Hostile code as a Technology of the Year? If Microsoft's switch is any indication, there are worse candidates WELL, IT’S TECHNOLOGY of the Year time here in the InfoWorld Test Center, and I’m annoyed because one of my personal favorites was thrown out of the running. You see, I nominated “hostile code” — Trojan horses, viruses, worms, the whole nasty lot — on the same theory that drives other publications to nominate Hitler, Stalin, or Osama bin Laden for their Man of the Year awards. After all, the little beasties did make plenty of headlines in the last year, not least because of their very real impact on corporate IT strategies and resources. The way I see things, it was a toss-up between hostile code and box cutters, and there’s not much technology in the latter. But we couldn’t figure out to whom we’d present the award. If it had been up to me, the winner would have been Microsoft, the company without whose software much of the last year’s mayhem would never have been possible. I know some of you think I’m picking on Microsoft, and you correctly point out that other operating systems have holes, too. But Microsoft’s weaknesses are real, and it looks like that fact has even penetrated the consciousness of the Fearless Leader himself. Apparently Mr. Bill came back from a soul-searching session and decided it was finally time to get serious about building security into Microsoftware, starting from the very bottom. If I were in a cynical mood, I might be tempted to dismiss the announcement of the Maximal Chief’s conversion to the cause of security before all else as a marketing gimmick. Yet I remember hearing about a similar road-to-Damascus experience back in 1994, when Gates finally realized he had missed the boat on that Internet thing. Now, changing the direction of a company as big as Microsoft is like steering a battleship, but it worked then, and I have a feeling it might work again. Frankly, I think a fine-toothed combing of .Net server’s code might take more than a month, even with Redmond’s resources. I’d be happier to hear that the company was spending, say, six months, but I’m sure Microsoft’s plans don’t allow for that much slack. But I digress. I was going to write about why hostile code was a legitimate candidate for Technology of the Year. I figure it’s one those ideas you either understand immediately or hate. Obviously somebody hated it, and that somebody had more juice than I. THIS WILL BE my last turn at this column, because the powers that be don’t want me to feel limited by the theme of this space. Mandy Andress will be doing the honors from here on out, and I’m looking forward to reading her stuff. I’ve enjoyed the last year, especially some of your more pungent replies to my columns, and I’ll miss what has become a happy part of my Wednesday mornings. Security