Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Here we go again with false positive antivirus actions bricking computers

<< < (5/6) > >>

timowers:
This is what happens with mickey mouse personal 'anti-virus' software. With professional anti-virus programs this has never/will never happen.
It's a shame home users never get to experience this.

J-Mac:
This is what happens with mickey mouse personal 'anti-virus' software. With professional anti-virus programs this has never/will never happen.
It's a shame home users never get to experience this.
-timowers (May 08, 2010, 06:14 PM)
--- End quote ---

Uhhh...  the McAfee screw up DID affect "professional" users; the false positives occurred in Enterprise versions; very few home users were affected.

Jim

timowers:
the McAfee screw up DID affect "professional" users
--- End quote ---

Reading again I should have worded my post slightly differently. As you say in caps, 'DID' because whatever the edition type, both home and professional users know McAfee can no longer be considered a reliable solution. Any business worth its salt will never deploy a new version without having trialled it in a sandbox box environment for at least a month first. Then, after deployment all definition updates would never be pushed out as they come in, rather deployed to a red test network first, then once proven the Admin would allow deployment. These false positives should then be caught before doing any harm. Most FP's have an understandable, underlying reason but for Mcafee to bang out these FP's without undergoing a basic degree of QA first is unacceptable.
There is really only one solution in the Enterprise arena that has a reliable and proven track record, which is why when McAfee contracts are up for renewal, they aren't, and are jumping ship ASAP.

cyberdiva:
Reading again I should have worded my post slightly differently. As you say in caps, 'DID' because whatever the edition type, both home and professional users know McAfee can no longer be considered a reliable solution. Any business worth its salt will never deploy a new version without having trialled it in a sandbox box environment for at least a month first.-timowers (May 09, 2010, 08:13 AM)
--- End quote ---
I agree that companies should be more careful than McAfee apparently was this time, but I'm not sure how your statement above relates to the McAfee debacle in question.  McAfee wasn't putting out a new version of the software but simply new definitions, something they do every day.  Yes, they screwed up big time, but it had nothing to do with a new version of the software.  And, as Jim has already pointed out, your statement about "mickey mouse personal 'anti-virus' software" also seems off target.

J-Mac:
Tim,

I understand that companies should - and hopefully most do - test all new software/versions before rolling them out to the client boxes, however we are talking about virus definition files here. It is not reasonable to expect any IT dept. to test every virus def. update as they are often released several times daily. Heck, some companies - like Eset which I use - send out definition files hourly and even more frequently if needed!

I do agree that McAfee is remiss in not having tested the subject release a bit more thoroughly before foisting it on their (former??) customers.

Thanks!

Jim

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page