Starting March 1st 2018, Windows Defender and other Microsoft products will begin to remove programs that display coercive behavior designed to pressure a user into purchasing their software. This includes registry cleaners and system optimizers that offer free scans, detect issues with alarming messages, and then require the user to purchase the product before fixing anything.
To prepare for this change, Microsoft has updated their software evaluation criteria to include behaviors that will no longer be acceptable.
Unwanted behaviors: coercive messaging
Programs must not display alarming or coercive messages or misleading content to pressure you into paying for additional services or performing superfluous actions.
Software that coerces users may display the following characteristics, among others:
- Reports errors in an exaggerated or alarming manner about the user’s system and requires the user to pay for fixing the errors or issues monetarily or by performing other actions such as taking a survey, downloading a file, signing up for a newsletter, etc.
- Suggests that no other actions will correct the reported errors or issues
- Requires the user to act within a limited period of time to get the purported issue resolved
This is a very important step, as these types of products have long been a problem, especially to users who may not be experienced with computers. With alarming messages and the use of colors that denote threats, users are often scared into purchasing the program to only find that they didn't have a problem in the first place.
To make matters worse, purveyors of system optimizers and registry cleaners often release the same program under many different names. This allows them to continue pushing their product on unsuspecting consumers even when their older programs have been fully detected by antivirus vendors.
By issuing these new criteria, companies will be either forced to comply or have their software removed. Companies who develop these types of programs can submit their software to Microsoft for validation using the Windows Defender Security Intelligence portal. Microsoft will then evaluate the program and determine if the program will be detected and removed on March 1st.
Comments
Amigo-A - 6 years ago
Microsoft it had to be done 10 years ago.
phossler - 6 years ago
Maybe, but no matter what MS did, some one would complain that either a) it wasn't their business to police other companies and it all an evil plot on their part to take over the computing world, OR that b) it should be their business to police other companies as part of their evil plot to take over the computing world
GT500 - 6 years ago
Better late than never? Maybe?
Doghen - 6 years ago
Registry Cleaners, PC optimizers program's, are definitly pure garbage shit. who that uses Ccleaner is really screwed, because Ccleaner brings more problems when you scan your registry, it makes mores problems than it fixed..
phossler - 6 years ago
I've used CCleaner for years without issue. I check the log of registry problems it finds, and decide to let it fix all issues or just selected ones
Occasional - 6 years ago
I think it's the "Free scan" part that's the real problem - it can be tough to arrange a date when it would be convenient for them to come by; they're rarely on time, and you'll probably waste a good part of the day just watching for their van. ------ That is to say, the problem is that the "Free scan" is done remotely, when you give someone you don't know a level of trust you wouldn't give to most people you do know.
Lawrence Abrams - 6 years ago
I have no problems with free scans and pay-to-clean if that company proves that they are offering a legitimate service. The problem is that these many companies who promote these types of software are not offering anything that a user really needs.
cat1092 - 6 years ago
"I have no problems with free scans and pay-to-clean if that company proves that they are offering a legitimate service. The problem is that these many companies who promote these types of software are not offering anything that a user really needs."
+1 to Grinler!
A long, long time ago, in a day when I didn't know better, after nearly a weekend of desperation, almost fell victim to one of these services. Won't name the company due to possible liability issues.
After using one of those mini CD's for a cell phone program the day before, my optical drive wasn't working at all. Was attempting to install a 3G cellular wireless card driver from the included CD at the time, the only ISP I had. After much reading, a night of sleep lost, seen a trick that shown if I removed the optical drive via Device Manager & reboot, all would be OK. To my surprise, it worked perfectly.;-)
And to think, the company trying to hit me up for a 'promo' of $39.99 would had socked it to many who doesn't have the patience, ability or self-desire to learn in fixing these issues. It doesn't take a registry cleaner to reset the upper/lower filters of an optical drive, removal via Device Manager was all that was needed.
Of course, this wasn't the worst part of the ordeal, the removal of all remnants of the scanner would take longer than fixing the optical drive. In the end, I chose a Restore Point, which would had also fixed the optical drive issue, just had to install the software for the 3G wireless card one last time. Needless to say, there wasn't 'over 400 issues' with my notebook, otherwise was running great.
Am happy that Microsoft is taking this action, was needed over a decade back, in the XP glory years. Still, better late than never!
Cat
theshiv - 6 years ago
Ironically, a large amount of these programs display the Microsoft partner emblem.
Occasional - 6 years ago
Haven't checked, but BC probably has a tutorial in best practices before exposing your system to offers and sites that "look" legitimate (show MS Partner logo, etc...).
One practice I've followed for a while is to NOT follow any links in an ad; rather, first web-search the product and company. If what I see posted doesn't raise a red flag, I'll look for the company's website - rather than a download site. There are good DL sites; but still safer to check out the official website. If you want to go back to the original site with the ad (to help a good site, funded by ads and promos), at least you've done your due diligence.
NickAu - 6 years ago
I wonder how many of these scare ware peddlers will sue Microsoft over this?
Angoid - 6 years ago
NickAu, my guess is that they won't if they're not running a legitimate business. It would only backfire, but then I've got no legal training or expertise so who knows?
Another +1 to Grinler. However, I detest the practice of goading people to download a program that will give you a FREE SCAN!!! for malware ... so you do it .... yes, you get the scan for free and then ... "Click here to remove the threats!" (there are a thousand of them, by the way) .... only to get greeted by a paywall. You had no idea that the product was not free up until that point, now you're faced with having to cough up money to remove some thousand or so threats (most of which are probably just cookies anyway) or live with those 'threats'.
Unfortunately, the practice often works where people do not educate themselves in basic online security.
madchen - 6 years ago
Too bad for Combofix, RKill, AdwCleaner, All-in-One Windows Repair and other of "weekly downloads" section of bleeping computer.
Thanks you.
Lawrence Abrams - 6 years ago
Confused. Wan't to expand on that? Are you implying these programs are coercive?
Huggy4u - 6 years ago
Although this sounds like a good thing, it seems to me just like Microsoft repeating its modus operandi of stealing other software developers proprietary code & incorporating it into their OS. Go back to DOS 6.2 which had another company's disk compression code & MS got sued & lost hence the immediate rush to release 6.22 The gist of it all was they offered to test the software with a view to purchasing rights to use it & then reverse engineered it to steal the code. That's my early recollection of one of the first times they've been sued for that type of conduct & there have been many many others. Just google "Microsoft Lawsuit History" to see for yourself.
Lawrence Abrams - 6 years ago
I do not believe the developers have to provide source code. Just the binary, which for the most part can be downloaded anyway.