Microsoft partner: Vista less secure than XP
section: windows, for your questions: KezNews forum, 23.3.2007
Security company Kaspersky claimed that Vista's User Account Control (UAC), the system of user privileges that can be used to restrict users' administrative rights, will be so annoying that users will disable it.
Natalya Kaspersky, the company's chief executive, said that without UAC, Vista will be less secure than Windows XP SP2. "There's a question mark if Vista security has improved, or has really dropped down," she said to our sister site ZDNet UK at the CeBIT show in Hanover last week.
Kaspersky provides one of the scanning engines in ForeFront, Microsoft's business security product.
Arno Edelmann, business security product manager for Microsoft, said that Kaspersky's claims were surprising. "We have a thriving community of partners, and Kasperky is one of our best partners," Edelmann told ZDNet UK. "I find their statements a little strange because they have one of the best insights into Microsoft security products."
After being roundly criticised over its security strategy in the past, Microsoft has done a lot of work to improve its approach and has been touting Vista as its most secure operating system. But Kaspersky confirmed that her analysts had found five ways to bypass Vista's UAC, and that malware writers will find more security holes.
Kaspersky also added her voice to Symantec and McAfee complaints that PatchGuard, designed to protect the Vista kernel, is hindering security companies' work.
"PatchGuard doesn't allow legitimate security vendors to do what we used to do," said Kaspersky.
Symantec has claimed that PatchGuard is hurting security vendors more than it was hurting malware writers. Bruce McCorkendale, a chief engineer at Symantec, said: "There are types of security policies and next-generation security products that can only work through some of the mechanisms that PatchGuard prohibits."
Eugene Kaspersky, the company founder, said last Thursday that while vendors had to interact with Vista legitimately, hackers were under no such constraints.
source: zdnet.com.au
Send link 2 friend | Permalink
MORE RELATED ARTICLES:
Vista is still more secure than XP || Windows Vista More Secure than XP When It Comes to Infected MP3 Players || One year later, Vista really is more secure || LockCrypt 1.50 - Secure Password Management || Secure and Beautify Your Windows Operating System
Comments(11)
yeah dude, that's right... it's very annoying, i've already shut it of a long time
ago.
wow - cant believe they actually reckon anyone still has uac on in order to then go and
turn it on.
i thought thats what everyone did - got their shiny new box, made sure it
powered on, made sure they could login, disabled uac then starting using vista.
soooo glad i disabled it and they allowed you to, if they hadn't they'd definitely have
lost alot of users.
boo kaspersky. keep rely on patching kernel that leads to system instability. thanks for
condescending yourself to the level of symantec
i also disabled that shit
yep, same here, after i installed it (with the internet disabled), installed my
av,spyware software, first thing i did was turn off uac, and the security center.
i
think most people who know anything about computers turn off uac/security center.
saying "without uac, vista will be less secure than windows xp sp2" is purely fud b.s.
in vista all program run in user-mode by default even you're administrator. the
function of uac is to elevate program from user-mode to full administrator privilege. if
you turn off uac it would be no different than running programs in administrator just like
xp sp2. i don't see what's all the fuzz is all about. it just like sudo in *nix. if you
can look after yourself in xp, there's no reason why you can't turn uac off other than
losing some sort of warning system.
vendors like complaining towards microsoft 'cause they lost freedom and control.
that's right vista shit.buy a mac.
with xp more updates software that's works.xp cost less more stable.bill gates need re
thank.
i've turned it off a long time ago.damn thing is like my girlfriend when on heat...lol.
anyways,some say it will affect how vista behaves toward security...to tell you the
truth,i've never run anything from any windows os,that microsoft considered "safe",and
i'm still here to talk about!
so screw uac,it's a bitch,and like every bitch...slap
it!
i keep it on all you have to do is click 1 button if you want to open a program id rather
not have to do it but if it makes it more secure then ill leave it on
No new comments are allowed for this article.
For your questions use our KezNews Forum
Correct
By DjJk on 23.03.2007 - 10:03