Other Vendors Worth Considering, But Not Institutional Entrepreneurs

Antivirus organizations aim to protect users from malware and other online threats. On the surface, that mirrors the security-focused pain points we discussed in our previous posts about institutional entrepreneurs. Here’s how we assessed several antivirus companies we’ve personally used in our environment over the years.

Read more: Other Vendors Worth Considering, But Not Institutional Entrepreneurs

We also noticed that some major players aren’t included in our review. That’s simply because we haven’t used them, so we couldn’t evaluate them firsthand or offer an accurate assessment of whether they truly exhibit the qualities of an institutional entrepreneur.

Malwarebytes – Has many of the traits of an institutional entrepreneur. Their goal is to reform cybersecurity through more effective, less resource-intensive solutions. They challenge the bloated software status quo. Strategic partnerships and advocacy expand their model.

Bitdefender – While innovative, their focus seems more on growth and profits than systemic reform. No strong evidence of a long-term strategy to transform institutions from within through policy/advocacy. More reactive to threats than proactive shaping of the field.

HitmanPro – A capable product but they don’t display the hallmarks of institutional entrepreneurship. No clear mission beyond selling point-in-time security software. No signs of strategic coalition-building or pushing for changes to security practices on an industry level over the long run.

Therefore, out of these three, Malwarebytes would be the best fit as an institutional entrepreneur based on having a reform-minded vision, challenging entrenched interests, and taking a strategic approach through partnerships to gradually reshape cybersecurity standards from the inside out. Their goals appear more aligned with driving progress than just responding to market demands.

The others may be good security vendors, but don’t exhibit the same qualities of an institutional entrepreneur – specifically aiming to transform institutions, build new norms, and address systemic issues through a long-term strategic approach. It’s more about immediate protection than reshaping the field.

On that note while they may not fully embody the characteristics of institutional entrepreneurs, antivirus companies could still potentially undermine users’ privacy and security to some degree through their business practices and data collection, even if that’s not their stated goal.

Here are few thoughts on that:

• Many rely on collecting extensive data on users’ devices, apps, files, etc. to detect threats. This data could be abused or exposed in security breaches.
• Overly aggressive detection algorithms may flag legitimate programs/files as threats, disrupting users. This could erode trust over time.
• Privacy policies may not adequately outline all data uses and shares with third parties for analytics/profiling.
• Reliance on ongoing subscription/renewal revenue could incentivize prioritizing growth over minimizing data collection or updating detection methods.
• Lack of transparency into codebases and detection logic means independent verification of their impact on privacy/security is difficult.

So in summary, while the protection of users is the aim, business models and technical approaches of antivirus vendors could still present some privacy and security risks if not implemented carefully with strong oversight, transparency, and a user-centric mindset. Ongoing evaluation would be prudent given the sensitive data involved and trust placed in them.