Reply to post: Can't McAfee (and Symantec) just go backrupt and be turfed in the bitbucket already!

Review: McAfee Endpoint Protection for SMB

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Can't McAfee (and Symantec) just go backrupt and be turfed in the bitbucket already!

It's an f'ing sluggish pain on my work machine because it keeps pointlessly scanning my big development projects etc. which causes loads of time wasting, and the sad-mins don't allow any exclusion control!!!

Anti-virus is mostly pointless dinosaur tech. now; it's often too late /if/ anti-virus identifies malware, given I only see stupid false positives now, and we still need specialist tools like Unchecky and AdwCleaner, to block and delete injected malware, including adware.

Proper intrusion security should use system gateways; this idea that all of a user's applications are run with full user security access is nuts, thus the need for kludged on flawed late security like anti-virus. All applications should be put in secure containers and only be granted a /limited/ customisable virtual OS view by default, like a kind of sub-user, and the OS should support and enforce this natively, like *Solaris Zones and maybe containers/Docker in Linux. OS VMs should be reserved only for stuff which /really/ requires an isolated OS instance.

Android is closer to proper isolation security and friendly notification, via application (flawed) "user" permissions and message passing, but the b'stards at Google still don't allow you to allow only some of the requested permissions, and the message passing security is lacking.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021