Microsoft’s new operating system won’t be out until late 2006, but here‘s a look at some of the new security features expected. This includes less kernel-level code, IE7 in restricted mode, and more.
Microsoft’s new operating system won’t be out until late 2006, but here‘s a look at some of the new security features expected. This includes less kernel-level code, IE7 in restricted mode, and more.
Some people never learn and I have to say this – the Cowboys from Redmond have done it again unless they enable the firewall by default.
If security is the priority then make it so. The inconvienience of a few extra dialogs is nothing compared to the effects of being infected. This is exactly the reason windows will continue to be an insecure and virus friendly OS.
Jamie, the firewall is already on by default as of XPSP2.
RTFM!
The dual way firewall is off by default in Vista.
The dual way firewall is similiar to ZoneAlarm in that it prompts you whenever an app needs internet access.
The feature hasn’t even been seen yet, and is subject to change anyway.
XPSP2 the firewall is on by default. This article is about Vista. Read the article; unless your one of those /.ers.
IE7 in restricted mode? Does that mean that there will be fewer fantastic soft installed automatically? I always loved that particular feature in windows.
My point is that It has already been set as a precident to have the firewall on by default.
That precedent was set in SP2, no? What was the precedent before that one was set?
…and Longhorn that will come out in late 2006.
…except Vista IS Longhorn…
Sounds like more hacks to fix what is basically a fundamentally flawed design. Fix the underlying OS before you implement a flashy interface. How are the going to deal with DLL hell? Using hashes? How about not letting any application write to the system directory while installing? Registry bloat? Uninstallers that don’t uninstall the complete application and remove the directory? This UAP or whatever the acronym was is just Unix’s sudo with a flashy name. Don’t be fooled – it’s just more of the same from Microsoft – sugar coated unsecure software. My saying has always been “you can’t make gold from shit”. That’s why Apple started with a solid core and built it from there.
No matter how much you polish the terd, all you end up with is a shiny peice of crap!
“Windows Vista’s New Security Features”
ROFL
I hope to defecate on a shiny new Windows Vista CD just like I did the previous versions. I enjoy pooping on Windows CDs. Some security, can’t even withstand my poop.
Yes, firewall, fine. Let’s move on, because most of the Windows security problems exist with or without a firewall, and whether or not it’s two-way or halfway decent.
The vast majority of Windows security issues have to do with the fact that 1) too many people run browsers, email clients, p2p software, and other network applications as the superuser, and 2) even if they don’t, Windows will often trust applications to access system resources that it really shouldn’t be touching. For example, the registry.
The big questions is, will the push towards users running applications with reduced privileges solve the problem? Will it break applications? Will it merely expose really nasty privilege escalation bugs in the brand new code?
What we need to be asking is, disregarding the tragic failure to address security in the past, are there any technical limitations of the Windows platform that inherently make the system insecure beyond repair? Can Microsoft throw $100M at the security problems and make them go away?
And if your computer resides behind a router with a firewall built in? Really need to get overly paranoid and run firewalls on every device on your network?
Windows Vista’s new security features: http://windows.czweb.org/show_article.php?id_article=156