Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

GMail Adds Virus Protection

CmdrTaco posted more than 8 years ago | from the google-farts-and-people-smell dept.

Google 355

AxsDeny writes "Google has rolled out virus protection for it's web based email service. Apparently they are scanning incoming and outgoing messages for infected messages. Read more on their "what's new" page."

cancel ×

355 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Final Straw! (5, Funny)

fembots (753724) | more than 8 years ago | (#14159967)

That's it, that's EVIL and I'm quitting GMail now!

GMail has been my faithful virus depository, now where can I go today? HoTMaiL?

I wish it gives users the option to still retrieve the virus if they insist.

Re:Final Straw! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14160046)

Flamebait? Wow, tough room!

Re:Final Straw! (0, Redundant)

fembots (753724) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160070)

My bad, had I posted the following, it might have a different outcome:

I wish it gives users the option to still retrieve the virus if they insist.

GMail has been my faithful virus depository, now where can I go today? HoTMaiL?

That's it, that's EVIL and I'm quitting GMail now!

OMG (1)

repruhsent (672799) | more than 8 years ago | (#14159980)

Google ADDED THREE PAGES TO THEIR INDEX TODAY! Hooray! Let's make it a front page story! Sweet!

Re:OMG (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14160087)

Indeed.

When a Google-employe goes to the shitter and craps out a "e"-shaped piece of shit, some Slashdot-"moderator" or -"editor" will immediately post an "article" about Google finally, this time really, really true producing a browser.

Re:OMG (1, Funny)

tehwebguy (860335) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160305)

well, i don't know about everyone else but i think if someone crapped out an "e"-shaped piece of shit i'd think it was pretty awesome. e isn't exatly the easiest letter to make with your ass.

"it's"? (1, Insightful)

keesh (202812) | more than 8 years ago | (#14159981)

Oh come on... Why keep up the pretence of being 'editors' if you don't even fix stupid mistakes like it's versus its?

Re:"it's"? (5, Funny)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160014)

"Oh come on... Why keep up the pretence of being 'editors' if you don't even fix stupid mistakes like it's versus its?"

I was all excited about the virus protection in GMail until you pointed that out.

Re:"it's"? (0, Flamebait)

joemawlma (897746) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160038)

mmmm Grammar Nazi... always entertaining.

Re:"it's"? (0)

sconeu (64226) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160066)

<PEDANTIC>
"pretense", not "pretence"
</PEDANTIC>

Re:"it's"? (3, Insightful)

bamf (212) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160192)

If you're going to try to be pedantic, at least be accurate. "pretence" is perfectly valid here.

Re:"it's"? (2, Informative)

Buddy_DoQ (922706) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160235)

*
Or is it?

pretence P Pronunciation Key (prtns, pr-tns)
n. Chiefly British
Variant of pretense.

pretence

n 1: a false or unsupportable quality [syn: pretension, pretense] 2: an artful or simulated semblance; "under the guise of friendship he betrayed them" [syn: guise, pretense, pretext] 3: pretending with intention to deceive [syn: pretense, feigning, dissembling] 4: imaginative intellectual play [syn: pretense, make-believe] 5: the act of giving a false appearance; "his conformity was only pretending" [syn: pretense, pretending, simulation, feigning]

(source: Dictionary.com)

*Sorry, I had trouble resisting after being beat down by the grammar Nazis my self. It's really just a regional thing here.

Re:"it's"? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14160240)

Go to http://www.dictionary.com/ [dictionary.com] and look up "pretence" and you will see that is valid. Are you a Brit by any chance? I'm asking because Brits prefer quaint, Frenchified spellings like "colour" and "pretense".

Re:"it's"? (2, Funny)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160105)

Its the damn grammar nazis again to ruin the hype.

Re:"it's"? (1, Funny)

Aqws (932918) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160265)

Its horrible how much the words its and it's are confused in a post. Its very important that a post has it's grammer checked very carefully so that its safe from mistakes like that. If its done, people will not make that mistake. That will cause the end of it's days.

Grammar (0, Offtopic)

falsified (638041) | more than 8 years ago | (#14159982)

its, not it's. Sorry.

