What the hell is wrong with MS??!!

[thehorse13]

Many times we advise end users to make use of knowledge base articles on the MS site. One end user had issues saving files to network drives. It took an unreasonable amount of time to perform the task so the end user went to the MS knowledge base to search for a resolution. What she found floored me.

MS, the clowns who are screaming about their progress in the new "Security Initiative" have a KB article that advises users to *DISABLE* realtime virus protection if saving files to network drives takes too long. Yes, you have read correctly.

Snip:

RESOLUTION
To work around this issue, temporarily turn off File System Realtime Protection, and then save the file. For more information about how to do so, view the documentation that was included with your program.

Here is the actual article.
http://support.microsoft.com/default...roduct=off2003

I have seen infections hit machines in less than a second. This, in my opinion, is wreckless on the part of MS.

Anyway, before you have your end users go off looking to do a little self help, you may want to look at the resolution to the problem before it becomes a security issue rather than a helpdesk issue.

--TH13

[DjM]

As insane as that is horse, it wouldn't work in my shop. The end users do not have the ability to disable real time protection, that function is locked down via the management console. If they wanted to disable it they would have to come through me and after I stopped laughing, I just say no.

Cheers:

[SonofGalen]

Well, you guys have to remember, in all fairness, Microsoft is so secure otherwise that it can't be infected by virii. Its been almost a week since the last epidemic, and they cut them down from once every two weeks to once a month, or every two months.

[thehorse13]

Yes, we too are implementing client side lockdowns via the admin console. However, when she walked in with a puzzled look on her face and I asked why I nearly died when I saw the advice. Just think about a shop that does not enforce client-side lockdown policy!

Anyway, I think I will be writing a nasty gram to MS. I'll post a response if I get one.

[Tiger Shark]

In all fairness to M$ here it's not technically their fault that some third party vendors product is detrimentally affecting the operation of their OS. They are stuck between the proverbial rock/hard place here. If they don't draw attention to the fact that it's someone elses stuff that is messing with their system then their product will be thought of as a POS. If they do, and tell people how to improve the apparent performance of M$'s product, then all the security types jump on them like you are Hoss...... The one thing they really can't do is to advise that the user uninstall that AV product in preference for another - can you imagine the lawsuits there?

While the advice may seem to be lunacy it would never have been proffered if M$ came with it's own AV. But since they rely upon a third party for this and it's the third party's software causing the problem they don't have any choice but to proffer the advice.

A similar analagy would be someone complaining that they can't network their machines at home any more. Then they reveal that they purchased a software firewall and installed it which is blocking the connection attempts. Unfortunately, the firewall doesn't allow the user to control port access. Microsoft's _only_ recourse, if the client insists on networking the machines, is to tell them to turn off the firewalls. Lunacy? Yes. Fair advice bearing in mind the priorities of the user? Yes.

[RoadClosed]

Some very disk intensive applications will slow down when used on a network share. They probably shouldn't be there in the first place but switching off client side scanning of those files will significantly speed things up. You can place importance on sever side scanning at that point. I don't set any client machines to scan network drives for that reason. I see the point though, you trying to lock down idiot users and microsoft goes and tells them to arbitrarily turn of virus scanning. However that stuff is written for the masses, it doesn't take into account the situation. I absolutely lock down every client via epolicy for that reason. Antivirus does cause problems. All kinds of problems, especially on older PCs. The real issue is fixing the slow access and that is a valid check to see if it's the culprit. With an enterprise virus product like mine you could see within the hour that someone has turned of the scanning featue (if I didn't lock it down). If file saving is really slow, the user could run a risk of losing data, especially with XP.

[aeallison]

I have to agree with Tiger Shark on this topic. I am no true lover of any OS. I use what I need to use when I need it. There are are all types of users here on AO, and everyone of them has at least one gripe about at least one OS. I might make a challenge to the people here at AO...

Write your own OS and see how many people complain about yours, or better yet gather the best minds here at AO and form a group to write our DREAM OS. Instead of complaining about it do something about it. IMHO I think that building an OS that anyone can use for anything is an impossibility... Someone prove me wrong... Please.

Just my 2 cents worth...

[thehorse13]

Yes, I see your point but at least they can add in a disclaimer or a warning that disabling realtime virus protection may cause infections. My point lies more with this idea than blaming them because a 3rd party vendor's app slows down saving to network drives. Also, I cannot get away from the fact that they would simply tell someone to disable AV for the sake of speed. I mean, ****, we don't remove our firewall because some numbnutz has performance issues hitting a remote FTP server. Oh well, now I'm all worked up. It's all Tiger's fault! I blame everyone but myself!

[aeallison]

It's all Tiger's fault! I blame everyone but myself!

rofl

That's the ticket...

[Tiger Shark]

Hoss: That's ok, I have broad shoulders.....

I do understand why you are getting worked up and it is an easy thing to get worked up about.... It's kinda like some consultant coming in and telling all your users not to worry about something you have been trying to drill into them for a coons age...... It just won't sit well with any of us.....

But the other side of the coin is that if you build yourself a nice fast 100BaseT network and along comes a vendor and changes all your switches back to good old 10BaseT hubs you'd probably be a little miffed by the vendor wouldn't you......