ie8 fix

Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King

McAfee gains distribution heft via Facebook

By | January 13, 2010, 3:34am PST

Summary: McAfee is gaining access to Facebook’s 350 million users in a distribution pact that could pay off nicely for the security company.

McAfee is gaining access to Facebook’s 350 million users in a distribution pact that could pay off nicely for the security company.

On the surface, the Facebook-McAfee announcement is all about protecting users from spam and malware (statement). But it’s hard to not notice the business implications. McAfee gets access to Facebook’s base. And Facebook shows how it could cut future software deals.

Under the partnership, McAfee will be the exclusive provider of security software. Facebook users will be eligible for a six-month subscription to McAfee’s security suite. After six-months, Facebook users can get discount pricing.

Facebook isn’t collecting revenue from user subscriptions—this time. But the model is there. Facebook can introduce software vendors to 350 million users. Who wouldn’t want to distribute netbooks, PC, software or any other product to those Facebook folks?

Also see: Gullibility of Facebook users continues to skyrocket in 2010

For McAfee all it needs is just a portion of Facebook’s user base to become long-term subscribers to get some serious returns on its partnership. McAfee is in a security as a service dogfight with multiple vendors, but Symantec is the biggest rival.

Jennifer Leggio notes that the McAfee deal is short on the education, but Facebook is working to clean up the site.

Clearly, Facebook and McAfee are taking social networking security seriously. However, it’s hard not to notice the business implications of these partnerships.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic.

Disclosure

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan has nothing to disclose. He doesn’t hold investments in the technology companies he covers.

Biography

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic. He was most recently Executive Editor of News and Blogs at ZDNet. Prior to that he was executive news editor at eWeek and news editor at Baseline. He also served as the East Coast news editor and finance editor at CNET News.com. Larry has covered the technology and financial services industry since 1995, publishing articles in WallStreetWeek.com, Inter@ctive Week, The New York Times, and Financial Planning magazine. He's a graduate of the Columbia School of Journalism and the University of Delaware.

For daily updates, follow Larry on Twitter.

17
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

good idea about facebook
gavin.chan 2nd Oct
Good post, and I learn more about it. We supply various brands of camera and camcorder batteries, including Canon, Casio, Fuji, JVC, Nikon, Olympus, Panasonic, Sumsung and other brands. Buy camera batteries from dealingway at wholesale price.bZZsT
0 Votes
+ -
Can Mcafee protect them?
zmud 13th Jan 2010
so far i would say no
they have a huge market share here and I run into infected computers running McAfee all day long
How about improving your product, McAfee, instead of finding the easiest way to sign up new subscribers.
This will only give Facebook users a false sense of security
0 Votes
+ -
What else can you do?
thehype 13th Jan 2010
No security solution is going to protect you 100% of the time, no matter what company you choose. Symantec, McAfee, TrendMicro, they all can't protect everyone all the time.

The real problem relates to the story that was quoted "Gullibility of Facebook users continues to skyrocket." Stop downloading questionable attachments, question every link sent to you by anyone and even question strange conversations with your friends. Social engineering is a rising problem with cracked Facebook accounts.

I'm not sure a false sense of security is entirely accurate, but it still won't stop idiot Facebook users from being idiots.
0 Votes
+ -
Agree to a point
djmik 13th Jan 2010
Whereas I agree to your points on smarter use, Zmud makes a valid argument. 100% of the computers I clean are running McAfee or Norton. In addition to that, it amazes me how much of the PC's power I get back when I remove those suites. No AV is perfect as you state, but there are much better solutions out there. I have been recommending Vipre Antivirus for some time now, and it has not let me down yet. Lightweight, fast and is not so much signature based, where a lot of the bloat comes from.
0 Votes
+ -
Dump Windows....
FXEF 13th Jan 2010
Use a secure OS. Mac and Linux are not 100% safe,
but they are not as prone to the kind of attacks
that Windows users sees.
0 Votes
+ -
Duh.......
OhTheHumanity 13th Jan 2010
Hackers find a much bigger pot of gold from the 94% of the worlds computers over say a 3 or 4%. Pretty logical math really.
0 Votes
+ -
I'll have to divert a tad...
techboy_z 13th Jan 2010
I would say this...I've never *personally* been infected while running McAfee (not that noone has been), but...for me, the larger issue with them vs. other leading vendors is that McAfee has become a huge resource hog. I switched to Symantec/Norton a little over a year ago, and have been *much* happier with performance. The most recent Norton (I think it's v10...) has a much faster update mechanism also. That was one thing that was previously a bit slow.
0 Votes
+ -
Latest version of Norton/Symantec...
PollyProteus 13th Jan 2010
...was updated to be less intrusive where system performance is concerned on Windows because of the huge number of complaints they were receving about just how much their software was sucking up computing power.

