Microsoft's anti-malware team to have new adware rules July 1

When people surf the Internet on their web browsers, it's just a matter of time when they hit a page that has an online ad which then tries to install something on their computer. This week, the Microsoft Malware Protection Center team announced it will have some new criteria to define when such activity crosses over into the annoying. and sometimes malicious, adware side.

Pop-up online ads have to have a working close window, according to Microsoft's new adware policies.

In a blog post, Microsoft stated that online ads start to cross over into adware territory if they run programs on a user's PC and create "notifications promoting goods or services in programs other than itself." If that occurs, Microsoft states there must be a clear way to close such an ad, like a prominent "X" or a close button in, for example, pop-up ads.

Ads that show messages such as "Your PC performance is poor" must also clearly mention they are ads and not suggest they are in fact warnings generated by a PC, under the new rules. Finally, if a program is installed via an online ad on a computer, there must be a clear way to uninstall it. Also, the name of the program in the uninstall listing must exactly match the name that's shown in the ad.

The new adware policies will go into effect on July 1, in order to give online ad companies time to change their programs. After July 1, if an ad is detected by Microsoft's online security programs that is considered adware, it "will immediately stop the program and the user will be notified. The user then has the ability to restore the program if they wish."

Source: Microsoft | Image via Microsoft

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Project Ara updates progress with new video

Next Story

Microsoft launches .NET Foundation to expand open source efforts

15 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I dont get why people think MS is doing so bad on the malware/AV side.

If any, MS is a company with one of the highest security levels in their products.
And MSE/WD works fine, problem is, you need to keep your entire system up to date because MSE/WD does not carry definitions for issues that have been fixed through updates.
And this is why MSE scores so bad on the AV/malware tests, because often its a 6month old Windows that hasnt been updated with UAC disabled... then yeah, MSE will perform horrible.

MSE is doing more then fine and since a year or 2 other vendors have been actively trying to stop Microsoft from gaining any traction in the anti-malware world.

Microsoft never perform good in security area, such as Antivirus and anti malware.
They already recruit or buy some companies, but why still weak in this area?
Must mak browser and OS stronger from the attack

utomo said,
Microsoft never perform good in security area, such as Antivirus and anti malware.
They already recruit or buy some companies, but why still weak in this area?
Must mak browser and OS stronger from the attack

They aren't allowed to. It's the exact same thing they did with IE that got them put in anti-trust jail. It doesn't matter how much we the consumers want it, our dear world governments don't think it's fair.

Hello,

Microsoft has acquired several anti-malware companies, including GeCAD from Romania in 2003, GIANT Company from the US in 2004, and Sybari and FrontBridge (both US) in 2005. They also have recruited heavily from anti-malware companies like McAfee and Symantec.

Simply acquiring companies and talent does not allow one to build--and maintain--a best-of-breed product.

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky

goretsky said,
Hello,

Microsoft has acquired several anti-malware companies, including GeCAD from Romania in 2003, GIANT Company from the US in 2004, and Sybari and FrontBridge (both US) in 2005. They also have recruited heavily from anti-malware companies like McAfee and Symantec.

Simply acquiring companies and talent does not allow one to build--and maintain--a best-of-breed product.

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky

Yep, they wanted to make a "best of breed" product. Then were reminded it would put them in another anti-trust position because the anti-virus and anti-malware market is rather lucrative and all of those companies would not take it lying down.

The original product I alpha tested in 2004 was pretty sweet. The product it became isn't so hot.

NastySasquatch said,

Yep, they wanted to make a "best of breed" product. Then were reminded it would put them in another anti-trust position because the anti-virus and anti-malware market is rather lucrative and all of those companies would not take it lying down.

The original product I alpha tested in 2004 was pretty sweet. The product it became isn't so hot.

Beta tested. It wasn't Microsoft I was ever doing alphas for. Must be tired.

If microsoft wanted a decent malware program they should just buy malwarebytes and integrate it into windows defender/mse. I'm sure it wouldn't cost that much to buy them out.

The problem is it would be too good. And AV companies would get pissed. So what Microsoft has done is put an AV inside Windows that was "Just good enough, but not great"

But not even Malware Bytes will prevent the end user from doing a search for Picasa, downloading it from the wrong source and having MYPCBackup and Conduit Search deposited onto their computers. The only solution at the moment for most non-savvy consumers, is stick to tablets and phones, and dare I say it Windows RT. It's a very sad state of affairs for anyone searching for anything to install over the internet these days. You just can't trust anything out there if you don't know any better and most people don't know any better.

warwagon said,
The problem is it would be too good. And AV companies would get pissed. So what Microsoft has done is put an AV inside Windows that was "Just good enough, but not great"

Anti-Malware companies wouldn't have a leg to stand on. Microsoft have a right to introduce measures into their OS to protect itself from malware.

adware makers have not adhered to any rules or guidelines in the past, what make Microsoft or anyone else think that they will start now?

timster said,
adware makers have not adhered to any rules or guidelines in the past, what make Microsoft or anyone else think that they will start now?

I think this makes the different between recommended for removal, or removed by default as a threat.