Vista gets hacked

[cantormath]

I wanted to share this article with the forum, thought it might suggest what direction we can expect vista to start in (or end up in) regarding security and vulnerability.

IMO, vista will take the similar path to xp, as far as security and vulnerability.

Agree,disagree?

the link to the article:
"Rutkowska took the stage in front of a capacity audience and proceeded to explain how to get around Vista.....

......Taking her attack a step further, she implemented a one-click tool, which she called "Kernelstike" to execute her Vista kernel exploit." (http://www.internetnews.com/security/article.php/3624861)

[djsroknrol]

To early to tell, but IMHP, I think it will be no better than XP...I've lost alot of confidence in MS OS's over the past couple of years as I'm sure many other's have...The delays in shipping Vista only add to the speculation that there's problems with it.

[_simon_]

Anything can be hacked.

For the most part I think how secure it is depends on the user...

[aysiu]

Antyhing can be hacked.

For the most part I think how secure it is depends on the user...
I agree. And, seeing as how Vista will most likely have the same users as XP did, I voted that security would be about the same.

[Kernel Sanders]

Based on what i've read, XP is still going to be the Microsoft OS of choice until Vienna. :p

[Engnome]

More insecure in the beginning as some old and proven drivers have been rewritten but maybe more secure in the long run.

[G Morgan]

I think it will be more secure but that still doesn't mean it is secure enough. Lets be honest Vista would have to be much better than XP to be acceptable in the security stakes. I still imagine that sticking plasters will be the defense system of choice for Vista.

What I never understood is why XP users don't setup a package managment system a la Linux. It's certainly possible in Windows and would allow them to vet packages and create a safe zone. Then again we are talking about Windows here.

[MaximB]

I'm counting on it
I will be very happy if indeed vista would be more easy to hack and more insecure then xp.

[richbarna]

Anything can be hacked.

For the most part I think how secure it is depends on the user...

You just saved me 12 words :)

[atrus123]

Microsoft may not have the best track record with holes, but they are usually pretty good about patching the holes that arise (even if sometimes it might take a bit of media attention).

I've also heard that Vista is supposed to take a more Linux centered approach to security. I.e., the main user doesn't necessarily get administrator rights. I haven't used it yet, so I can't confirm or refute that.

I think Vista will be more secure (after a few months in the field), but I'm not about to bet either testicle on that claim.

[jpkotta]

Word on the street is that Vista has a written-from-scratch-new networking stack, which means untested in the real world. There are probably going to be a lot of problems there.

[flaak_monkey]

Windows getting hacked is nothing new. It is expected. If it had been the new OSX (which has yet to be named) then i would have been like o.O , but someday half hese hackers will realize there efforst to annoy people is a waste of thei own time and maybe quit.

[flaak_monkey]

actually now that i have read the article on CNET, it was a team who hacked it to see if it was hackable type thing. So just saying that even though whatever security they have now there were small holes that you would not have seen coming otherwise. They will have this fixed soon and January "you" (whoever that maybe) can have a copy of Vista. But as with all new OS's there are always bugs at first that need to be worked out.

[kriding]

Vista will be no diferent to any other windows in terms of security and flaws, and the reason for this is 'backward compatability'. To achieve it, they have to drag along so much old code (the main reason Windows is so bloated) that they will drag in all the old flaws aswell, then add that to the new flaws that will undoubtedly arise and you have an over burdened, unstable system.

Windows needs to start from scratch and rewrite their entire OS from the ground up, instead of just bolting on new useabilty and 'features'

[G Morgan]

The best solution would be a VM based compatibility layer for old programs. Of course this requires the user to learn something so will never happen.

[cantormath]

Compared to XP, linux, IMO, is far more securiable and less vulnerable out of the box, or in general, to users as a whole.

Lets assume users aside, do you think that vista is going to be as insecure or as vulnerable compared to XP...

[Adamant1988]

Well, I don't think you can really remove users from the security equation and get a reasonable answer.

Without the Users Windows XP would have been decent in terms of security since many of it's flaws require a user to do something stupid to take advantage of the flaw.

also in an article in PCMagazine a chart showing security flaws in Mac OS X and Windows showed that mac os X has actually had more discovered flaws than windows for the last couple years. =\

not sure if it's relevant but I thought I would throw that out there.

[cantormath]

Well, I don't think you can really remove users from the security equation and get a reasonable answer.

Without the Users Windows XP would have been decent in terms of security since many of it's flaws require a user to do something stupid to take advantage of the flaw.

also in an article in PCMagazine a chart showing security flaws in Mac OS X and Windows showed that mac os X has actually had more discovered flaws than windows for the last couple years. =\

not sure if it's relevant but I thought I would throw that out there.

Im not sure how much I believe mac osx has more security flaws.

[aysiu]

Mac OS X uses the exact same sudo security model that Ubuntu uses.

[Polygon]

os x like aysiu said uses sudo security model...

and there are like 10 or maybe even less exploits/viruses for mac os x. I might be off but its no where NEAR the number that windows has.

[Adamant1988]

The article didn't specify viruses, Spywayer, exploits, etc.
It could have been stupid piddly crap that changed your dock or something, Idk, i just know that there were a higher number of reported security flaws in Mac OS X than windows last year, a lot more according to the article.

[3rdalbum]

I read something about the way they judge "reported security flaws". The security flaws are only counted if the manufacturer or developer acknowledges their existance. I think it was in Linux Format, and it was about how Firefox's developers acknowledged more security flaws than Microsoft's IE team did.

I thought OS X had 62 reported security flaws since the first OS X beta, most of those being patched. About 55 of them were in the Java Runtime Environment (well, not really, but more flaws were in Java than in any other program).

[weekend warrior]

You can only truly judge a man (or company) but what he's done, not what he claims he will do. In that light, a picture is worth a thousand words.

Security vulnerabilities, all current from Secunia.com

http://secunia.com/graph/?type=sol&period=all&prod=96

http://secunia.com/graph/?type=sol&period=all&prod=10611

http://secunia.com/graph/?type=sol&period=all&prod=22

That doesn't inspire much confidence is Microsoft's security savvy or level of commitment to its customers and a company as big as Microsoft doesn't turn a new leaf overnight.

[DoctorMO]

I think Vista will be more obstrusive, in order to get secure Vista may get in the way of users too much by requiring too many programs and processes to access the Windows internals.

[cantormath]

I think Vista will be more obstrusive, in order to get secure Vista may get in the way of users too much by requiring too many programs and processes to access the Windows internals.

It requires almost double XP.

[PriceChild]

Security vulnerabilities, all current from Secunia.comPlease remember these are slightly biased as Windows Xp has been out 5 years... Dapper just 6 months.

However the current record is still incredibly better ;)