I haven’t used a paid for virus protector for about 5 years. There was a time I put my trust in Norton, but their products started to cost an arm and a leg, for those of us who had 5 computers in our home. I used only McAfee once, a long time ago, when it came installed on a system I had purchased with a one year license. It was OK, but I never got used of the GUI, which I felt was inferior to Norton, at that time.

So when Intel bought McAfee for well over a billion big ones, I though to myself, why? No we have learned the answer to that question at a meeting that was held by the boss of Intel, Paul Otellini. We are all aware that anti-virus programs block bad code. Intel wants to change the game and allow only good code in.

In a recent article it states that:

Otellini went on to briefly describe the shift in a way that sounded innocuous enough–current A/V efforts focus on building up a library of known threats against which they protect a user, but Intel would love to move to a world where only code from known and trusted parties runs on x86 systems. It sounds sensible enough, so what could be objectionable about that?

Depending how enamored you are of Apple’s App Store model, where only Apple-approved code gets to run on your iPhone, you may or may not be happy in Intel’s planned utopia. Because, in a nutshell, the App Store model is more or less what Intel is describing. Regardless of what you think of the idea, its success would have at least two unmitigated upsides: 1) everyone will get vPro by default (i.e., it seems hard to imagine that Intel will still charge for security as an added feature), and 2) it would put every security company (except McAfee, of course), out of business. (The second one is of course a downside for security vendors, but it’s an upside for users who despise intrusive A/V software.)

That is the rub. Would you trust Intel to protect your machine whether it be a PC, smart phone or other device?  Would you only want to see one player in the security field, that being Intel?

Let me know what you think.

Source – ars technica