It's still too heavy handed as far as I'm concerned, I use Windows firewall and the firewall in my router and use Microsoft's Security Essentials full time and have been pretty safe.

And yes, I do check using third party web based utilities so make sure my systems stay clean which only proves that you don't need to pay however much a month Symantec or McAfee charges for "security" as long as you have more than two brain cells and don't keep downloading crap on your computer or opening emails from complete strangers and then clicking on the links therein.
0 Votes
+ -
Agreed.....
OhTheHumanity 13th Jan 2010
But Mcafee Enterprise does a great job and doesn't affect performance. Can't say as much about the consumer versions.

I would say go with Microsoft Security Essentials because its lightweight and actually has performed well in studies. Really I didn't even notice a difference once it was installed over having nothing at all.
0 Votes
+ -
Dittos to Microsoft Security Essentials
Aragorn_z 13th Jan 2010
That is what I use on my Windows 7 laptop, and I don't find it to be a resource pig either. On my Macbook just to be safe I run iAntivirus. The nice thing is both products have a superb price: FREE!
0 Votes
+ -
Facebook and McaFee 2 loosers
Fletchguy 13th Jan 2010
Well a marriage made in heaven. Facebook which if your under 40 and on there you need a life since thats a site for older people then McaFee the worse anti viruse makers next to Nortons. It catches nothing, it allows easy infections and is complete garbage so yeah makes sense to join a waste of a site like Facebook which will rely on this and allow its users to easily be infected. Anyone with any computer know how knows you dont use McaFeee or Nortons as they catch nothing. i clean many computers for a living and every machine that relies on these is alwasy infected seriously
Facebook, in a nutshell:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Pebihz0FJA

Losers indeed. McAfee is the most frequent "anti virus" or "security suite" I find on an infected machine. I'd estimate 40% of the crapped up boxes through here have McAfee on them, most of them "up to date" to boot.
0 Votes
+ -
Warning-Warning-Warning-Facebook people........I have Cleaned hundreds of infected computers running Norton/McAfee against virus definitions that are Easily detectable by other less redundant software!

I say this: If I'm cleaning out infected Computers hosting Norton/McAfee as their only protection then that would lead me to believe that these programs are sloppy and not managed by the company who made them. Norton and McAfee are probably thee worst protection anyone can put on their system, unless ofcourse, you have a commercial account and get the "monitered" version of the software. What that means is both of these security applications are being configured Faster for all commercial accounts leaving the personal computers vulnerable and ashured to crash. Both Norton/McAfee are in many instances "TOO LATE" in sending out viral definitions to it's personal Home users.

If you use 1 or more of these OVERATED information gathering tools then it should be clear that they do not work like they should when one experiences a "CRASH" because detection updates are few and far in between!!

Facebook users: STAY AWAY from Norton/McAfee, please, find something else to protect your systems with before it's too late and it leaves you with a bill so large you could have gone out and purchased a brand new system!
0 Votes
+ -
Divert a little more -
medezark@... 13th Jan 2010
I haven't been infected running WITHOUT Anti-Virus. . . . But I've cleaned plenty of machines that have been infected with and without anti-virus.
0 Votes
+ -
McAfee's products aren't much better than Radialpoint's crap. As soon as the software can't catch a virus, your system is toast.
0 Votes
+ -
I can't stand Norton or McAfee. They just simply don't work, they get infected much easier than other AV's. Hell, a lot of the FREE ones perform better.

But the real kicker is how those two always somehow manage to screw with system files and the registry.
0 Votes
+ -
Really sad
Greenknight_z 14th Jan 2010
There are free AVs from Avast, Avira, and Microsoft that perform better than McAfee while making much less demand on computer resources (AVG Free also performs better, but it's a pig). These poor suckers on Facebook will think they're getting a bargain, while they're getting ripped off.

McAfee has poor detection rates, high false-positive rates, and high resource usage - the whole trifecta of suckage.
0 Votes
+ -
good idea about facebook
gavin.chan 2nd Oct
Good post, and I learn more about it. We supply various brands of camera and camcorder batteries, including Canon, Casio, Fuji, JVC, Nikon, Olympus, Panasonic, Sumsung and other brands. Buy camera batteries from dealingway at wholesale price.bZZsT

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix