Comments on: Securing the Windows 7 beta
Several leading security companies have products, at least in test form, that work with Microsoft's new operating system.
Most Popular
Google's mobile hopes go beyond Nexus One
The world may have thrilled to the potential for a Google Phone, but what Google actually unveiled is its plan for a new smartphone world order.
• Photos: Unboxing Nexus One
Using your smartphone safely
faq Worms, Trojans, and SMS attacks are risks for mobile phones, but the biggest practical threat to users is losing the device.
About Beyond Binary
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft.
Beyond Binary is a look at how technology is changing our lives and the people behind all that life-changing stuff, with an extra emphasis on that which emanates from Redmond, Wash.
Add this feed to your online news reader
Beyond Binary topics
Binary Bits
Follow Ina on Twitter (Twitter name: InaFried)
Point for my comment is the fact that securing Windows, Mac, or Linux will never be truth always. There is always a hole or an exploit waiting to happen. However, in Vistas defence, there really hasn't been that many exploits in this OS. And Symantec is a piece of **** that will slow down your system immensely and has since the days of 95.
We much prefer AVG or NOD32 on our systems.
Hey - that's just like Windows now! They claim to be secure, but anyone with the right bit of malware can pop the lock and get right in...
(finally, an analogy that fits!)
/P
The REAL question is, when are we going to prosecute and imprison thugs that create viri and send spam? A bit of enforcement of laws would take care of these idiots for sure.
Dunno exactly how to tell this to a MSFT fanboy, but the A/V pestering is not a new feature. It's been around since XP Service Pack 2.
(crap - are MSFT fanboys so damned ignorant, even about their own fave OS? *shudder*...)
The best way to secure your PC is to work as a standard user. Windows Vista makes working as standard user easier than on XP because on Vista, the administrative user is effectively a standard user until he/she satisfies UAC's consent or credential prompt.
I have said good-bye to A/Vs on Windows XP and Windows Vista and work entirely as standard user. It's been two years now and my PCs have not yet been infected. It's a much better experience and you get the performance from programs that you expect instead of having A/Vs slowing them down.
Read why:
http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0005.html#1
RS
Windows will only be secure when your PC is not connected to the internet, has no place to plug in a keyboard or mouse, is not capable of having any modifications made and in fact is just a lump which will not even run when powered up. Even then, someone will find a way to exploit it.
@vamman
When comparing a GM car to Windows you might want to point out that breaking into Windows is more like walking up to a car with the doors in the locked position but hanging wide open. No sheet metal required.
@UITD
Spammers are already fined, virus writers are already prosecuted. The problem comes mainly because of the way viruses work in that tracking down the source is extremely difficult. A better education on how to handle files being recieved is a better choice. If it's from an unknown source, don't open it. If it's from a trusted source ask if they sent you a file, even if they say in the message "I sent you this file".
@someguynamedbob
What kind of person doesn't? Resumes are written on computers, they contain personal information. Bank info is often kept for tax purposes, Businesses keep information on computers to make the cost of running the business go down.
@cnet_user_0
I agree that UAC is necessary to run a more secure OS, that's why I switched to Ubuntu. UAC is something that has existed in a much more user-friendly fashion. The difficulties aren't in the process itself. Rather, the difficulties are in the implementation. On Ubuntu, unless I am constantly making changes to the core of my OS, I don't see the UAC. I turn on my firewall and that's the last I see of UAC for the next 3 days as I restart my computer every third day. As for running A/V, I do run it. I run it to protect those who still run Windows with A/V, like yourself. You're playing with fire by not running any but that's your choice.
If you can get people to use non-Administrator accounts, and teach them avoid running crap from e-mails, then XP/Vista is as good as Linux. The problem still exists between a chair and keyboard. As soon as trojan writers will start to care about Linux and OS X user base, you'll see those "Install this update immediately!" trojan emails with Linux- and OS-X aware payloads. And there will be enough suckers with your favorite OS, who follow the email instructions. Nothing beats old good social engineering.
