Malware review

While technology in calculate continues to rise, electronic computer hackers and crackers atomic number 18 also evolving. Cracking even started at the early age of computer technology. It started from simple codes exploiting bugs in Operating Systems. And now, it becomes a hobby of most. Stealing passwords and exploiting computers atomic number 18 common way of cracking. about commonwealth termed it as hacking. Everyday, anti-virus companies be also upgrading their corpses since viruses and other noisome softw ars are upgrading. piracy is a nonher story. It is an act of duplicating someones work and sells it. Before, it is not common and hardly be jut outn. But as devices and softwares are upgrading, duplications can be made in a split of seconds. For some consumers, it is good notwithstanding for the persistence, it is a disadvantage. Piracy is one of the major problems that media industry is facing.But, technology cannot be fathom it is continuously evolving in expon ential manner. Music publishers (the entertainment industry is the ones affected) released their cure or prevention for such exploitation. The program is called rootkit. Basically, its task is to hide copy harborion on computers. With its ability, people can no longer copy music. In this way, piracy can be prevented. But, Sony admitted that someday someways people forget try to crack its code and continue on pirating. But for sure, media industrys cyber warrantor personnel well not let crackers succeed.On the other hand, due its cleverness to attend computers, rootkit was distinguished by most anti-virus software as a malware. On an article on Technology Review published by MIT and write by Wade Roush, Technology Review interviewed Bruce Scheiener a computer credential guru. in that respect, Scheiener discussed about the tool and its capabilities. In When Copy Protection Becomes Malware, the computer security guru specifically identified the work of the rootkit and why it is called a malware.Basically, malware is a stamp of software that can control the system. Some malwares are harmful. But in the case of Sony, it has no other functions except to hide copy protections on users computer. The reason why it is distinguished as malware is because of its capability to manipulate the system wherein the users freedom of the intersection is given limitations.Added by Scheiener, computer users or consumers often times do not know what they are buying. Advertisements are so broad that buyers only see the outside display of the capability of the product. Consumers do not know what else their product can do. With this weakness, rootkit see an opportunity. It cant be distinguished by consumers as harmful except when their anti-virus reacts on it (after distinguishing it as a malware). But these years, rootkit is accepted by anti-virus companies as useful software and now freely preventing music from macrocosm copied.In my opinion, it is illegal and unethical to copy a product. The ethical constitution of copy protection and its implementation on the other hand is discussed in relation to a new set of copyright laws called The Digital millennium Copyright Act. This act protects the media industry. It punishes those people involved in illegal duplication of digital products.In some point, consumers do not freely outfox what they needed for a product. Consumers buy digital products to satisfy their needs. But with this technology, some consumers rights are somewhat by passed. If we try to look at some point, there is a contradiction. Consumers wanted to buy a product that exit make their lives easy. But this objective is not met since producers have the capability to control the product they want to sell. But, we can also say that it is a part of technology advancement. It is like before.There are no write devices before so digital products are secured. It only came when the technology advances and devices up to(p) to duplicate are manufactured. Digital products vendors are only upgrading their system. They only reinstate what was lost. With the rootkit, digital products today have akin(predicate) limitations before, except that its more(prenominal) advance and more easy to use.Theres another significant thing the article discussed. The rootkit was not detected by anti-virus softwares before. There are people who know that Sony rootkit is freely exploring their computers. One of the reasons for this is that, Sonys technology or program is more powerful than the anti-virus available that time. There were customers who noticed it. Some make noise that their anti-virus software did not detect the rootkit. Its unfeignedly shame on the part of anti-virus provider.Their software should be able to protect the computer from harmful viruses yet rootkit passed the test. We can picture out that programmers are getting their codes better in order to cross the gate which are set by protection softwares. However that d id not last a long time. Anti-virus software providers developed further their products and able to detect the rootkit.Scheiener was asked if Sony exit not make another program similar to rootkit. The guru said boldly that Sony will again do it when the controversy is over. Well, we cannot blame the company for it. They are only protecting their products from footpads. If more piracy will happen the digital industry will not also last for long. There will be no marketer on the said or similar products. It is also their way of saving their jobs and professions.Malware is really a big issue. Rootkit is not free from that controversy. The process will just create a cycle. There are people who will continue to find ways how to pirate a digital product. Crackers will continue to write codes in order to exploit bugs of every technology. While that is happening, cyber security personnel will find ways to prevent their products from being stolen. This is indeed an indication that we passe d the days of low-technology and now experiencing a high-end digital technology. Nonetheless, copy protection will in time be recognized as malware unless anti-virus provider withdraws its security on the program. acknowledgmentRoush, W. (2006). When Copy Protection Becomes Malware. Technology Review. Retrieved