Index
 |
Microsoft Vista Needs No Anti-virus? - Stupid Microsoft employee... | ||
Discussion by beatgammit with 26 Replies.
Last Update: March 27, 2010, 2:54 pm (View Latest) | Page 1 of 2 pages. | ||
 |
|||
Here's the article I'm talking about- link
This guy is saying that he lets his kid run Windows Vista without an anti-virus because of the parental controls. He thinks that since the new Windows has made such great improvements in security that he no longer needs an anti-virus. I think Microsoft has gone waaaaay too far in their PR, now they are flat out lying. They are getting to be like Apple (sorry Apple fans, but most of their ads are totally untrue). Vista will be a huge target for hackers because it is one of the most anticipated releases of an OS insofar. Sure, Apple OSX has it's moments, but Windows Vista will make a much bigger splash, for better or for worse.
This guy is saying that he lets his kid run Windows Vista without an anti-virus because of the parental controls. He thinks that since the new Windows has made such great improvements in security that he no longer needs an anti-virus. I think Microsoft has gone waaaaay too far in their PR, now they are flat out lying. They are getting to be like Apple (sorry Apple fans, but most of their ads are totally untrue). Vista will be a huge target for hackers because it is one of the most anticipated releases of an OS insofar. Sure, Apple OSX has it's moments, but Windows Vista will make a much bigger splash, for better or for worse.
Sat Nov 11, 2006 Reply New Discussion
I think he told that he is so sure about the parental control features of windows vista that there is no chance his son will be "able" to download something malicious to his PC.
I don't think Vista will work without an Anti Virus, as of now I know only AV that work with Vista (designed for Vista) it is NOD32.
I don't think Vista will work without an Anti Virus, as of now I know only AV that work with Vista (designed for Vista) it is NOD32.
Sat Nov 11, 2006 Reply New Discussion
You just know this is a BAD idea!!
What Vista does is not allow anything to modify the kernel of Vista..AV software kinda need to do this to be able to work properly..
As usual Microsoft think they are the best in the world at writing any bit of software so they think by doing this that there cannot be a virus on Vista..!! and there cannot be a way round it no-one could outsmart us bright folks at Microsoft!
So MS are now the gatekeeper on your pc not your AV or Firewall!!so the makers of buggy OS and buggy Office apps is here to save the world from virus and spyware!! I will sleep more easy knowing this!!
So over the years since XP was released ..how many virus or security attacks exploit holes in the XP code? i think the answer is hundreds...
If I was a CEO of Novell or Sun or anyone involved with programming Linux OS flavours I would post a bounty on the net...$10000 to the first person to come up with an exploit for this anti kernel thing..or an exploit to buffer overflow IE7 intergrated version which gives you full control of any copy of Vista..
Bit like somoen did when the Xbox was released..there was a bounty on that for the first team to get it hacked and running Linux on it
Ive said it on other posts in the forum but its worth repeating...
DO NOT BOTHER WITH VISTA!!!
Do you want a slower pc? ( I still wont "upgrade" my win2k for xp cos of the performance hit and the bugs that are still appearing for it 5 years later..)
Do you want a pc that every hacker on the planet wants to rip apart cos its runnign Vista?
Do you really want to be surfing the net with only MS products to secure your data?
Do you want an locked down OS that if bought with the Pc in a new deal..is not able to be reinstalled if you upgrade your Ghpx card..or change Hard Drives?-yes this "feature" was going to be for ALL copies of Vista..but MS backed down last week and claimed it would only be the new pcs that had Vista bundeled with them that would have this turned on..it does some kind of serial number check of al your hardware and if the check fails it will not boot ;(
THe only reason I could see for somone using Vista is if they have a brand spanking new 64bit pc that is "Vista ready" and get your own licence of it not a bundleded licence..but then again I hear the way Vista handles 64bit is still not as good as Linux...I hear seperate copies of software like PScs etc will have to be written for this version of Vista..
It sounds like MS are making a console OS not a PC OS!! its going to be soo locked down!!
