You are skipping
> that are called on by Microsoft Security Software Products
Nothing says that Microsofts Security Software needs to be implemented in a way that runs in the kernel, which is inherently more vulnerable. Other platforms have APIs for security software to hook into kernel actions without directly running in kernel space (Windows does too, but to my understanding more limited to logging, not intercepting activity, and hence limited in usefulness).
Hence the claim that it was impossible for Microsoft to prevent this is false. That doesn't mean they take all the blame for someone elses mistake, but it still means that they made a choice leading to it: Deciding that security software, whoever made it, running in kernel modules was the way to do it.
