- Related Stories
-
Piecing together Windows Vista
November 8, 2006 -
Vista's European battleground
September 18, 2006 -
Chills at Microsoft's security huddle
July 24, 2006 -
Allchin: Buy Vista for the security
January 27, 2006
"Parts of Vista scare me," Gleichauf said at the Gartner Security Summit here on Monday. "Anything with that level of systems complexity will have new threats, as well as bringing new solutions. It's always a struggle in security, trying to build for what you don't know."
Gleichauf told CNET News.com's sister site ZDNet UK that Cisco views the Microsoft operating system update, set for broad release in January, as a bearer of possible solutions to security problems, but also as a potential trigger of security issues.
Vista's European battleground
"Vista will solve a lot of problems. But for every action, there's a reaction and unforeseen side-effects and mutations. Networks can become more brittle unintentionally," Gleichauf said.
The Cisco executive's remarks come as Microsoft and the European Commission move deeper into a tug-of-war over security features in Vista. The company wants regulators to set clear guidelines as to what it can include in the operating system, but the Commission will say only that Microsoft must abide by its competition rules.
Systems complexity needs to be taken into consideration in any action plan for Vista implementation, he added.
"If you're embracing Vista, it's not going to be 100 percent initially. It's going to create more heterogeneity for a while," Gleichauf said.
Analysts from Gartner have also found that many businesses are nervous about integrating the security features in Vista with their legacy systems.
"Most organizations are cautious about Vista," said Eric Ouellet, vice president for research, security and privacy at Gartner. "(Companies) already have security tools which are being built into Vista. The risk is to go to another system. There's always going to be some hits," Ouellet told ZDNet UK.
"The risk you have to manage is: Is Microsoft going to get it right first time? Maybe yes. But are businesses going to take that risk?" he asked.
Microsoft has not helped to reassure customers by pushing back the release date of the operating system and changing some of the promised features.
"People don't know what's coming down the pike," Ouellet said. "TPM (Trusted Platform Module) is now not fully integrated--you can't rely on the feature and function set. Microsoft's moving the goalposts is definitely adding to the heartburn."
Tom Espiner of ZDNet UK reported from London.
See more CNET content tagged:
Cisco Systems Inc., Gartner Inc., security feature, Microsoft Windows Vista, exec
Cisco Wi-Fi is SCARY!
http://news.com.com/Cisco+flaw+puts+Wi-Fi+networks+at+risk/2100-7349_3-5929059.html
Cisco Internetwork OS is SCARY!
http://news.com.com/New+Cisco+flaw+could+pose+threat+to+Net/2100-1002_3-5853330.html
Cisco Session Initiation Protocol is SCARY!
http://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid7_gci1207783,00.html
Cisco Unity is SCARY!
http://searchvoip.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid66_gci1034991,00.html?bucket=NEWS&topic=299030
How about...
Bob Gleichauf is SCARY! He drums up fear through speculation when his own company's products have introduced plenty of vulnerabilities. Bob should lay off the rhetoric and do an analysis - if he can find an actual vulnerability, then perhaps we'd have a reason to be worried - and perhaps it would be fixed. But he has no interest in resolving issues or providing a clear understanding of the paranoia he tries to create - he apparently just wants to damage Microsoft sales. What a goon.
The heck with it! I used Win98SE until less than 2 years ago! It ran like thunder! I'll probably use XP for 4 or 5 years more and then switch to a stable, easy to install, customer friendly version of Linux that will probably be on the market by then!
MS has definitely gone out of their mind! That's what I say! We're soon gona need a CRAY 1 just to run the damn thing!
Doesn't anybody just get the meaning of OS? Like Operating System? Like basic functions? What of it?!