Re:Grammar (0, Offtopic)

chrispitude (535888) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160019)

I noticed it too. I know it's fashionable not to give a damn about spelling or grammar anymore, but it's still like fingernails on a chalkboard to me (and I'm an engineer, so that's saying something).

Re:Grammar (1, Funny)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160035)

Noooooooooooo. It's a Badger badger badger badger Badger badger badger badger Badger badger badger badger Badger badger badger badger Badger badger badger badger MUSHROOOM MUSHROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM Badger badger badger badger Badger badger badger badger Badger badger badger badger Badger badger badger badger ... and so on.

Re:Grammar (2, Funny)

joemawlma (897746) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160107)

Snaaaake, snaaaaaaake, IT'S A SNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE! AH Badgers, badgers, badgers, badgers...

Re:Grammar (1)

ZombieWomble (893157) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160169)

It says something about the internet that the parent got moderated 'Interesting', doesn't it? I can just see it now...

"Mushrooms, you say? By jove! Give that man some karma!"

What a lame "article". (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14159983)

The link just says "Yup, we're removing viruses."

Re:What a lame "article". (1)

moro_666 (414422) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160106)

at least it doesnt say Beta on antivirus feature, does it ? (check a few articles back on the m$ issue :p)

EICAR (4, Interesting)

ditto999999999999999 (546129) | more than 8 years ago | (#14159985)

X5O!P%@AP[4\PZX54(P^)7CC)7}$EICAR-STANDARD-ANTIVIR US-TEST-FILE!$H+H* makes it through fine.

Re:EICAR (1)

temojen (678985) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160047)

Perhaps because it's not actually a virus? Try sending known malware like sdbot or bagel.

Re:EICAR (1)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160149)

Well, duh!!!!

You got a space in between the "R" and "U" in antivirus!!!

No need to thank me.

Hotmail has integrated this for years... (3, Funny)

the computer guy nex (916959) | more than 8 years ago | (#14159994)

.. can we say Google is now replicating? :)

Re:Hotmail has integrated this for years... (1)

Nezzari (927045) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160002)

More like improving.

Re:Hotmail has integrated this for years... (2, Insightful)

rincebrain (776480) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160102)

No, because theirs actually does something useful, whereas Hotmail's has failed to catch a lot of the viruses people randomly send me while simultaneously denying people legitimate attachments because they fit some extension that Hotmail blocks.

Re:Hotmail has integrated this for years... (1)

_Swank (118097) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160200)

or some weird pattern. peachtree accounting saved files are always flagged by hotmail regardless of extension or stuffing it into a zip file or something. claims trend micro's scanner found a virus in it. go to trend micro's web page and have it scan the file -- no virus. so there's no way to send it via hotmail. so you go get an e-mail account through gmail.

Re:Hotmail has integrated this for years... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14160118)

No no no... you have to understand this is Slashdot. If the Google/Apple/OSS crowd does something that's already been done before it will always still be considered "innovative" or "fresh" for some fucked up reason. Maybe one of the Slashbot hippies can explain it to us.

but what powers it? (5, Insightful)

caffeinemessiah (918089) | more than 8 years ago | (#14159999)

This in itself is not surprising -- it's a natural step that Google had to take in order to compete with the other biggies in the business. What I'm more interested in knowing is if Google has put that army of Ph.D.'s into developing the AV technology. I don't see any other reason to wait so long for adding virus protection -- they could just as easily have licensed some commercial AV months ago, seeing as AV is one of the features that novice Internet users look for most. Now that MS is into AV, will Google follow suit? I'm hoping...

Re:but what powers it? (2, Insightful)

temojen (678985) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160072)

Or just use ClamAV.

Re:but what powers it? (4, Insightful)

IAmTheDave (746256) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160247)

No offense to ClamAV, which I currently use, but if an engineering team rivaling the brain power of MIT research teams or NASA decides to make a virus scanner and release it for free, well... I'm gonna at least give it a try.

Re:but what powers it? (1)

temojen (678985) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160276)

Wouldn't it be better for google to take the ClamAV base and extend/adapt it to their needs? I think that's more likely to happen than them starting from scratch unless there's something weird (aside from size) about the way their email system works.

