

Having an MBA myself of a reputable US university, I can only say that entrepreneurs are born, managers are made. For those having enjoyed both sides, I daresay: MBA's create managers who think everything can be determined, managed, et cetera. Still many breakthroughs and business are created by just doing so, believing that after the next hill a prosporous future will arise.

The Vikings'discovered America by just looking at debrie, sea birds, etc. Columbus only had a compass (he did not know on which latitude he was) and discovered America. Today sports sail ships with all high tech on board sometimes get lost.

Another feat of just doing so: have you ever wondered how the pacific was populated in such small boats (it is a large ocean). I heard that they believed that islands floated around, so as long as you did not do anything nasty to the gods, an island would appear on the horizon. No polynesian in his right mind would have stepped in a small boat after having performed a SWOT analysis (assuming that it would be possible to collect the right info for a SWOT).

Cheers Kees

 

I am a paid customer.

Thanks for being frank.

 

You're the one living in Disneyland Fantasy if for one moment you think that SYSTEM SAFETY MONITOR is even close to being or ever has been anything called a failure.

And FYI, (this is not a biased opinion from beta testings), but thanks to SSM, i was not the only user who completely dropped AV protections for the first time ever and have never looked back again to have any real need for them except my research work/collections for identification.

So to say "it fails to address the needs of the majority of customer's" simply is not a factual statement, neither any truth in it at all.

If there was any failure it can only be summised that most users didn't understand the RAW PROTECTION POWER of this HIPS and i will be the first to admit that any decent HIPS entails a certain learning curve to reach the full potential of what SSM offered in the way of total protection at a very high success percentage compared to Anti-Viruses, and not many other products could be so formidable as to be capable enough to work better then an AV on it's own. But that's just what SSM did in my experience with it.

So it wasn't the product's failure per say but the user's failure in practicing haste instead of taking a little time to LEARN it as expected. And therein probably is the raw answer why HIPS are not as globally acceptable as an Anti-Virus. But you'll find AV users all the time being hammered with, what else? viruses, worms, etc.

 

Easter don't you see, the majority does not wan't to learn the internals or flatten a steep learning curve. It is too much hassle for them. They will always favour a product that needs little to no attention but has "almost" the same effectiveness as a classical HIPS being in the right hands.

 

In my opinion these analogies are flawed. In modern business times you need the right idea in other words you have to anticipate the customer needs ahead of your competitors by market analysis.

I don't think Google had arisen without direction and by just doing so. They considered the needs of the people and filled the gap.

 

You say people are lazy to learn and it would be helpful for apps like SSM/GS/PG/PS if people were ready to pick up new things.

I myself been using classical HIPS for several years in my intuitive way but nowadays I feel like shifting towards less talkative apps - those kinds that only alert me in case of real threats.

I threw up the idea some time ago here at Wilders to create a sort of general manual for using HIPS. Trying to ask questions thru the eyes of a novice. Practically no support came or just very complicated answers saying it is a very complex question. Are you surprised at people turning away from HIPS when you guys who regularly write here about trying out this and that latest HIPS - you do not want to take time to share your knowledge with the newcomers? It is an inner circle and it always will be.

 

To continue what Peter was saying.

The amount of money you have to spend, not just to get a product on the shelf, but on the shelf close to eye-level and where it is able to be seen (I don't know IT store prices, but I know what the supermarkets charge for eye-level positions. And you need serious $$!).

And what's the good of your product if you can only afford the lower shelf near your feet, where you have to crawl around to see the product, while Symantec and McAfee take prime position with their bright coloured boxes and packaging.

And if the program by miracle of jesus started to sell, can you imagine the amount of support needed to answer the questions and concerns of the average mum and dad user. The HIPS-program inbox would be bursting at the seams, and the company would need a customer-contact number to address all the enquiries. You'd have users blocking a legitimate sytem processes by accident, and all hell/drama would break loose.

Next step would be the b-grade news programs taking their turn. This is where you'll see old buck-tooth Timmy ranting, "By golly gee, this program ruined my computer which had all me daily-milk-run routes, now I'm screwed and on the street. And me wifey, she can't do her cyberspacey chat anymore to her swedish boyfriend, we're all screwed."

True.

 

This is hilarious. Thanks for the laughter.

 

I believe that we all agree on the focus, and the real mean of his thread is becoming: may HIPS survive ? How ?

 

I think sandboxing is the way to go. Be it by virtualization or right restriction of programs (policy based). These concepts can handle zero-day intrusions without relying on the decision of the user. Or the decision could be community based as in PrevX thus the user gets some orientation on what to press, either Block or Allow or ...

 

Yes, they are flawed but still true

Know your classics: both Yahoo and Google were started without SWOT, after the venture capitalist gave Yahoo second jump growth funding, one of the particpating venture capitalist (a plain streetwise american dream guy) brought Yahoo (at that time bigger than Google) and Google together. The MBA-men of the largets venture capitalist thought Google would not add much to Yahoo, otherwise the Google owners had sold their company for approxiate 0,0000000000000002% of the value it is now!

Okay I stop teasing you, but even the example you brought up proved my point:
- visionair or just plain streetwise entrepeneurship makes companies start
- venture capitalist jump into some of them
- next the MBA-men make them conolidate growth when averages (and market rational) are starting to kick in

Cheers Kees

 

Hey say what we agree

 

like i always say it is the feature

 

I thought about that quite a few times. The real strength of SSM is its ability to control the activities of individual processes and how they interact. Every explanation I came up with started with a process tree and knowing what those individual processes were for. At that point, it was already more than the average user wanted. There's no easy way to explain how to set it up. If the user was running the free version and Win98, it got easier, but not if you didn't know what the processes were for. A user has to know what a process is before they can make any kind of decision regarding whether it should be allowed and what it's allowed to do. You'd almost have to go thru the processes one at a time with them, which could take days doing it on a forum.

IMO, the problem is the users, and the company that's responsible for these users knowing nothing about their equipment, Microsoft. They created an OS that any child can use, almost no knowledge required. Every new version of Windows pushed that concept a little farther until you got to XP, which does just about everything for you. Because of that "ease of use" it's also incredibly vulnerable. Most are infected with something or have some garbage intalled that the user doesn't know how to get rid of. MS finally figured out that this was a problem and changed it some in Vista, and many don't like it for that reason. We've got users who are conditioned to expect that an OS will do everything for them, without their having to know anything about what it's doing. The percentages of infected PCs shows what kind of failure this model has been.

Given the present conditions, I don't see HIPS being economically viable as a free standing product, no matter how effective it is. If it's part of a remote maintenance or administration service that's sold on a monthly or annual basis, there's a possibility.