Did I have a stroke or is the second paragraph basically a rehash of the first?
post
replies:
No thank you.
45 comments in c/linux@lemmy.ml view that post
For anyone who has been missing Microsoft’s tender, loving embrace since switching to Linux. Copilot for Linux is in development, I presume.
replies:
This is like poking holes in the condom before visiting the nearest $20 brothel...
replies:
It's to meet compliance regulations for orgs leveraging linux with E5/E7 licenses already. I doubt they even publish a version your average user can license, and it's probably just an attempt to further entrench orgs into E5/E7, perpetual money drip into the Microslop money tank.
As useful as nipples on a truck.
replies:
It's perfect for them. They don't have to do the work of maintaining an OS (Which they suck at) and get to continue monitoring the entire computer using their malwa- I mean security suite. :)
[deleted]
replies:
Well this is bullshit. I guess I will end up with this on my work laptop because almost everything is Microsoft in that environment. I can only hope it stays the hell out of the way.
replies:
I'm surprised the requirements isn't "To use Microsoft defender you need TPM version 2.0 or newer"
I wouldn't be surprised if this is just the beginning. Microsoft is making its tools Linux-compatible and is quietly, turning Windows into a desktop environment for the Linux kernel. They probably don't even need to tell their users about it. Surprise, WSL is everywhere now!
replies:
Thanks, but no thanks.
Why is the first paragraph repeated? Written by AI?
replies:
Crucial distinction: this is specifically for enterprise developer workstations under corporate management (requiring Defender for Endpoint / M365 enterprise licenses), not a general release for all Linux users.
I wrote a bit about what this means for the compliance versus privacy tug-of-war over on my site: Microsoft Defender Arrives on Linux Workstations.
Definitely an interesting shift for mixed-stack environments.
Original content by The Unknown Universe, written by a human and not AI generated!
Microsoft is like a plague.
They spot something with potential and immediately pounce on it. That's exactly how it went with GitHub too. And now they're trying to insert themselves into Linux. Probably just to harvest data. Complete bullshit. I would never use that.
The more Linux gets support the more likely is that it gets used more and is allowed on more companies. I dont want windoes defender on my linux device but I still think this is a good step for linux in general
To quote Shoresy: "For WHAT‽"
Ew, what? No
What the fuck?
Next up: Microsoft Linux with crap like Game Center.
replies:
Isn’t this mostly for enterprises that have linux on notebooks or VDIs, just so that all of their OS types are in the same ecosystem when it comes to attack surface management (ie in Sentinel)?
Lmao is it April 1st already? This is so fucking funny to me
This is really showing that Linux is on its way to be plagued by lots of corporate crap. What surprises me though is that the OS comunity has not come up with a FOSS solution that does what MS Defender does? I'm no programmer so i may be talking out of context. Why do i need to think that my out of the box Debian machine is more vulnerable than MicroSoft Windows.? Time to move to BSD?
replies:
I think I'll stick to Wazuh 😂
Ewwwww
I just want a real security solution for Linux that's privacy respecting and not the NSA in a trenchcoat (aka M$) but that's too much to ask. The offerings for advanced security on Windows are better than those on Linux for desktop use (we're not talking server) and it's not even close. Secure enough for most people is nice. But it's not enough for the paranoid like me and I desperately want it to be.
Defender has a very good thing in its configurable hard mode that simply blocks new executables that have never been seen before by M$'s cloud data. That stops pretty hard and fast a lot of new in the wild malware including campaigns by sophisticated actors. Combine with good management of LOLbins and a lockdown on those and you have a pretty hardened machine. The issue is it isn't private because it's sending M$ a complete list of hashes of every file on your machine which they pass to the NSA I'm sure. That and Windows itself being NSA-malware you know.
Rant warning
I'm not talking definition detections or clamAV (which is shit and has long had the lowest scores in comparative testing, it's for use on email servers to prevent known old malware from being passed around or stored on a file share, that's it, it's not end-point security, it won't even try to stop the most amateur hacker out there to say nothing of nation-state actors).
I'm talking real endpoint security that consumers can access without slapping down $400 a year for a corporate security license from Palantir (NSA in a trenchcoat warning) for 8 machines when only half that is needed.