Although I am going to "Have" to install this garbage on a pc over here to get used to it and work out the most common problems on it to work out how to support it ;( cos a couple of my clients will be migrating to a Vista platform in the next few months even though I have urged them not to ;(
So I would say stay away from Vista at least untill Sp2..and that will be a couple of years in my estimation..cos I got a feeling the first versions will hacked to bits till MS work out what they have done is a huge mistake
What Vista does is not allow anything to modify the kernel of Vista..AV software kinda need to do this to be able to work properly..
As usual Microsoft think they are the best in the world at writing any bit of software so they think by doing this that there cannot be a virus on Vista..!! and there cannot be a way round it no-one could outsmart us bright folks at Microsoft!
So MS are now the gatekeeper on your pc not your AV or Firewall!!so the makers of buggy OS and buggy Office apps is here to save the world from virus and spyware!! I will sleep more easy knowing this!!
So over the years since XP was released ..how many virus or security attacks exploit holes in the XP code? i think the answer is hundreds...
If I was a CEO of Novell or Sun or anyone involved with programming Linux OS flavours I would post a bounty on the net...$10000 to the first person to come up with an exploit for this anti kernel thing..or an exploit to buffer overflow IE7 intergrated version which gives you full control of any copy of Vista..
Bit like somoen did when the Xbox was released..there was a bounty on that for the first team to get it hacked and running Linux on it
Ive said it on other posts in the forum but its worth repeating...
DO NOT BOTHER WITH VISTA!!!
Do you want a slower pc? ( I still wont "upgrade" my win2k for xp cos of the performance hit and the bugs that are still appearing for it 5 years later..)
Do you want a pc that every hacker on the planet wants to rip apart cos its runnign Vista?
Do you really want to be surfing the net with only MS products to secure your data?
Do you want an locked down OS that if bought with the Pc in a new deal..is not able to be reinstalled if you upgrade your Ghpx card..or change Hard Drives?-yes this "feature" was going to be for ALL copies of Vista..but MS backed down last week and claimed it would only be the new pcs that had Vista bundeled with them that would have this turned on..it does some kind of serial number check of al your hardware and if the check fails it will not boot ;(
THe only reason I could see for somone using Vista is if they have a brand spanking new 64bit pc that is "Vista ready" and get your own licence of it not a bundleded licence..but then again I hear the way Vista handles 64bit is still not as good as Linux...I hear seperate copies of software like PScs etc will have to be written for this version of Vista..
It sounds like MS are making a console OS not a PC OS!! its going to be soo locked down!!
Although I am going to "Have" to install this garbage on a pc over here to get used to it and work out the most common problems on it to work out how to support it ;( cos a couple of my clients will be migrating to a Vista platform in the next few months even though I have urged them not to ;(
So I would say stay away from Vista at least untill Sp2..and that will be a couple of years in my estimation..cos I got a feeling the first versions will hacked to bits till MS work out what they have done is a huge mistake
Sun Nov 12, 2006 Reply New Discussion
Its already been done.
A company started a project to see if they could somehow modify the Vista kernel.
They figured out how to turn the lock off, make any changes to the kernel they wanted and were even able to turn the lock back on.
Not only did they install a virus, but they made it so it would be impossible for a virus to come off without a complete drive format and reinstallation.
Vista's "kernel lockdown" has already created a major security threat if they are able to write a virus that will do all this automatically.
On top of that Microsoft failed to release source code for the Vista kernel and OS until just a few weeks ago to major anti-virus companies. This might cause a major problem when Vista is out for a few months and anti-virus companies are still developing their programs specifically for Vista. Microsoft was at first not going to release the source code at all but companies threatened to take it to court.
I will try to find this article, I read it on slashdot a week or so ago so I will browse through my emails a little later and see if I can find it and I will post the link.
A company started a project to see if they could somehow modify the Vista kernel.
They figured out how to turn the lock off, make any changes to the kernel they wanted and were even able to turn the lock back on.
Not only did they install a virus, but they made it so it would be impossible for a virus to come off without a complete drive format and reinstallation.
Vista's "kernel lockdown" has already created a major security threat if they are able to write a virus that will do all this automatically.
