Microsoft Security Exec Suggests Internet Tax To Pay For 'Computer Health Care' Program
from the is-that-an-HMO-or-a-PPO? dept
Tank Szuba alerts us to the story about a Microsoft security exec suggesting that it might make sense to implement an internet usage tax to help fund a "computer healthcare system" to fix the notoriously insecure software that his company produces. It doesn't sound like a well-thought out proposal. It seems more like a brainstorm from a panel discussion by Scott Charney, Microsoft's Vice President for Trustworthy Computing. He suggests, as others have, that a system could be setup for quarantining infected computers, but when asked how to pay for it, he suggests such a tax. Or, of course, Microsoft could make software that doesn't have as many security holes.Charney seems to model his idea off of our broken healthcare system:
"I actually think the health care model ... might be an interesting way to think about the problem,"Has he looked at how well healthcare has been working lately? Of course, as with healthcare, the real issue should be preventative efforts, and those mainly start with Microsoft and how it architects its software. But I guess it's easier to just ask everyone to pay a tax to hide that.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: computer security, healthcare, scott charney, tax
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Uh huh...
I've never had a virus on any Linux computer I've ever had.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Uh huh...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Uh huh...
: P
Cracking Linux would be worthwhile--a majority of the world's corporate and web servers (you know, important things--unlike stupid Windows users' computers) run on Linux. The reason botnet handlers target Windows users? Windows has no security. (or, in modern parlance: easy targets.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Uh huh...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Uh huh...
Supermarket self-checkouts and complex industrial control and monitor systems may not be important to you, but you can cause quite a bit of havoc with them if you know how.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Uh huh...
But, windows place is not the internet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Uh huh...
It doesn't matter. At the moment, most malware-infected computers out there are on Windows. When it can be shown that a good proportion of *nix computers are also infected by *nix-specific malware, then we can talk about taxing *nix users. But until then, the tax should only apply to Windows users.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Uh huh...
Pretty big Linux targets, if you ask me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Uh huh...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Uh huh...
I guess because that's pretty much the way taxes work now, it seems...
And is it just me, or does the idea of quarantining infected computer sound even dumber than a tax for it? I'm picturing the military descending upon a data center in hazmat suits, followed by firebombing as the trojan horse spreads out of control.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Uh huh...
To be honest I worded it badly. Still, I'm not sure what current tax you could compare this to. It'd be like taxing roads to pay for problems involving cars. I'm pretty sure you don't get your car repaired by the taxpayer if you crash it.
If Microsoft hadn't only just gotten around to encouraging security on their consumer software then we wouldn't see a thousandth of the troubles we do now. It's hard to convince people not to ignore warning messages when their computers never used to have them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Uh huh...
The unusual thing about windows users is that they pay other people to fix their computers rather than expecting Microsoft too. If people had viable options other than Microsoft, such as a Honda for our car example, Microsoft would be all over free security.
As it is, we are apparently willing to tax people over it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Uh huh...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Uh huh...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Uh huh...
thats the kicker isn't? Stupid people buy computers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Uh huh...
If any other OS were to rise to prominence, you'd immediately be confronted by this user:
http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=1801#comic
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Uh huh...
More importantly, the people who create Linux distributions are usually smart enough to encourage (and code) best practice whenever they can. It's an ongoing battle.
Notably, Gnome and KDE have run into trouble while trying to be more accessible to people used to Windows; they took the basic security principle of the executable bit and threw it away until someone pointed out what a backwards step that was. They still, arguably, do too little to discourage people from running untrusted code as they have 'fixed' the issue with a simple 'are you feeling lucky?' dialogue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Uh huh...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Uh huh...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Confucious say...
Also:
1. Man who farts in church sits in own pew....
2. Baseball wrong, man with four balls cannot walk....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
agreed maker of OS shoudl pay
if you create a problem
YOU FUCKING FIX IT
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hilarious idea
Hey, I'm thinking Toyota ought to sponsor a new tax to make sure their brakes work, and that they don't have acceleration problems. Their problems would be over, and they'd make money!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hilarious idea
Yeah, a road tax. I'm sure their competitors would love that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can't mimic healthcare ideas for this one...
However, when someone's computer is infected with malware, nobody has pity for them. Not the other malware infected people, not the uninfected people, and despite the topic of this article, not even Microsoft gives a damn. Being the victim of malware is not pitiful, and it doesn't pull on anyone's heartstrings, it's just plain moronic, that's why instead of excitedly agreeing, this Microsoft employee will find that most people will be outraged by his suggestion, as we all are here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
preventative efforts?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: preventative efforts?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: preventative efforts?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
seriously?
Stupid is as stupid does.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WOW Little mikee m's ignorance shines
Maybe you should buy a clue or two before posting...
Linux is JUST as buggy if not worse, it's just a tiny share of the market so noone tagets it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: WOW Little mikee m's ignorance shines
Nobody thinks they can make flawless software. Lots of us wish they would place a higher value on security though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: WOW Little mikee m's ignorance shines
point two: linux is a target, just not a consumer target. it is easier to get a virus from the internet through stupidity then someone actively hacking your network.
Point three: are you meaning linux as a whole? or the kernel? the kernel is damn near rock solid. the whole, including userland? yea, I can problems, but that doesn't mean Linux is at fault. Apache may be, but the kernel is strong.
Point four: obviously you are the one who needs to actually learn a thing or two about software development instead of spouting bs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: WOW Little mikee m's ignorance shines
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: WOW Little mikee m's ignorance shines
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yours shines brighter!!!
So Windows is millions of lines of code. So what?
The Linux kernel is millions of lines of code too.
The BSD kernel is millions of lines of code too, if it comes top that.
