Will the Kaspersky OS experiment work?

5605 pts.
Tags:
Kaspersky
malware
Security
Kaspersky Labs recently confirmed rumors that it is building an operating system aimed exclusively at protecting industrial systems from malware. Think it will be a success? What issues do you see with the company's approach?

Answer Wiki

Thanks. We'll let you know when a new response is added.

Just like any other OS that has ever been created, eventually, it will be populated by malware.  How does the saying go, the only way to not get your computer infected is to not turn it on?  Well, the authors of the OS must have their heads in a box if they think that it will be protected from malware.  It would be the holy grail of all OS’es, not that it is a bad thing mind you, but I don’t think that the technology is out there yet. 

One day, we ever had a debate that the number of virus’ out there are probably created by those companies that create the virus scan databases, like McAfee and Symantec, but then you read on how far behind they are in creating the fixes for those viruses and it really makes you wonder.

No, I don’t think that any OS will ever be fully protected from malware.  It is one of those things that is a fact of computer life that we all have to face up to and ensure that we keep our security systems updated on a daily basis.  But again, this is just my opinion, free speech and all.

Discuss This Question: 3  Replies

 
There was an error processing your information. Please try again later.
Thanks. We'll let you know when a new response is added.
Send me notifications when members answer or reply to this question.

REGISTER or login:

Forgot Password?
By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy
  • TomLiotta
    It might depend on what is meant by "success". The OS will probably function correctly. Creating a secure OS in the context Kaspersky intends isn't that hard. But whether or not that can translate into any kind of use in commercial devices is harder to guess.   The huge number of existing devices indicates the scope of the environment. The infrastructure must support the OS. Essentially none of the devices work in isolation. Unless the entire network in the scope of a given device is upgraded at the same time, existing devices will mostly be unaffected. (And those are the biggest part of the problem.)   New devices must be fully compatible with everything they communicate with. If they are built around Kaspersky's OS (K-OS), they'll need to be compatible with all existing ICS protocols. That may imply additional complexity if any new protocols are added. It may also mean that device vendors will need to learn new programming methods while continuing with the old.   Maybe worst of all, it's not clear how it will make the slightest difference for some of the worst problems. For example, how will it stop vendors from embedding 'backdoor' accounts? If vendors can't create the programming that they want, it won't matter if K-OS "works". It simply won't be used.   Tom
    125,585 pointsBadges:
    report
  • TomLiotta
    (I tried to comment last night, but it disappeared. Fortunately I had copied the text before clicking 'Add' (due to recent truncation problems). And when I try to re-paste and submit it again, I get this error:   Duplicate comment detected; it looks as though you’ve already said that!   So, I'll try again with this changed comment.)   It might depend on what is meant by "success". The OS will probably function correctly. Creating a secure OS in the context Kaspersky intends isn't that hard. But whether or not that can translate into any kind of use in commercial devices is harder to guess.   The huge number of existing devices indicates the scope of the environment. The infrastructure must support the OS. Essentially none of the devices work in isolation. Unless the entire network in the scope of a given device is upgraded at the same time, existing devices will mostly be unaffected. (And those are the biggest part of the problem.)   New devices must be fully compatible with everything they communicate with. If they are built around Kaspersky's OS (K-OS), they'll need to be compatible with all existing ICS protocols. That may imply additional complexity if any new protocols are added. It may also mean that device vendors will need to learn new programming methods while continuing with the old.   Maybe worst of all, it's not clear how it will make the slightest difference for some of the worst problems. For example, how will it stop vendors from embedding 'backdoor' accounts? If vendors can't create the programming that they want, it won't matter if K-OS "works". It simply won't be used.   Tom
    125,585 pointsBadges:
    report
  • Ben Rubenstein
    Tom, looks like your comments got caught up in the spam filter for some reason. I restored the original comment and got rid of the duplicate. 

    I was thinking commercial success -- I have no doubt that Kaspersky can create a functional, secure OS. But I think your concerns about it actually being used are pretty valid. 

    Interesting (if negative) viewpoint from Haris -- you'd have to think that if anyone were capable of creating a malware-free OS, it would be Kaspersky, right? But it may indeed be a pipe dream. 
    5,605 pointsBadges:
    report

Forgot Password

No problem! Submit your e-mail address below. We'll send you an e-mail containing your password.

Your password has been sent to:

To follow this tag...

There was an error processing your information. Please try again later.

REGISTER or login:

Forgot Password?
By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy

Thanks! We'll email you when relevant content is added and updated.

Following