- More porn sneaks onto the iPhone
- 'Swatting' case shows need to ban caller-ID spoofing
- Why the iPhone can't be "killed"
- Nortel enterprise chief wants to bring back Bay
- US sets final emergency responder wireless pilot
Is the bell tolling for desktop antivirus technology?
Some industry analysts are proclaiming the traditional antivirus method for detecting and eradicating viruses, trojans, spyware and other baneful code by matching it against a signature to be “dead."
They say signature-based checking can’t keep up with the flood of virus variants manufactured by a criminal underworld that is beating the antivirus vendors at their own game. And they are arguing it’s time for companies to adopt newer approaches, such as whitelisting or behavior-blocking, to protect desktops and servers.
UPDATE 4/25/07: McAfee, Symantec, Trend Micro reveal their plans
“It’s the beginning of the end for antivirus," says Robin Bloor, partner at consulting firm Hurwitz & Associates, in Boston, who adds he began his “antivirus is dead" campaign a year ago and feels even more strongly about it today. “I’m going to keep beating this drum. The approach antivirus vendors take is completely wrong. The criminals working to release these viruses against computer users are testing against antivirus software. They know what works and how to create variants."
The fundamental problem “isn’t about viruses, it’s about what should be running on a computer," Bloor says.
Instead of antivirus software, he says, users should be investing in whitelisting software that prevents viruses from running because it only allows authorized applications to run.
Whitelisting products are available from SecureWave, Bit9, Savant, AppSense and CA, the first traditional antivirus vendor to see the light, in Bloor’s view.
Others are joining Bloor’s way of thinking. Andrew Jaquith, a security analyst at Yankee Group, in December published a research paper entitled “Anti-Virus is Dead: Long Live Anti-Malware." Yankee Group’s research indicates that there’s an "explosion" in cumulative malware variants, with 220,000 cumulative unique variants expected in 2007, a tenfold increase over 2002 levels.
The antivirus vendors simply can’t keep up, Jaquith says, noting that some antivirus lab managers privately complain this flood of virus variants, which force signature changes every 10 minutes, adds up to the equivalent of a denial-of-service attack against them.
“Most antivirus labs work the same way; they get more samples than they can handle on a daily basis," Jaquith says. “They triage based on severity. The antivirus people are like folks with nets trying to catch the big fish, so if you’re a bad guy, you want to be a minnow and get through the driftnet."
Comments (17)
Previx 2.0By Gaz on June 15, 2007, 5:50 amJust installed Previx after getting the smanager.7.exe whatever which kept causing pop-ups which stoped everything working on my computer. Upon restart, it blocked...
Reply | Read entire comment
Signature-Based Products Are Not EnoughBy Joseph on May 17, 2007, 11:44 amAre signature-based products useless? I would contend that they are not. However, their effectiveness is sharply declining in light of the new breed of security...
Reply | Read entire comment
signatures are not dead...By Mohit on April 25, 2007, 2:06 pmSignatures are not going away anytime soon. I wrote about Host IPS on my blog http://securetheworld.blogspot.com A snippet from there: Interestingly, the term...
Reply | Read entire comment
Interesting question but...By Elder Norm on April 24, 2007, 10:41 amWhile the replys above are interesting, I have to ask, "If you were to run an internet accessing desktop system with non of the standard virus protections in...
Reply | Read entire comment
Application Control is the way to go!By Michael Burton on April 16, 2007, 4:22 pmI agree with the argument that traditional methods are not effective enough when it comes to desktop security. Application control based on policy is the next logical...
Reply | Read entire comment
View all comments