I installed Norton trial version. Dammed if I will pay to put anti-virus software on a test machine! Supposedly they sent me a key to unlock the trial version. I haven't installed the key yet or studied closely the license Terms and Condition. Hurry up McAfee, the Trojans are lined up and waiting to get in.
I guess it just goes to show that ever single configuration is different and so every user will experience different results.
I'd recommend un-installing Windows 7 beta, and re-installing. Check drive space, etc., etc., the basics.
For the record I love Windows 7...I havent paid for a Windows OS since Win95 but I will absolutely buy Win7. I've been running XP until now.
I like 7, but lets be honest, it could almost be Vista SP2. It feels like Vista finished to me. 98% of it looks like Vista. XP was a tweaked 2000, but it had more changes that 7 does compared to Vista.
7 = Vista SP2 with a name change to hopefully spur corporate sales.
This is more like "Windows NT 6.1" than anything else.
"Service Packs don't add features. Never have. Never will."
Uh...wrong. XP SP2 was a nearly a complete rework of Windows XP/ XP SP1. It added a plethora of new features and functions the majority of which were admittedly "behind the scenes" with less UI changes than Win7 has over Vista but for all intensive purposes, WinXP SP2 could easily have been considered a new Windows OS.
MS could have rebranded it as such but they didn't. I suspect that the bad rep that surrounds Vista has a lot to do with moving away from the Vista name even though I have to agree that Win7 is the equivalent of what XP SP2 was to the original XP/XP SP1.
Service Packs probably shouldn't add features but they often do. Just as an example, the initial release of XP as well as SP1 lacked built-in WiFi access point selection. It was added in XP SP2.
There are many other features added in SP2 as well:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP#Service_Pack_2
This is an incredibly ignorant comment. Vista SP2 is a collection of bug fixes and a few small out-of-band updates collected together. It is a "sustained engineering" project and not even developed by the Windows engineering team.
Windows 7 has been worked on by thousands of engineers for 2+ years, it has significant changes at every layer (you don't rewrite the shell, make massive changes to the kernel's scalability, or add several hundred new features in a service pack).
So, err, where's the big feature here? The screen even looks just like the Vista version.
There really isn't much in big features for antifirus programs and Windows 7. However, if your refering to Windows 7 with "where's the big feature here" statement, then I wonder if you have even tried using the software. First, the taskbar change is a big feature. The major update to the windows caculator is another major update since I can't remember when it was changed. Then you have paint and wordpad. Another major change is how Windows 7 handles home networking. Homegroup is a nice and easy home networking feature.
Vista has this right now... so again I have to ask - where's the newness here?
"However, if your refering to Windows 7 with "where's the big feature here" statement, then I wonder if you have even tried using the software"
Yep. I'm also typing this on a Vista (x64) machine, where I can flip over and see the same thing that Ina is touting in the article. Your point? ;)
"First, the taskbar change is a big feature"
cosmetic changes are not really features ;)
"The major update to the windows caculator is another major update since I can't remember when it was changed. Then you have paint and wordpad."
I'm really sorry... but... seriously? I'm supposed to spend $$$ in upgrades just to get a new revision of calc.exe, paint.exe, and wordpad?
Okay, look... before this goes too far south, let's simplify this a bit: Windows 7 is a slight improvement on Vista, mostly in how it manages resources (e.g. you don't have to have a minimum of 4GB just to get it to run worth a damn). OTOH, everything I see in it (yes I have the beta), aside from some minor cosmetic bits, are already present in Vista. As in, you can get all of this right now, as long as you don't mind the bloat and bugs that Vista brings with it.
The reason I asked where the big feature was, is because the thing Ina keeps pointing to, I can pull up a near-exact copy of right now... in Vista.
Good grief, you cannot be possibly this stupid and ignorant. But I could be wrong. Let's find out:
RE: Updated Action Center:
"Vista has this right now... so again I have to ask - where's the newness here?"