On top of that Microsoft failed to release source code for the Vista kernel and OS until just a few weeks ago to major anti-virus companies. This might cause a major problem when Vista is out for a few months and anti-virus companies are still developing their programs specifically for Vista. Microsoft was at first not going to release the source code at all but companies threatened to take it to court.
I will try to find this article, I read it on slashdot a week or so ago so I will browse through my emails a little later and see if I can find it and I will post the link.
Mon Nov 13, 2006 Reply New Discussion
I'm not sure. I didn't read much of the article actually.
It's just that the title of the thread had me on the floor in glorious laughter.
Thank you.
It's just that the title of the thread had me on the floor in glorious laughter.
Thank you.
Mon Nov 13, 2006 Reply New Discussion
yes, the only reason why his kid can run without the anti-virus is because he locked his kid out of the Internet and able to install anything .
There has never been a Windows that's secure enough to not need an anti-virus.
However, if you say MacOS X and/or Linux, then I would understand, it's ok to not run an anti virus on those.
xboxrulz
.There has never been a Windows that's secure enough to not need an anti-virus.
However, if you say MacOS X and/or Linux, then I would understand, it's ok to not run an anti virus on those.
xboxrulz
Mon Nov 13, 2006 Reply New Discussion
Well as xboxrulz said the kid would be using a very limited environment, no internet acccess, no installing, not even some games. I personally think this approach isn't that good because if you want to run your computer in tight security, you would simply be able to do nothing.
At the moment i would prefer to stick with windows xp, sure vista has some great features but the majority of not so great features is enough to change anyone's mind.
Also the fact that if you want to use vista the way it was intended to you would need to have a very good computer, one that would meet the requirements of some of the best looking games out now. Now i think that is asking too much for the average user.
-HellFire
At the moment i would prefer to stick with windows xp, sure vista has some great features but the majority of not so great features is enough to change anyone's mind.
Also the fact that if you want to use vista the way it was intended to you would need to have a very good computer, one that would meet the requirements of some of the best looking games out now. Now i think that is asking too much for the average user.
-HellFire
Mon Nov 13, 2006 Reply New Discussion
When Want to Install Vista, I will be think 10x because
For label just "Windows Vista Capable" (Minimum) we need:
1. RAM 512
2. 800 MHZ Prosessor
3. 64 MB
4. CD-ROM
and for "Windows Vista Premium Ready" we need:
1. RAM 1 GB
2. 1 GHZ prosessor
3. 128 MB (External)
4. DVD-ROM
We are going to buy server right?. What vista promise in GUI like "Flip 3D" or whatever, whocare!. What i need is realible PC with minimum spesification!. Thats for i choose LINUX!.
For label just "Windows Vista Capable" (Minimum) we need:
1. RAM 512
2. 800 MHZ Prosessor
3. 64 MB
4. CD-ROM
and for "Windows Vista Premium Ready" we need:
1. RAM 1 GB
2. 1 GHZ prosessor
3. 128 MB (External)
4. DVD-ROM
We are going to buy server right?. What vista promise in GUI like "Flip 3D" or whatever, whocare!. What i need is realible PC with minimum spesification!. Thats for i choose LINUX!.
Mon Nov 13, 2006 Reply New Discussion
Well i suppose Vista is an improvement (loosely termed, at present) over XP. So while i won't be changing over any time soon, once Vista has been around for a bit and has gone through the public testing for 6 months or so, i'll be inclined to install it on my computer. Stupid to run it without an antivirus though. Even if I had a Mac or a Linux machine, i would still want an antivirus. While the spyware/malware/adware/virus count for windows may be in the tens of thousands, that doesn't mean that there are ZERO for Macs or Linux. There are a few, and with the slow but steady shift to open source, this will become the next big hacker target. They WILL find a way. I'm in no way negating these OS's strengths against viruses, but it's walking with blinders to assume that there are no vulnerabilities.
Mon Nov 13, 2006 Reply New Discussion
well, of course there are some for UNIX based machines, but they don't really harm the user.