Re:but what powers it? (3, Interesting)

garcia (6573) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160086)

This in itself is not surprising -- it's a natural step that Google had to take in order to compete with the other biggies in the business.

Of course it's not surprising. They've been blocking "bad" attachments for quite some time (and possibly since I started using it on 6/22/04).

If they were doing that (which gets rid of most viruses and non-sense) all along, I certainly wouldn't be surprised by this.

Re:but what powers it? (1)

misleb (129952) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160093)

Who needs to invest in commercial scanners? There are free ones ones there. ClamAV, for example has been working great for my company. Not only does it catch viruses as attachments, but it identifies phishing emails as well. Indeed, one has to wonder what took Google so long.

-matthew

Re:but what powers it? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14160114)

a non-trivial investment in servers to scan the mails, I would imagine.

No zips with binary files (1)

RobPiano (471698) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160214)

I can't say I know much, but I have been irritated many times that it would not let me include a zip with a binary file (something I do often in testing programs).

Re:but what powers it? (5, Insightful)

Zeinfeld (263942) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160217)

Hopefully GMail use the most secure, most effective form of virus scanning, block all executable attachments.

Traditional virus scanning based on a blacklist of known bad code is hopeless. By the time a new piece of trojan code has been identified a hundred million copies have been blasted out from a botnet. There is almost no legitimate use of email to send executable code, way over 99% of all executable attachments are malicious.

ISPs should block executable attachments by default and offer the people who really really think that they can't live without it the option of turning delivery back on. AIDS awareness campaigns have saved millions of lives by persuading people to use condoms even though some people think that they just have to have casual sex without one. Accepting code in email is like having casual unprotected sex, its idiotic.

There is a very small, largely theoretical problem with non-executable content. Any data that is transferred from one machine to another could be used to exploit a code vulnerability in theory. The use of anti-virus style malicious data lists will still be necessary but the problem is much, much smaller. It is a much easier signal to spot. AV systems spend huge numbers of cycles recursively unpacking program loaders. With a data exploit we know the shape of the lock it fits into.

Re:but what powers it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14160220)

> What I'm more interested in knowing is if Google has > put that army of Ph.D.'s into developing the AV technology. They are using Sophos Anti-Virus.

Re:but what powers it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14160303)

Sophos, apparently.

NO! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14160000)

Not on the same day MS starts beta testing their anti-virus solution.

I'm gonna fucking kill this guy, I did it before and I'll do it again, I'm gonna fucking kill google!

Where's a chair?

Re:NO! (2, Interesting)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160071)

Steve Ballmer? You read slashdot? Are you by chance a masochist? That would explain everything...

Re:NO! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14160227)

don't reply to urself just so people can get your joke. it's stupid and makes me want to shoot puppies. don't deny it, i'm totally standing outside your window watching you.

So what? (5, Insightful)

NineNine (235196) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160003)

So what? Yahoo and the other big players have had this for years. That's like announcing that Ford is now selling cars with anti-lock brakes and power steering. That's great and all, but I wouldn't consider that news.

Re:So what? (1)

goldspider (445116) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160068)

You forget. "News" likes this is more like a cue for the Slashbot revisionist historians to claim another innovation for Google and/or OSS.

In three months, we will read about how Google created virus protection for web-based e-mail.

Re:So what? (3, Funny)

NineNine (235196) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160124)

You're right. I'm wrong. I'm a bad Slashdotter. Here's my revised post:

GMail has virus protection?!? Wow! That's so innovative! They've done everything else perfectly, and now they've ended email-based viruses! M$ and Yahoo both suck! Google rocks! Thanks, Google!

Re:So what? (1)

rayzat (733303) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160264)

You forgot to add, that after looking at hotmail and discovering that it has anti-virus capabilities MS has clearly ripped off Google again. Why can MS innovate? Stupid copy cats. They have a crappy business model that will be destoryed by Google. Google stops MS for using it's monopoly power to force users from using hotmail anti-virus. Yea Google, MS sucks.

Re:So what? (1)

Jotii (932365) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160095)

Not at all. Google is known for researching everything with their army of employees. It wouldn't surprise me if Google actually managed to kill spam.

What's new? (1)

RedLaggedTeut (216304) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160005)

Indeed what is new?

