06.02.10
IDG Approaches Microsoft-Funded and Microsoft-Hired ‘Analysts’ (Without Disclosure) to Defend Windows Security
Summary: A new example of familiar routines from IDG and IDC, which happen to be setting trends using false information
Gregg Keizer from ComputerWorld usually calls out Windows and reports rather accurately about Microsoft’s security problems. One issue the author overlooks is that Microsoft has an information lock-down on what it does with its proprietary code and it abuses this privacy to deceive everyone, even by producing bogus reports that are unfairly (if not fraudulently) demeaning to the competition. Microsoft admits lying about security, as we pointed out a few days ago.
“One issue the author overlooks is that Microsoft has an information lock-down on what it does with its proprietary code and it abuses this privacy to deceive everyone, even by producing bogus reports to are unfairly demeaning to the competition. ”Thanks to Satipera we became aware of Gregg Keizer’s new article which quotes several Microsoft sympathisers who are paid by Microsoft. One of them is Gartner and another one is Gartenberg, who is quoted all over the place despite having come from Microsoft [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11] only to attack Microsoft’s competition without any disclosure. These talking points are being summoned in response to Google's move which is a huge blow to the reputation of Windows. The financial Web sites struggled with the news, deciding somehow that Red Hat actually owns “Linux” and “Chrome O/S” is an entirely separate operating system (it is based on Ubuntu GNU/Linux). SJVN’s report is much better, but the Microsoft convention/gallery Keizer brought to IDG is a bit of an embarrassment. To quote some potions from Microsoft’s paid allies (don’t expect disclosures at IDG):
“There must be other motives besides security for such a move,” said John Pescatore, an analyst at Gartner who specializes in security issues. “As an academic exercise, yes, the ‘security-by-obscurity’ model works,” he said, referring to the concept that users are safer running Mac OS X and Linux because they have much smaller market shares than Windows, and so offer hackers a less attractive target.
[...]
“The idea that security is behind this is a little bogus,” added Michael Gartenberg, an analyst with the Altimeter Group. “Windows seems pretty good for Fortune 500 companies.”
Like Pescatore, Gartenberg sees Google’s move, if true, driven by other factors than security. “It’s an interesting excuse, but to me, it underscores the tension between Google and Microsoft,” Gartenberg said.
Michael Gartenberg says that “the idea that security is behind this is a little bogus,” but we say that Gartenberg’s credentials and reliability are bogus because he used to work for Steve Ballmer (and also for IDG, which means there is a conflict here) and Microsoft produces bogus reports about security, by its very own admission. Shame on IDG for approaching Michael Gartenberg about this subject.
IDG and IDC are pretty much the same entity and here are some new bogus numbers from IDC, coming just a month after more bogus numbers that it produced with the BSA/Microsoft [1, 2, 3, 4]. They are not real analysts, they are propagandists in suits. They are analysts for hire to ‘prove’ the required fallacy and spread it as “truth” in as many publications as possible, the latest example being this one: [hat tip: Glyn Moody]
Piracy ravages Spain
The study, carried out by IDC Research Iberia, the Spanish arm of U.S. consultancy IDC, covered the piracy of music, movies, vidgames and books.
They are trying to pass new laws, especially in Spain where they recently had some difficulties stifling sharing of legal content (along with some illegal). Those who follow copyright news probably paid attention to those stories from Spain, starting with a key verdict and then carrying on with Spanish politicians trying to change the law to accommodate Hollywood. Here we see IDC manufacturing some bogus, unfounded ammunition for the clients to lobby with (we previously explained the obvious falsehoods). So again, shame on IDG/IDC — the best propaganda money can acquire. Several days ago, someone told us in the IRC channel: “My 2 cents re: IDC/BSA .. i worked with IDC for many years ,.. and what they say about GUT FEEL is [just] that … guess work .. kids jacking out spreadsheets with *imaginative* numbers …”
In other news, SJVN also write about botnets [1, 2], delivering some shocking numbers and not always naming the culprit which is Windows (where one in two computers is said to have been hijacked).
Think you’ve got good security? Well, maybe you do. But can you say the same for your colleagues and friends? Probably not. According to RSA, EMC’s Security Division, even at Fortune 500 companies 88% of them had systems that had been accessed by infected machines and 60 percent of them had experienced stolen email account information.
In summary, what we deal with here is what Microsoft best described with the statement below. █
“Analysts sell out – that’s their business model… But they are very concerned that they never look like they are selling out, so that makes them very prickly to work with.”
–Microsoft, internal document [PDF]
Related posts:
- IDG/IDC Does Microsoft’s Revisionism to Deny Crimes
- IDG/IDC (Yardena Arar): Bribed by Microsoft
- IDG OpenMic Should be Renamed OpenMicrosoft
- IDG ‘Forgets’ to Name Microsoft for Bending “Open Source”
- IDG Carries on Publishing Anti-GNU/Linux Rhetoric from Microsoft Evangelist in More Domains
- Troll Warning: Bill Snyder, IDG, Microsoft Investor
- IDG Gives a Platform for Microsoft’s Familiar Attack Dogs (and Former Employees) to Smear GNU/Linux
- IDG/IDC Produces Propaganda for Microsoft as ‘Analyst’, Then Publishes That as ‘Journalist’
- NetworkWorld’s (and IDG’s Other Sites) “Open Source” Blogs Are Not in Favour of Open Source
twitter said,
June 3, 2010 at 5:45 pm
Microsoft’s Fortune 500 boast rings hollow when roughly 450 of the Fortune 500 have botnet problems [thank you, GrokLaw RSS feed]. It is getting hard for Microsoft to lie about security problems that are both ubiquitous and obvious. Windows is a security black hole no matter how much money and effort the world’s richest companies thrown at it. Smaller companies do even worse. So, Microsoft advocates pull out the tired old “Microsoft Hater/Competitor” label to spin the practical advice of one of the worlds most competent tech companies. I wonder what they have to say about Intel, world+dog avoidance of Vista and Windows 7?