Within Windows

Ouch!

OK.  Enough with the weasel words, mistruths and lies.  Pure FUD.  We can clearly see that AVG has reached the end of it’s life, and is thrashing about wildly.

Yous say “ Microsoft had a huge hand in creating it.”

Really?  We know that this app cannot trangrece it’s sandbox – surely MS knows this too.  Yet, you *WANT* to suggest (from teh app itself) that it can.  Which we know it cant.  This is fiction.

You say “Microsoft trained AVG’s teams for this product, ”

Really?  MS trains *MANY* people.  That doesnt mean that they had a hand in it’s development.   None.  I can be trained by MS, but it doesnt extend to what I develop.

You say “and Microsoft gave it the thumbs up”

Really?  So, it approved your app – an automated system scanned the code and assured you meet the minimum criteria for Marketplace listing.  This **DOESNT** mean that your app is affiiliated w/ MS in any way.

You say “even having AVG implement changes MS suggested”

Really?  See above; the automated system will present your shortcomings and tell you how to resolve them.  This happens for everyone. It’s automated.

Every single one of your statements is designed to MISLEAD and MISINFORM the reader.

You’re a disgrace.

Your WP7 product is sham.

Your entire effort here is a lie.

—–

The real source of all these sour grapes from this AVG shill?

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security_essentials/default.aspx

Your rough translation is a bit too rough Aaron. You took some liberties there. ;)  No, being trained by MS is a bit different than just reading the documentation, that’s training yourself. But really that doesn’t seem to be the main concern of most of the people here.

The main concern seems to be that this will cause negative feedback as people will fear infections on the WP7 platform. I however, don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing, all platforms have malware and exploits, it’s important that people accept this fact early, and start working to proactively secure the platform before the threats start popping up. WP7 may not have it’s own yet, but malware will be created and exploits will be discovered as the market share of the platform increases. 

I think it’s great that MS is working with AVG to secure their platform proactively, rather than re-actively. As was pointed out in the link I shared, when AVG first released Mobiliation for Android it was a bit skimpy on the features as well, but it has since evolved to become a comprehensive product that offers valuable protection.

My point is, Rome wasn’t built in a day. This product is not finished, it’s actually just beginning. Think of it more as a proof of concept at this stage, a base to build upon, as time goes on and the platform evolves and attracts more users (and of course more attention from the cybercriminals along with them) then I think you can expect to see this product expanded on and improved.

I’m well aware of what my photo shows. If I wanted to hide my affiliations with AVG, I could easily have done so. I see no reason to be deceitful, because I’m not trying to inject “wrong” or “pro-AVG” information, this is my honest personal opinion from my own experiences supporting users and from being involved in the InfoSec field. I’m not an employee of AVG, just a fan. I own an independent IT consulting company in a small town in South Carolina. Here’s a video that explains a bit more about my affiliation with AVG and the event that photo was taken at. http://www.youtube.com/user/RunPCcomputerrepair?feature=mhee#p/f/3/hxe1iIvbJCA

As for the other jab, I haven’t said anything factually incorrect. You may not share my opinion, and that is fine, but nothing I’ve said is wrong. You may not agree with my focus on security and my belief that it’s more important for the users to be truly secure, rather than believe they’re secure even when the day finally comes that they are not, and would rather worry about what some pundits might say about the platform, but that doesn’t mean either of us are wrong, it just means we focus on two important, but separate priorities. You’re more worried about the reputation of the platform rather than the real long-term security of the users, I understand you have another viewpoint, but that doesn’t make my opinion *wrong.*

In that same spirit, I don’t think your opinion is *wrong* either. You are just more interested in the reputation of a platform you love (which is important to it’s growth and adoption, and therefore its long-term survival) than securing the platform, for fear that others will spin the efforts to secure the platform as a reason to avoid it, “it’s being secured, so there must be security problems.” But honestly, any platform has security problems waiting to be found, and if you protect the reputation by ignoring security, then it may expand the user base, but when the user base expands, then so will the threats as cyber-criminals turn their attentions to it. You can’t have one without the other.

If a pundit or news source tries to put a negative spin on securing the platform, then I think that’s pretty low of them, but at the same time, I think it’s more important to truly secure the platform, or in the future they’ll have some more concrete examples to cite when they want to talk about how insecure the platform has become.

Reputation is important, but you won’t have much of a reputation in the long run without proper security, and that starts here, with this product, and evolves with the needs of the platform.

Or have native code like some apps on the marketplace.

Sent from my Windows Phone
——————————

Why does AVG need to provide this lost phone capability? The platform has it built in.