They were having some sort of virus protection already that involved disallowing certain file extensions inside zip files and mangling(!) files with other extensions (.asc) or maybe headers (MBZ)

Does it mean they are finally doing it right(tm) now, actually scanning for virii?

Re:What's new? (1)

gad_zuki! (70830) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160237)

>actually scanning for virii?

Virii isn't a word. So no, they're not.

Seriously, they're doing what yahoo and hotmail have been doing for a couple years now. Not terribly newsworthy, but hey, its google. I wonder how our kids and grandkids will see the google hype which so far has been one good search engine and lots of aquisitions and me too projects.

Re:What's new? (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160284)

Not just inside zip files... what i remember from the 1st days of gmail, it dont let in files with executable extensions (windows style, i.e. not only exe, com, or dll, but also others like chm), and the same was controlled for compressed files with those files attached. So i dont think i ever received a virus/worm/whatever in gmail, since im using it, as you could not receive that kind of files.

They are going back in that policy, accepting all kind of extensions, or is just another level of protection scanning the files they are letting in (i.e. scanning a dangerous.renametoexe attached file) ?

gMail on IE (1)

0110011001110101 (881374) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160012)

But what if I'm running gMail on IE with the unpatched security flaw??

SCAN THIS GOOGLE!

but but but... (5, Funny)

ellem (147712) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160013)

<sarcasm>
I use GMail on OS X so I don't need it...
</sarcasm>

This could be a big issue (4, Insightful)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160015)

If the virus can't be removed from the file, you won't be able to download it.
......
If a virus is found in an attachment you're trying to send, you won't be able to send the message until you remove the attachment.


Now I know Google is pretty good and reliable, but that's sort of a harsh way to do business. There should be some sort of work-around if Google gets it wrong on what is and isn't a virus (which I assume they are going to do sooner or later). I mean, a false positive would get you cut off from what could be vital information. If that happens to someone, they'll be mad, even though it was done for a good reason. I hope they at least warn the people that there was an attachment.

Re:This could be a big issue (2, Interesting)

Daniel_Staal (609844) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160164)

Or for that matter, for virus-analysis. I know of people who email each other copies of viruses (safely marked) so that they can all examine them.

Re:This could be a big issue (1)

rincebrain (776480) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160186)

So embed it in an encrypted ZIP inside of an encrypted RAR inside of a 7zip archive. :)

Re:This could be a big issue (4, Informative)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160293)

A lot of filters drop anything encrypted, for that reason.

Re:This could be a big issue (1)

0110011001110101 (881374) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160233)

There should be some sort of work-around if Google gets it wrong on what is and isn't a virus

Well now we know you're not a /. regular, I mean "Google gets it wrong", what does that even mean? I'm having trouble computing... arrrghghghghgh!!!

Re:This could be a big issue (2, Insightful)

xero9 (810991) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160309)

Yahoo is the same way. My ISP uses Yahoo for its email and when a virus comes through it don't let you get the attachement at all. I think it's kind of good though, because you know there's stupid people out there who are just dying to open it, even if it's been flagged as a virus.

Wrong Link (4, Insightful)

OverlordQ (264228) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160028)

Actually the "What's New" page is here [google.com] , not what was linked to.

Also, I'm still pissed they havent added the option to empty the spam folder, yes I know it gets automagically deleted after 30 days, but I'd like to clear it out without having to go through 30 pages.

Re:Wrong Link (1)

DTC (450482) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160139)

Also, I'm still pissed they havent added the option to empty the spam folder, yes I know it gets automagically deleted after 30 days, but I'd like to clear it out without having to go through 30 pages.


30 pages? click on the Spam folder, click the "select all" option at the top of the list, then click the "delete forever" button. Not too hard.

Re:Wrong Link (1)

OverlordQ (264228) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160173)

Yes, that only selects the 50 odd messages on the first page, the most you can show on 1 page is 100 emails. With 3800 odd emails in the spam folder, yes 30 pages.

More power to Googlezon! (0, Offtopic)

thelost (808451) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160034)

I for one look forward to EPIC

Is it going to... (3, Interesting)

scenestar (828656) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160036)

flag mp3s and archives as unsafe by default?

