HP loads PC with nonexistent web browser

HP loads PC with nonexistent web browser

Secure Home | Search | About
 Microsoft Applications Security    Post an article   get this group's latest topics as an RSS feed add this group's latest topics to your My MSN content add this group's latest topics to your My Yahoo content add this group's latest topics to your Google content
Subject Author Date
HP loads PC with nonexistent web browser ~BD~ 09-23-2008
Posted by ~BD~ on September 23, 2008, 9:21 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options


"Yesterday, the hardware maker unleashed the HP Compaq dc7900, a business
desktop with a version of
Firefox that isn't really there. Developed in tandem with Mozilla and Symantec,
the Firefox for HP
Virtual Solutions browser operates in a runtime netherworld that's separate from
the rest of the
machine.

This means that when malware attacks, the machine itself is unharmed. "[This
virtual Firefox
browser] ensures that employees can utilize the World Wide Web productively,
while keeping business
PCs stable and easier to support," writes Symantec technical product manager
Scott Jones. "Changes
made to a PC while surfing the Web are contained in a 'virtual layer' and do not
permanently alter
the machine."

Ref: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/22/hp_virtual_web_browser/

If this catches on, folk like David H Lipman and PA Bear may lose their
clientele on these groups!

Dave

--





Posted by David H. Lipman on September 23, 2008, 4:37 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options




Ref:: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/22/hp_virtual_web_browser/

| If this catches on, folk like David H Lipman and PA Bear may lose their
clientele on
| these groups!

| Dave

Not quite. It is only a Browser and it will do nothing about Internet worms and
email
based Trojans and worms.

Additionally, don't believe the hype.


--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp



Posted by ~BD~ on September 24, 2008, 2:12 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options



> NOTE: The following newsgroups were REMOVED from my reply because
> software virtualization has nothing to do with security or virus
> prevention: microsoft.public.security,
> microsoft.public.security.virus.


As it is a matter of opinion, Vanguard, I have now ADDED your reply!

