PDA

View Full Version : Kaspersky : Vista less secure than XP


Mystic
03-19-2007, 12:55 AM
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.

"Cybercriminals seem not to care about Vista licensing," said Eugene Kaspersky. "They don't need to follow regulations or be certified by Microsoft -- antivirus vendors do."
Source (http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/Microsoft_partner_Vista_less_secure_than_XP/0,130061733,339274261,00.htm)

aloksingh
03-19-2007, 07:06 AM
That was always going to happen. Unless vista releases a security fix, it is always going to be less secure than xp. I think that the guys at windows have concentrated more on looks of the windows this time than the features.

Submerge
03-19-2007, 10:30 AM
I wouldn't be suprised if it was less secure. Everything Microsoft releases is insecure at stage one.

Arthur07
03-26-2007, 02:39 PM
News http://weblog.infoworld.com/techwatch/archives/010564.html :)

Symantec says otherwise.

Mystic
03-27-2007, 02:09 AM
These AV companies! Always contradicting each other.
Remember when Symantec said Vista's protection system was going to cause problem for AV Vendor's, Kaspersky had said otherwise. Kaspersky offcourse has now done an abouturn regarding that issue.

Whitey
03-27-2007, 08:01 AM
I wouldn't be suprised if it was less secure. Everything Microsoft releases is insecure at stage one.

And when it's actually secure enough, they make it secure at the cost of usability...


Remember XP SP2?....


"You are coming to a sad realization, allow or deny?" - Apple said it best :P



- Whitey

Submerge
03-27-2007, 12:35 PM
Extremely true. Prime example, look at social websites.

MySpace - very unsecure but very customizable
Facebook - secure but not very customizable (compared to MySpace)

Arthur07
03-27-2007, 12:44 PM
Surely MySpace must be relatively secure? A website like that must be otherwise a rogue coder could take down the whole website and I'm assuming that any people have already tried.

Mystic
03-27-2007, 02:00 PM
Some had started a blog recently, in which he promised to expose a myspace exploit everyday for 30 days.

Arthur07
03-27-2007, 02:45 PM
So I read here: http://www.techshout.com/internet/2007/19/myspace-security-vulnerabilities-to-be-disclosed-by-hackers-in-april/

but i don't know....

We could have just as easily gone after Google or Yahoo or MSN or ZDNet or whatever.

Now that I doubt :P