Re:Is it going to... (1)

tehshen (794722) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160171)

Having just tried sending both and succeeding, apparently not (yet?)

End of .creative.extenstions (2, Funny)

sphix42 (144155) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160042)

So much for the .zip.remove.everything.after.the.first.zip.includi ng.the.period files.

Nice addition to GMail (1)

Capeman (589717) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160044)

I've been using GMail for about 2 months now, and I like it better than any other free e-mail service because of its features. Personally I don't open any e-mail attachments without scanning them first, but now they add virus scanning to their service, many end users that don't have an anti-virus on their system will benefit from this feature.

No. (1)

andreyw (798182) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160054)

Webmail will never replaced a normal MUA. Essentially, until I found a decent up-to-date MUA (Being an ELM user hating PIne and Mutt), I used gmail. Now that I have Mail.App, I just use Gmail as a safety repository for deleted mail.

Re:No. (1)

SamBeckett (96685) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160116)

Mail.app sucks. Or maybe it's just the IMAP support. I don't have time to think about such things.

Re:No. (1)

misleb (129952) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160172)

Oh, AJAX will make all webmail systems just like Mail.app

What about false positives? (2, Insightful)

mmThe1 (213136) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160075)

From the page..
"If the virus can't be removed from the file, you won't be able to download it"

All that talk about false positive and important (project/contract saving) mails sounds so important suddenly...

Re:What about false positives? (3, Insightful)

temojen (678985) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160251)

You keep important, time-crucial files on a free webmail service?

Nice, I suppose, if you get a lot of them. (3, Funny)

tgd (2822) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160090)

I've got 10k+ e-mails in my gmail account, though, and I don't think any have any virus-laden attachments, though.

What I really want is a "yes, I'm unilingual, I speak English and if an e-mail isn't in English, its spam" setting.

Re:Nice, I suppose, if you get a lot of them. (5, Funny)

Nezzari (927045) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160150)

Que?

great, but... (1)

ameyer17 (935373) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160096)

now all they need to do is implement a feature to disable the spam filter and/or IMAP

Yeah that! (1)

Hakubi_Washu (594267) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160242)

Though their Spamfilter is rather good, I still hate logging in every couple of days to see if it hasn't accidentaly gotten a false positive (It has, sometimes, because I don't store my friends addresses online, so they aren't whitelisted). I prefer using my own mail client and my own filters, thank you, Google. (Disallow pop3-access, if you dont want me to use it :-P )

What's next? (0, Flamebait)

Ant2 (252143) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160098)

What's next?

1) Scanning for copyrighted material?
2) Scanning for pornography?
3) Scanning for insider trading information?
4) Scanning for links to Google competitors?
5) Reading your email to display relevant advertisements? (oh crap...)

Re:What's next? (1)

Billosaur (927319) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160270)

1) Scanning for copyrighted material?

Of course, so they can add it to their book-scanning repository

2) Scanning for pornography?

Next up: Porngle or maybe Google PornBase

3) Scanning for insider trading information?

Well how else do you think they make money? It's not like their shares are worth $400 or something!

4) Scanning for links to Google competitors?

The search engine has eyes!

5) Reading your email to display relevant advertisements? (oh crap...)

That's right, no more messy popups or banner ads... advertising content direct to you... GoogleSpam!

Antivirus???? (1)

larry2k (592744) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160099)

I'm using gmail on Mac OS X on Safari, so do I need antivirus?

SLASHDOT adds IT'S protection (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14160119)

In a surprise move for illiterate, clueless morons everywhere, popular tech website Slashdot has added a spell checker that can tell when IT'S is actually supposed to be ITS. Although a third grader can tell by himself, adults are stymied by the difference.

Not only are they scanning for infected messages (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14160121)

... but they are no longer allowing ANY zipfiles containing .exes to be transmitted to a gmail account.

That's obviously pretty damned annoying for people who actually work with zipfiles. "Here, give this version a try." "What version?"

I've sent them polite feedback requests to stop doing that. Other services scan zipfile contents for known viruses; Google is just dropping the zipfiles altogether. In my message to their support folks, I pointed out that letting virus writers dictate the design of your mail service isn't the best long-term business model.