Dave



> SVS (Software Virtualization
> Solution) will not increase your security. It will not prevent viral
> infection or its deleterious effects. SVS will not do either anymore
> than doing backups will. That is not what SVS is about at all. While
> it is very, very difficult to punch out of a virtual machine, programs
> that run when a virtual layer is active have just as much access to your
> host as if they were running outside a layer and in your base host.
>
> Software virtualization. It's been around for awhile but end users
> don't know much about it. A free version can be had at
> svsdownloads.com. Altiris had their SVS product which Symantec bought.
> Now Symantec is working with HP, Dell, and Intel of providing VPS
> which are pre-packaged virtualized products; i.e., you can add a VPS to
> add a virtualized product. This isn't the same as running a virtual
> machine. The virtualized software runs in its own layer but within
> your host rather than in a guest OS.
>
> I've been using Altiris SVS for a very short time. It works but has
> some bugs. For example, when I activate a layer, I can no longer
> shutdown/restart my host using the Start menu because the shutdown
> dialog disappears in a second. The personal version doesn't let you
> run layers mutually exclusive of each other. That is, if you have
> multiple versions of a product that you want to test and because all
> cannot be currently active on the same host at the same time, you can
> manually select one layer to activate for one version but have to
> remember not to activate the layers for other versions. It would be
> much easier if you could place conditions in a layer that it not load
> when certain other layers are active or to force specific other layers
> to deactivate when you activate the one that you want. The business
> version might have this. You could simulate this conditional loading
> by using a batch file or script and use the command-line version of
> their SVS program.
>
> There are lots of VPS packages already available, include web browsers.
> The 2 main sites that I visit at juice.altiris.com and
> svsdownload.com. While there are forums at juice.altiris.com, they
> tend to be visited by network admins and developers so they are way
> above the level for common user questions. Instead go visit the
> altiris forums (forums.altiris.com) under the software virtualization
> group.
>
> For corporations, this makes a lot of sense because they can easily
> track how many licenses of a product have been assigned to users. They
> can see who is using what product.
>
> It's not a panacea. Any application that loads a driver won't work
> with software virtualization unless you manage to get the driver out of
> the layer and load it in the base host. The driver has to be there
> before you load the driver. The layer will not register and load the
> driver (unless it is a dynamically loaded driver). I've got some games
> within a layer for each one and they run but not all games will work
> inside a virtualization layer. One user noted that Halo won't work (I
> think Steam was also mentioned) because their copy protection is too
> strong and won't let the game work when virtualized.
>
> Virtualized is somewhat of a stretch for this technology. You are
> actually using a kernel-mode file redirection driver to hide files when
> the layer is deactivated. Registry entries are similarly hidden. So
> the program really is running in your base OS but all its file and
> registry entries can be hidden when its layer is deactivated and they
> reappear when you activate its layer. As it stands now, it isn't a
> perfect solution and still needs a lot of work. In a corporate
> environment where hardware and software can be enforced and controlled,
> it works well. In the public venue, and considering the level of
> expertise to figure out how to make it work, it can be a disaster. It
> took me a whole day to figure out how to move the Start menu group
> added by a game install so it was somewhere else in my Start menu (you
> have to modify by editing the layer's properties rather than moving the
> Start menu group around). There are also read-only and writable
> sublayers within a layer where sometimes you have to move a file, like
> an .ini file, out of the read-only sublayer into the writable sublayer
> so any changes to it will survive if you reset the layer. Resetting
> the layer is one of the advantages (if done right) of virtualization.
> It lets you revert that layer back to a base state. If you, malware,
> or corruption end up screwing over or deleting a file, you can reset
> the layer back to that base state and you're good to go. Hopefully you
> configured your data so it was stored outside the layer or in the
> writeable sublayer; else, when you reset the layer, you would lose all
> your data. Tech problems are easier when all you have to do is to
> remotely reset a user's layer on their host and its back to the fresh
> install state.
>
> If you actually bother to look and use SVS, you'll see that it does
> nothing to eliminate the need for expertise in using it, in installing
> or deploying applications, or in fixing problems (that reverting to the
> base state for a layer doesn't fix). It is NOT protection against
> malware. When a layer is active, the malware within it still has the
> same access to your devices and files that it would have when not
> running virtualized. So far, I've used it for a couple games because I
> know that type of software NEVER cleanly uninstalls. In fact, if you
> install an app within a virtual layer, you won't see a Remove button in
> the Add/Remove Programs applet for that program. It's listed but you
> remove it by deleting the layer, not by running its uninstall program.
>
> I would NOT recommend to use SVS for trialing unknown software (or any
> software that you're not sure if you want on your host). I use a
> virtual machine for that. Once the layer is active, that trial program
> has full access to your host just like it does when not virtualized. A
> VM keeps the scope of effect by a trial app within the VM, and I can
> revert to a baseline snapshot for the VM to completely get rid of the
> trialed app (don't even have to bother uninstalling it).
>
> SVS has advantages. It also has disadvantages. And the personal
> edition that you get to use still has some flaws or deficiencies. What
> Symantec delivers to Dell, HP, and Intel is not what you get to use for
> free. Users that implement SVS will end up making MORE work available
> for Lipman and Bear, not less. It will probably helpdesks to some
> extent but I, as a user, know that getting my layer reset to its base
> state means I could lose the time I spent to tweak that application and
> possibly some data if the layer wasn't setup correctly (and most end
> users won't edit the properties of their layer to set it up correctly
> and instead just use the defaults which may not work as wanted).
>
> If you want to know more about software virtualization, go visit their
> web pages and read.
>
> http://www.altiris.com (redirects to a Symantec page)
> http://juice.altiris.com http://www.svsdownloads.com
> http://forums.altiris.com (Software Virtualization Solution)
>



Similar ThreadsPosted
Is Browser using Localhost OK ? July 27, 2005, 11:57 am
Browser being hijacked? February 21, 2007, 7:03 am
Browser Hijack? February 21, 2007, 9:10 am
What, exactly, is a 'normal' browser? December 10, 2008, 5:54 pm
Browser Re Direct or Similar August 11, 2005, 4:01 pm
Issuing Web Browser digital certificates October 27, 2005, 9:39 pm
RE: Users urged to fix browser flaw April 11, 2006, 4:18 am
browser/remote monitoring problem April 20, 2006, 9:40 am
standalone CA - cannot use browser to install certs February 1, 2008, 3:41 pm
Web Browser Password Change Solution Needed September 13, 2007, 10:56 am

The site map in XML format XML site map

Contact Us | Privacy Policy