I'm talking access controls, comprehensive exploit prevention, attack chain interruption and mitigation, scripting control, prompt to allow execution warnings, IPS/IDS in a software package for the desktop.
"Just do this deranged thing where you totally lock your Linux machine down and break tons of things you need and then spend dozens of hours every 3 months fixing it because an update badly broke your whole OS again" yeah no thanks I have a life and troubleshooting my own machine due to trouble I made isn't part of it. On Windows machines I can click and deploy after a short audit period software that does all I outlined, it's easy, it works, it comes with default allowlists of essential OS executables and libraries so it doesn't break the OS itself and the most trouble I have is needing to occasionally click a prompt to allow or block something which takes all of a few seconds, maybe a few minutes if I need to look up what's going on. And I can find free, pay once, and cheap annual subscriptions for under $200 annual from multiple providers for at least parts if not the whole thing. It's frustrating!
Due to advances in AI driven exploit finding the cost for zero-days is due to plummet and the access to such abilities with some money has come within the reach of even small criminal/hacker groups. So saying zero days are expensive and unlikely is a variant of the obscurity argument and not valid to rebut the points nor increasing relevant with AI driven exploit fears which may allow mass campaigns with brand new zero days for cheap.
And you can hmm and haw about security through obscurity but that doesn't really help your argument or my situation and we both know it.
-Signed someone who likes Linux and desperately wants the same security options and capabilities as a properly configured Windows machine running properly configured security software (you can't do it on Linux if it doesn't exist and that's a market size problem to some degree). I fucking hate Windows and I hate Micro$lop even more but I'm not going to bury my head in the sand and pretend this isn't a real problem.
P.S. Please prove me wrong. Point me to software that does most of what I asked, isn't $60 per machine annual (or a minimum purchase of $300 of licenses due to requiring at least 10 machines), meets the usability requirements of being relatively easy to run and maintain (security that's relatively easy is security that holds up over time, security that's hard gets turned off, turned down, ignored, or deferred for ease of use). I desperately want this and I will retract my statements and sing your praises. (No Bitdefender for Linux doesn't count, they're an NSA/eyes vacuum and really not a hard-configurator, access control/IPS centered solution anyways. Anything that sends files or file hashes to remote servers whose developers are based in eyes countries is an NSA/eyes vacuum that feeds them data on you.)
P.P.S. I already have network edge defenses and firewalls/IPS/IDS set-up but that's not really enough by a long-shot as I'm not talking about the low-hanging fruit of known cryptolocker campaigns or known cobaltstrike beaconing but the real big fish bad threat actors who pull out something never before seen and pair it with at least one 0-day exploit.
21 comments in c/linux@programming.dev view that post
If this allows more companies to offer Linux as an option for employees workstations, or even instead of Windows, I’m fine with this. Obviously this is not something for consumers.
I am at a loss of words for how non-sensical this is.
replies:
This sounds like the type of stuff a company would require on their business laptops, so this might actually be a good thing for Linux adoption. Of course it sucks for people who were already using Linux for work and now gotta put up with this shit lol.
Defender on Linux desktops requires the standalone Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Plan 2 or Microsoft 365 E5 and E7.
replies:
Fuck, next will be teams
Can't wait to ignore it
I had to check my calendar to make sure it wasn’t April 1st
I just threw up in my mouth a little bit
At least it's accurately named. "Microsoft Defender" is designed to defend Microsoft from competitors. All those EU orgs switching to Linux are now just one short sales call to the right idiot away from falling back into Microsoft's ecosystem.
Cats and dogs living together, MASS HYSTERIA!
If it's easier to set up and work with than ClamAV I'm down to clown. I won't put it on my personal machine, but I've got machines I use corpware on for work and school I wouldn't mind having it on.
Hahaha... no. Never installing that.
lol
lmao even
Looooooooooool no
2 comments in c/keralalinux@lemmy.ca view that post
Should your organization beIn the extremely unlikely and inexplicable event your organization is interested in Microsoft Defender for the Linux desktop, you can learn more at
replies:
all 10 comments