Skip to main content

MSFT Retaliates Against Google's Security Claims

Although Microsoft VP of corporate communications Frank X. Shaw already had his moment in the spotlight with Google-related comments on Twitter, Windows communications manager Brandon LeBlanc came out and updated his Windows corporate blog with his view--a retaliation of sorts--over Windows, security, and the comments made from the Google employee(s). LeBlanc builds his defense and covers all the basis, spanning from Yale's decision to delay its move Gmail to the high-risk malware attacks on Apple Macs.

"When it comes to security, even hackers admit we’re doing a better job making our products more secure than anyone else," he said, referring to Marc Maiffret, chief security architect at FireEye (Pwn2Own hacking winner says otherwise). "And it’s not just the hackers; third party influentials and industry leaders like Cisco tell us regularly that our focus and investment continues to surpass others."

Naturally he debunks any claim that Windows is in the same state it was ten years ago, listing many Windows 7 features such as Parental Controls (which you actually have to download separately from the initial installation), improvements to BitLocker for disc encryption, and the SmartScreen Filter embedded in Internet Explorer 8. However LeBlanc took a beating in the comments section which led to a few revisions to his original post.

"We are not where we were 10 years ago," he said in response to criticism over security. "What's really changed in the last 10 years is Microsoft has invested quite a bit on less "buzz features" and more on security. If you recall back with Windows XP SP2--we stopped everything to focus on security in Windows. And then Windows Vista introduced UAC which we streamlined for Windows 7. UAC is certainly not a "buzz feature"--nor is ASLR. Or SmartScreen Filter. We've done a lot in the last 10 years to make sure Windows users are more protected than ever before from attacks."

So what's the big picture here? Are Macs just a vulnerable and Windows machines? Are we hearing more stories about Windows-based security issues because it's fun?

As stated Monday, Google could very well be ditching Windows over said security issues. Google could also be gearing up to be totally in-house with a stable release of Chrome OS. The heart of the issue seems to be that most employees don't know the entire corporate scope, and simply enjoy ruffling a few Microsoft fathers.

  • Trueno07
    "The heart of the issue seems to be that most employees don't know the entire corporate scope, and simply enjoy ruffling a few Microsoft fathers."

    So Microsoft has... More than one dad?
  • And, of course, Google have an impeccable security slate (think China/GMail incident).
  • Rosanjin
    Just a few things to correct:

    "Are Macs just a vulnerable and Windows machines?"


    "....and simply enjoy ruffling a few Microsoft fathers."
  • Zingam
    C'mon that guy's joking? UAC? A joke! Ppl turn it off. Even I click-click without reading and thinking. It so bothersome :) I don't use Linux/Unix much but what they are is what it should be... at least.
  • zaznet
    These articles need more proofing, as rosanjin states above. Another correction needed for "covers all the basis".

    I find the news of a large tech company removing Microsoft Windows from the desktop very interesting. It's been known for a long time that the total cost of ownership is a big issue for corporations. If you can deploy and support an alternative which reduces your TCO year over year that turns into more revenue for your company.

    Microsoft made major inroads into corporate desktops through providing a lower TCO many years ago. I think it has flipped on them and they stand to lose ground in the coming years.
  • nevertell
    They should use linux or some other open source os.
    Why ?
    When you find a hole, you can patch it and spread the patched source, so everybody benefits from it.
    With both macos and windows, you just CANNOT do that.
  • DemonBiscuit
    alexkitch: I take it you completely didn't read the basis for Google leaving windows behind. Their claim was Windows and its inherent security flaws were the cause behind the China/Gmail incident.
  • tokenz
    I would expect google to go to chrome. Its their operating system. Of course they are going to ditch windows if they can do it themselves.
  • Dirtman73
    The fact that Google aren't using Chrome is a pretty big indicator of how limited it is as an OS. Google are smart enough to know that Chrome can't do 3/4 of the stuff that Windows or OSX can, despite all the yapping and yawing they've done over it in the press.
    Windows security is built on layers of compatibility which makes the OS slow and consumes more resources (RAM, CPU, etc.). This is the price of trying to be compatibile with everything you can toss in a PC over the past 30 years. The compatibility layers are huge security holes and is the reason why Windows 7 (and Vista and XP) have 5-10 security updates every week of every year the OS implemented Windows Update services.

    If Microsoft want to move forward and be able to financially keep up with Apple, they NEED to start from a fresh OS slate and toss compatibility out the window. Ground up build of an OS is LONG LONG LONG overdue at Microsoft. If people need to live in the past and retain compatibility with their existing games/applications, then Dual Boot and VM (Virtual Machine) have been around a long time and work VERY well. This is the lesson Microsoft seem unwilling or unable to learn ... it maybe too late given Google's fresh slate OS due out soon.

    It's sad to see what Ballmer has done to Microsoft, his lack of vision has left them behind Apple financially and a huge Giant like Goolge is about to release a new secure OS on the world and what is Microsoft trying to do ... come up with Tablet OS to take on iPad. Shakes head, Ballmer just doesn't get it.

    Ballmer rode the "leverage" wave for a long time, now that the wave has finally hit the shore he's got nothing.