Skip to main content

Windows 7: How To Ignore Reports of Danger

I am running Windows 7 via VirtualBox, and I skipped Vista completely, so some of my comments might also apply to Vista and thus be outdated. Too bad.

You can probably expect a few other short pieces as I find something I like and something I don't.

So, we see Internet Explorer here trying to help you out and tell you the download seems safe. Of course, it also lets you report that the download is, in fact, unsafe! This will no doubt be fed back into their SmartScreen Filter service, and when enough users report something, future users will be warned on downloading whatever bit of malware it might be. What a great way to protect your users.

Now, the only obvious place to report the download is right here, in the download dialog box, which disappears as soon as the download completes and you can open or run it and actually discover anything threatening about it to warn others about.

My Windows 7 review will eventually be the composite of many small pieces. I'll build up a score card along the way, along with a table of links between the series.

The Good: 0
The Bad: 1

Comments

Seo Sanghyeon said…
Now, the only obvious place to report the download is right here, in the download dialog box, which disappears as soon as the download completes.No, this happens if and only if you check "Close this dialog box when download completes" box, which can be seen on your screenshot. So don't check it.
Calvin Spealman said…
Sanghyeon, this is not so. I have unchecked "Close this dialog box when download completes" on my machine, but the default is actually to close it as soon as the download completes. Perhaps I should have done a download with it checked, just for a more accurate screenshot.
saluk said…
Regardless of whether the window closes before you execute the file or not, very few people are going to keep the window open long enough to actually determine whether the download is malicious or not.
Anonymous said…
Can't wait till all the zombified Windows 7 machines report antiviruses as unsafe downloads!

Popular posts from this blog

Respect and Code Reviews

Code Reviews in a development team only function best, or possible at all, when everyone approaches them with respect. That’s something I’ve usually taken for granted because I’ve had the opportunity to work with amazing developers who shine not just in their technical skills but in their interpersonal skills on a team. That isn’t always the case, so I’m going to put into words something that often exists just in assumptions.
You have to respect your code. This is first only because the nature and intent of code reviews are to safeguard the quality of your code, so even having code reviews demonstrates a baseline of respect for that code. But, maybe not everyone on the team has the same level of respect or entered a team with existing review traditions that they aren’t acquainted with.
There can be culture shock when you enter a team that’s really heavy on code reviews, but also if you enter a team or interact with a colleague who doesn’t share that level of respect for the process or…

CARDIAC: The Cardboard Computer

I am just so excited about this.


CARDIAC. The Cardboard Computer. How cool is that? This piece of history is amazing and better than that: it is extremely accessible. This fantastic design was built in 1969 by David Hagelbarger at Bell Labs to explain what computers were to those who would otherwise have no exposure to them. Miraculously, the CARDIAC (CARDboard Interactive Aid to Computation) was able to actually function as a slow and rudimentary computer. 
One of the most fascinating aspects of this gem is that at the time of its publication the scope it was able to demonstrate was actually useful in explaining what a computer was. Could you imagine trying to explain computers today with anything close to the CARDIAC?

It had 100 memory locations and only ten instructions. The memory held signed 3-digit numbers (-999 through 999) and instructions could be encoded such that the first digit was the instruction and the second two digits were the address of memory to operate on. The only re…

How To Care If BSD, MIT, or GPL Licenses Are Used

The two recent posts about some individuals' choice of GPL versus others' preference for BSD and MIT style licensing has caused a lot of debate and response. I've seen everything as an interesting combination of very important topics being taken far too seriously and far too personally. All involved need to take a few steps back.

For the uninitiated and as a clarifier for the initiated, we're dealing with (basically) three categories of licensing when someone releases software (and/or its code):
Closed Source. Easiest to explain, because you just get nothing.GPL. If you get the software, you get the source code, you get to change it, and anything you combine it with must be under the same terms.MIT and BSD. If you get the software, you might get the source code, you get to change it, and you have no obligations about anything else you combine it with.The situation gets stickier when we look at those combinations and the transitions between them.

Use GPL code with Closed S…