Re:Not only are they scanning for infected message (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14160234)

they still let .rar files containing executables through.

Re:Not only are they scanning for infected message (1)

mojo333 (465664) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160302)

No, they don't. I tried it today to no avail. UUencode to the rescue :-)

What? Can't they index virii? (4, Funny)

Wellspring (111524) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160131)

This is a natural outgrowth of the fact that they can't effectively index virii.

Therefore, they must be destroyed [theonion.com] .

Not all accounts upgrading? (1)

obli (650741) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160146)

Has anyone else noticed that their accounts are falling behind when it comes to upgrades? I discovered the auto-save feature yesterday by accident when I was peeking over one of my friends' shoulder, I asked him how long it had been there. "A month, maybe", he replied.

How come I haven't seen that feature yet? Even my dummy accounts get upgrades.

Re:Not all accounts upgrading? (1)

mysqlrocks (783488) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160311)

How come I haven't seen that feature yet? Even my dummy accounts get upgrades.

You haven't, by any chance, had the same browser window open for a couple of months?

next step: gVirusFighter (5, Interesting)

altoz (653655) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160147)

They have gmail scanning for viruses... They have google desktop indexing the files...

Soon, they'll release a google-desktop extension that scans viruses on windows.

google really is taking over microsoft (windows)

Welcome to SlashDot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14160153)

Welcome to the new SlashDot community. It's the latest and greatest Digg.com mirror. Come on guys, quit reporting crap that was already reported 6 hours ago on a better website.

Virus protection? Wuh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14160198)

I'm a Linux user. How does this affect me?

Virus-Targetted Advertising (3, Funny)

Jherek Carnelian (831679) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160203)

Does this mean Google will be targetting their advertising based on the kind and number of viruses they filter out?

For people who get a lot of viruses, they can advertise privacy tools, anti-virus software and adware removers.
For people who do not get a lot of viruses, they get to see ads for social networks, dating sites, etc.

Two consecutive posts about "Email"....... (1)

raingrove (934820) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160211)

Again, E-mail is only for old people....... isn't it? At least it is here in Korea. We use Google Talk, not GMail. You guys are oldfashioned!

Re:Two consecutive posts about "Email"....... (1)

Jotii (932365) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160223)

E-mail is very useful as long as you aren't online 24/7. Even if you are, it might be convenient if someone wants to tell you something when you're rebooting.

Re:Two consecutive posts about "Email"....... (1)

raingrove (934820) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160245)

We have multimedia mobile phones and SMS for that:P

Exclusionary (1)

d3am0n (664505) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160224)

I'm off topic so I figure this'll burn abit of karma. However I've noticed that even as webmail becomes more pervasive, it gets harder and harder for me to attatch certain files. Sometimes I need to send exe files around, and even if I put it into a zip file, or change the exe to a .dat file...it still buggers it and refuses to take the upload. I'm figuring that even if I find out some other way to start hiding my exe files, having a virus scanner go through it is going to make it just that much harder to send my work through.

hotmail (3, Funny)

dioscaido (541037) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160254)

following the trend for MS, it looks like hotmail is copying gmail and checking for viruses as well. :)

The Real Story (1)

blueZhift (652272) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160262)

The real story here is that GMail went live without virus scanning in the first place considering that at least one of their major competitors, Yahoo!, already had it. In a lot of ways Google reminds me of the go go tech companies back in the tech boom of the late 90's when updates and "news" came on an almost hourly basis. Am I saying Google is going too fast? Maybe, but I do admire their enthusiasm energy. They certainly woke up Yahoo!, AOL, and MSN to name a few.

Can I send _uninfected_ .exe files now? (2, Insightful)

Hopieopdepaus (884724) | more than 8 years ago | (#14160279)

Because I am getting tired of renaming my files and explaining n00b aunts how to re-rename the files when they receive them.

I'd love this... (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14160282)

except for one thing: what if there's a false positive? Being unable to download a file because of a false positive would piss me off.

Um, I use VMS...why protect me? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14160289)

I use gmail exclusively on my Alpha running VMS...There are no known viruses for this platform and I really really REALLY doubt that anyone will ever create one anyway.
why does Google feel the need to protect me from anything?
There should be an option to turn it off.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>