It's like Jerry Springer meets PC World - the melodramatic soap opera that is Symantec vs. Microsoft just keeps going. Earlier this week, Microsoft finally made a concession to the security firm, offering full APIs for Vista as soon as they were available. Now, Symantec and McAfee are saying that's simply not enough
First off, is anyone surprised here? Thought not - but the wailing, flailing and gnashing of teeth carries on anyway. The security 'partners' have gone on record to call Microsoft's offer a "red herring" for the press, saying that APIs will provide no benefit - by the time they get the APIs, Microsoft will have been able to write its own patches. Until then, all users will go unprotected.
Symantec has fired most of the shots, with its VP of Consumer Products saying:
"With PatchGuard Microsoft is stepping in and changing the rules. When Vista 64 gets released, we will not have the APIs we need, and Microsoft expects customers to stand-by, unprotected, waiting for 'multiple upcoming Windows releases as we understand the exact requirements'."
Of course, the company has gone out of its way to point out that it has already found ways around PatchGuard, it just is choosing not to use them in order not to 'upset its relations' with Redmond. Because that isn't happening already?! The basic argument is, if Symantec can break it, hackers should surely be able to. One has to wonder if they honestly think that lowly of their techs - "If our
idiots can break it, it's just plain not safe."
What's your take on this Vista battle royale? Let us know in our forums