I have yet to encounter either BSD or Linux with as many kernel "soft targets" as Windows and haven't seen a one of those over the years that's taken more than 48 hours to close on my distros of either. MS, on the other hand, has left some open in Windows for years particularly as the affect IE.
Part of it is the design as *Nix was designed from day one to be networked and secure which is why userland is completely separate from systemland.
DOS, and therefore Windows, began life as a clone of CP/M with no networking or protection moved on to Windows 1.0. 2.0. 3.0. 3.1 and 95 still as single user systems. A huge mass of that code is still there. Networking and TCP/IP were add-ons poorly created and, in TCP/IP's case born broken and remain that way right up to Win7.
I know of what I am speaking because I make a good living, than you very much, fixing problems on large networks and when I'm called in to fix a problem with the internet my first question is "what's your edge server" and if the answer my next question is "what idiot did that" who is usually the contractor they hired after I fixed the last event.
So I get 6 hours of pay for showing up, mostly in the middle of the night, putting the *nix server back up as the edge machine configuring it back to where I left it the last time putting the Window server behind that and then looking at the traffic protocol by protocol till I find it. Mostly it's bot nets, mostly it's infected the Windows server and mostly could have been prevented by leaving things how I'd left them. I may spend only two hours doing this but I get paid for 6 cause it's always the middle of the night when I get the call so I want to be well paid and I want them to remember.
Yes, there's malware for Linux most of it botnets but those holes can be easily plugged in Linux through either firewalling, proper proxying and proper, simply implemented defenses against rootkits. Try that in Windows!
Oh yeah, and the greatest. most wonderful part of my day is sitting there at the command line in both Windows and Linux and having the MS consultant looking at me totally lost asking why I'm not using wizards. :-)
MS is getting much better at security but they have a problem with all that legacy code buried way back to DOS, a hell of a lot of it spaghetti code and runtime encoded MS Basic of one form or another until the early 90s. So they have an enormous problem on their hands.
Now then, do you want a clue or two to buy? Did I mention that I make a very good living doing this?
ttfn
John
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
@harbingerofdoom
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
@Michial Thompson
its why the US military uses linux as does china and why all of russia is migrating to it.
YEA cause its worse
YOU SIR attained the RETARD AWARD of the DAY.
AND there is no excuse for you breaking laws right, you cant use ignorance in a court of law as a defense why then should a software maker be allowed to do the same.
JUST think of the possibilities we can have here for this type a tax.
WE could make crappy hammers that break after one use and tax people to RIGHT the problem
WE coudl create cars that there brakes go after the first push, and tax people to correct the problem
DAMN SOOO MUCH tax we can have OHHHHHH YES IM RICH $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$4
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
New idea
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: New idea
That's not sufficient, we need military involvement. The army needs to quarantine the unit immediately and dispose of it with aggressive explosives.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: New idea
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: New idea
Because the first time the monitor program made a mistake (or got compromised!) and YOU lost all your data, you'd be crying up a storm.
Windows Embedded currently has something like that - it's called Write Filtering. Basically, for embeddded controllers, you can set up Windows so it keeps all changes in RAM and abandons them at reboot - never writing to the disk.
The downside is you lose all your data. But hey, a virus
free system!
Modern software is amazingly complex. It's always going to have holes. No matter what it is, or is running on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: New idea
Unplug your computer, put it back in the box and return it to whomever you bought it from.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Linux
Be right back where you were.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Linux
stupid people shouldn't be allowed computers.
(or reproduction rights)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Linux
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Linux
And most of the existing Linux users and developers would avoid those bad programmers like the plague. They would be able to do so due to the competitive and free nature of open source.
It's a valid point, but it wouldn't put anything back. Linux isn't just lines of code anyone can contribute to, it's communities. If your doomsday scenario were real then it's already been and gone in the form of Lindows.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Linux
My guess is that you are not familiar with the various varieties of linux available, because if you were, you would not have made that silly statement. For example, a typical Ubuntu installation does not have a root account with login privledges. If you desire this capability, you must make the necessary changes yourself. Those that would surf the intarwebs as root would, most likely, not be capable of such system changes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Linux
As for the end users they'd find themselves with a failing system soon enough and get whacked with large repair bill.
The bad programmers would find themselves rather stymied by things like the userland/systemland separation and their own need to learn over again what to do to get their crappy code to run.
Then again, there's Ubuntu's (horribly bad, IMHO, solution to that problem) or others which make root a bit difficult to use in a GUI by turning the whole thing red or, in a corporate setting, simply by not providing for a root login on the default login screen.
ttfn
John
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just like a mosquitto
Yeah that,
bbb
wheatus.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Surprise
What really surprises me is that a bill proposing this is not currently pending in congress.
Our health care system is not as bad as it's made out to be.
Nothing that more government can't make worse.
After all look at all the people who come here from Canada and other places for health care.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Good Idea
That should solve most of the internet problems that Microsoft has inflicted upon us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Cracking Linux would be worthwhile--a majority of the world's corporate and web servers ("
And of course none of those have ever been hacked...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Root of Security
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Root of Security
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I would expect this sort of idea to come from MS.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
look people
hammer and car makers will demand one SOON ill not be able to afford eating a candy bar without a mortgage
THAT'S THE FACTS move along it ain't gonna happen if it does it will tune people into the greed of MS and shove them more at linux at least if im taxed then ill not be using somehting that wont get fixed form a tax , MS already is a tax on every computer sold and its shown not to work.
WHY THE FUCK then add a second tax.
greedy lazy fuckers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
microsoft
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Neat concept...tax as subsidy to an incredibly profitable monopoly
ttfn
John
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
second of all, i find it ironic that businesses that chose to come to and use the internet(read: did NOT create) want to regulate it to suit their purposes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]