Anyways, even if I run Linux, I still have clamav installed for my protection.
xboxrulz
Anyways, even if I run Linux, I still have clamav installed for my protection.
xboxrulz
Mon Nov 13, 2006 Reply New Discussion
QUOTE (beatgammit)
Here's the article I'm talking about- link
This guy is saying that he lets his kid run Windows Vista without an anti-virus because of the parental controls. He thinks that since the new Windows has made such great improvements in security that he no longer needs an anti-virus. I think Microsoft has gone waaaaay too far in their PR, now they are flat out lying. They are getting to be like Apple (sorry Apple fans, but most of their ads are totally untrue). Vista will be a huge target for hackers because it is one of the most anticipated releases of an OS insofar. Sure, Apple OSX has it's moments, but Windows Vista will make a much bigger splash, for better or for worse.
Link: view Post: 91465
Microsoft is being honest, the parental controls that will be offered by Vista is one thing but what they are nto telling the General Public is that Vista locks down Windows kernel. Even though this is a great thing it will cuase problems in the future. People will one day learn how to break through the new Windows kernel and when that happens, you know what to do? The sucky part about Microsoft is that they don't plan to release the unlocked source to Firewall and antivirus companies. So one day we might be seeing some nice lawsuits again mic.
Tue Nov 14, 2006 Reply New Discussion
I very much highly doubt, if we're talking about the same company here, (Microsoft Windows), would be able to create Vista, with a secure and foolproof anti-virus.
Maybe something for the future, but they wouldn't be able to do it, and I bet that most people who have got Windows Vista as their OS would have another Anti-Virus siuch as Mcafee or Norton Anti-Virus or maybe AdawareSE Personal Addition.
You can never be too safe*
* I would not reccommend downloading or having any more than 2 anti-virus programs on one computer because they will clash, and from what I have heard, start inter-mingling with each other's programs and you end up letting most viruses in!!
Maybe something for the future, but they wouldn't be able to do it, and I bet that most people who have got Windows Vista as their OS would have another Anti-Virus siuch as Mcafee or Norton Anti-Virus or maybe AdawareSE Personal Addition.
You can never be too safe*
* I would not reccommend downloading or having any more than 2 anti-virus programs on one computer because they will clash, and from what I have heard, start inter-mingling with each other's programs and you end up letting most viruses in!!
Tue Nov 14, 2006 Reply New Discussion
Even though I run Mac, I still have Norton Anti-virus for Mac. If Vista sees wide spread adoption, there will be viruses and hacks. Same if OSX continued to gain in popularity. I see more and more people with apple laptops out and about all the time. So you can't tell me that Mac isn't gaining in popularity.
Running any OS not made by IBM without antivirus is kind of stupid.
Running any OS not made by IBM without antivirus is kind of stupid.
Tue Nov 14, 2006 Reply New Discussion
Strongly disagrees with you..Its not just windows.Nothing is secure if something can be locked it can be opened (at least theoretically).I assume that it is because Linux and Mac are not so widespread it is staying secure..the hackers will not gain something if they get in to an OS that is run by a few users.
Everything is Vulnerable
Everything is Vulnerable
QUOTE (xboxrulz)
There has never been a Windows that's secure enough to not need an anti-virus.However, if you say MacOS X and/or Linux, then I would understand, it's ok to not run an anti virus on those.xboxrulzWed Nov 15, 2006 Reply New Discussion
That article is completely out of NPOV (neutral point of view).
First of all, the kid was practically restricted from the Internet. With the parental controls, he told the kid NOT to go to specific sites. As a result, the kid couldn't download anything harmful for the computer.
Secondly, will EVERYONE enable Parental Controls? Probably not. Only parents will enable it on the kids user accounts. So without the security of the parental controls described in the articles, you don't have that download virus blocker security.
First of all, the kid was practically restricted from the Internet. With the parental controls, he told the kid NOT to go to specific sites. As a result, the kid couldn't download anything harmful for the computer.
Secondly, will EVERYONE enable Parental Controls? Probably not. Only parents will enable it on the kids user accounts. So without the security of the parental controls described in the articles, you don't have that download virus blocker security.
Mon Dec 4, 2006 Reply New Discussion
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
| Reply / Comment | Ask a Question? | Share / Bookmark | E-Mail a Friend |
 Avast Anti-virus Avast (5)
|
(2) Antivir And Nod31 
|