WRONG. This is a new feature. If you used the product instead of making uninformed bigoted postings, you would know this.
"Yep. I'm also typing this on a Vista (x64) machine, where I can flip over and see the same thing that Ina is touting in the article. Your point? ;)"
IMPOSSIBLE. You have stated publically many times in the past (and just this week in fact) that you do not own, use, or support *ANY* Microsoft product. You bragged about it in fact. Now you say you're using Vista 64 on a system? Which is true? You either lied about not having/using/supporting Microsoft products earlier, or you're lying now. You can't have it both ways. Which lie do we believe now? You just got caught telling another big one. Credibility: ZERO.
RE: Taskbar changes
"cosmetic changes are not really features ;)"
Um, yeah... so here you have demonstrated you have never seen or actually have used the product. If you had, you would have been all over how clumsy it is at 0first, how the Quicklaunch bar is missing, etc. You wouldn't miss an opportunity to bash Microsoft like that and here you just proved yourself not to have any experience at all. Is this another lie?
RE Vista and 4Gb of memory:
"e.g. you don't have to have a minimum of 4GB just to get it to run worth a damn). "
Wow. What complete and utter FUD this is. But hey, let's use your tactic so people can get the real experience. Did you know it takes32Gb of memory to get Linux to work decently?
Sheesh, do you honest think people reading your comments here actually are so stupid as to believe your lies? Do you get tired telling them?
It's not even hard to spot them anymore.
So folks, you heard it here- Penguinisto is using Windows now. But just wait, tomorrow he'll claim once again that he has never used Vista and doesn't use any Microsoft products. He's done it befoer and will do it again just like he did here.
The task bar needs work but the Aero is much better..
And if Cosmetic Changes aren't features.. how do you explain Macs?
I downloaded Kaspersky Beta, as I have used Kaspersky for many years and always found it to be better than the other 'leading' brands, both for bloat and performance. It works fine except they haven't updated the databases for a few days so it keeps moaning about it.
I think some of the nobheads on this board just want to bash Microsoft, but...it is looking like a damn good OS at the moment from how it's performed so far with me.
I have used Avast! for years, and never gotten a virus on 98, XP or Vista.
Don't open email attachments, from anyone, under any circumstances, unless you expected them to send it, or you manually open them in a safe program (i.e. do NOT open images in a web browser, open them in an image editor. Do not open movie or music files in Media Player. Use some non-Microsoft thing).
This may sound extreme, but it really is not hard at all. And it's a lot faster and more secure than depending on these anti-virus things that are always behind the curve.
You simply NEED AN ANTI-VIRUS.... the only thing you have been..... INFINITELY LUCKY, thus far.
1. Dont look for cracks.
2. Dont try to pirate
3. Dont look for serial codes
4. Dont look at porn.
5. Dont use limewire
Since removing them all, no problems for the last 3 days.
I have YET to see a virus capable of causing mass damage WITHOUT USER INPUT on anything since Windows XP SP2.
And if you've been using Macs for over 20 years, you sound terribly immature for someone your "age".
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Microsoft-Windows-7/39012423321
- by wolfpacker1993 January 18, 2009 10:23 AM PST
- "Go find an average GM vehicle. Get a piece of flexible but sturdy piece of sheet metal that you can slide between the glass on either the drivers side or passenger door. Push the metal down between the glass and the door and push down while bending the steel back towards the outside of the door skin using the width of a pen. About 10 tries later you will unlatch the locking bracket and then pull up and you lock will pop up."
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (71 Comments)microsoft is trying to do what many car companies (such as honda) are also trying to do. change the type of locks on their doors to keep that from happening while also adding to the sleekness and user-ability of the car/OS. that old trick their only works on the cars that have little rods that stick up to lock or unlock the car. many new cars are getting little "switch type things" next to the handle that u have to flip and this can not be mimicked from the outside. microsoft is tyring to do the same type fix for windows 7.