Comments on: So secure we don’t need security?

By: Chrome os. ¿Estas muy seguro de no necesitar medidas de seguridad? | Blog Smartekh

Fri, 24 Jun 2011 06:42:26 +0000

[...] Si estas interesado en saber más características de Chrome OS ve a la siguiente liga: http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/so-secure-we-dont-need-security/ [...]

By: Google Chrome OS: Too secure to need security? • The Register | Linux Info

Google Chrome OS: Too secure to need security? • The Register | Linux Info — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 20:12:21 +0000

[...] Rik Ferguson, a security consultant at Trend Micro, criticised this line as marketing rhetoric. Google risks repeating the security mistakes of Apple, he warns. [...]

By: Could Google Repeat Apple’s Security Blunders? | ChromeBytes

Could Google Repeat Apple’s Security Blunders? | ChromeBytes — Thu, 09 Jun 2011 20:02:37 +0000

[...] Rik Ferguson, director of security research at Trend Micro, isn’t buying it. He made a rather poignant post on his blog giving his take on the whole thing. ”While I applaud the impressive advances in [...]

By: Could Google Repeat Apple's Security Blunders? | thechromesource - Google Chrome and Chrome OS News and Forum

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 14:38:32 +0000

By: Is Chrome OS An Impregnable Fortress? Not According to Trend Micro | TECHTECHS.CA | IT Professionals in Toronto

Sat, 28 May 2011 20:52:32 +0000

[...] a recent blog post, Ferguson tersely touched upon Chrome’s key security features, including sandboxing, automatic [...]

By: Is Chrome OS An Impregnable Fortress? Not According to Trend Micro | PCE Groups, LLC

Sat, 28 May 2011 04:39:24 +0000

[...] a recent blog post, Ferguson tersely touched upon Chrome’s key security features, including sandboxing, automatic [...]

By: Chromebook, cosi’ sicuro che non abbiamo bisogno di sicurezza ? » Italia SW

Fri, 27 May 2011 20:43:05 +0000

[...] Google ha offerto un Chrome OS SDK (software development kit) per creare applicazioni native, che, secondo Ferguson, spalanca la porta al malware. Terrorismo ingiustificato ? Ferguson si complimenta con Google [...]

By: Rik Ferguson

Rik Ferguson — Fri, 27 May 2011 12:42:01 +0000

Very vallid point Larry, there is certainly a lot more research to be done in this area before any claims of no need for security can be validated. As regards the sandbox, nope no further details, guess I should have said “may be” rather than “is”, I didn’t want to seem too negative though, overall I like the concept I’m just concerned that marketing might blind adoptees to their real risks.

By: Larry Seltzer

Larry Seltzer — Fri, 27 May 2011 12:24:36 +0000

Do you know more about the ChromeOS/Linux sandbox than I do? I’ve been trying for a while to get details on the implementation, but the Wiki and other Chromium docs are really old and still look experimental. It definitely looks to me as if the ChromeOS/Linux sandbox is in lesser shape than the Windows sandbox

While the machine may be reset to a known-good state at bootup, have you considered that the user’s server-based state won’t? Surely it’s possible to infect the user’s state so as to create a non-persistent infection on every machine he runs on

By: MigrationKing

MigrationKing — Thu, 26 May 2011 15:21:19 +0000

I truly believe that Google is on to something. If it didn’t truly scare Anti-Virus companies and their age old model of computing. They would not be complaining. Unfortunately, your time has come and as years pass by, you will either adapt or suffer a long…drawn out closure of your business.