How about:
Cisco Internetwork OS is SCARY!
http://news.com.com/New+Cisco+flaw+could+pose+threat+to+Net/2100-1002_3-5853330.html
Cisco WiFi is SCARY!
http://news.com.com/Cisco+flaw+puts+Wi-Fi+networks+at+risk/2100-7349_3-5929059.html
Cisco Session Initiation Protocol is SCARY!
http://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid7_gci1207783,00.html
How about... Bob Gleichauf shut his trap and quit spreading fear of the unknown through biased speculation? If he can find a flaw, we'll have reason to worry - and there's a chance it'll be fixed. But no... Bob's only goal is apparently to hurt Microsoft sales. He offers no valuable evidence at all. EVERY new system has the possibility of security flaws - CISCO should know this better than anybody. Hey Bob... how about cleaning your own house before suggesting that somebody elses could possibly be dirty. What a goon!
chance it'll be fixed. But no... Bob's only goal is apparently to
hurt Microsoft sales."
Microsoft doesn't need anyone else to hurt their sales. They're
doing well enough on their own.
Shoddy product quality, uninspired new products, and massive,
crippling delays have already pushed many organizations to
Linux and Mac OS X.
What about Vista has taken five years to create and complete?
they've cancelled most of the compelling new features. Are you
telling me it took five years to get DirectX 10 out?
Vista's going to make a splash, alright - into the toilet bowl.
Either way, quit whining.
The OEM's will love to accommodate MS because Vista requires a top of the line system. MS has to ensure Vista runs like crap on yesterdays hardware because hardware sales = windows sales.
Vista will sell anyway, and if it is total crap that just means they can repeat the cycle sooner rather then later.
On client XP systems they have all these services in listening state (eg highly vulnerable to remote attack). This pushes up the hardware requirement and ensures lack of security. They reply by saying they _need_ this stuff in listening state by default and if there is a vuln they patch but don't dissable the services.
fast forward to SP2 and they still leave the services in listening state but now include an added layer, a firewall to stop traffic. Everybody upgrades to the better, more secure product but what happened to the statement they needed the services in listening state? How is adding a firewall rule any easier then turning on a service only after you decide you need it?
Answer, it's not, but running everything requires beefy hardware ($$PC upgrade cycle$$).
MS is their own competition, if they release a perfect product nobody will upgrade and it costs them money.
MS can't do like Apple and include a bunch of cool things for free cause it is against the law for them (monopoly thing), so releasing a crappy products so they can improve on it in another version later is the best strategy they have going for them, intentional or not.
But that wont discourage our chicken littles from making such predictions, or the lazy journalists who publish such predictions unchallenged (*cough*, CNET. How about doing some actual journalism?).
"I hereby wager one million dollars that more security risks will be discovered in the first year of Vista's release than XP & W2K combined.
If you do not wish to participate in this wager, please post your refusal within 24 hours, otherwise you will be deemed as consenting to this wager."
Vista's release will be a paradise for hackers, scammers, organized crime, and terrorists.
Micro$oft can't execute reliable security tests now for the more simple XP & W2K platforms, so there is NO WAY they can deliver a "safer" Vista that is enormously more complex!
Wait - they already have done that - NOW Cisco is starting to worry that nobody will need theoir overpriced pieces of crap. Maybe they can get together with Symantec and drown their sorrows together.
Bill still rocks.
No single solution is perfect and software firewalls are nice, but there are many advantages of using stand alone hardware routers.
"NOW Cisco is starting to worry that nobody will need theoir overpriced pieces of crap."
Considering we're talking about Microsoft it's interesting you mention over priced.
Where you could have a point with "FUD" is that Cisco can benefit from additional Cisco product purchases to deal with potential problems created with a Vista deployment in a large enterprise. Cisco wants CTOs to remember and budget for Cisco while buying into Vista.
"Anything with that level of systems complexity will have new threats, as well as bringing new solutions. It's always a struggle in security, trying to build for what you don't know."
"Vista will solve a lot of problems. But for every action, there's a reaction and unforeseen side-effects and mutations. Networks can become more brittle unintentionally."
"If you're embracing Vista, it's not going to be 100 percent initially. It's going to create more heterogeneity for a while."
...Does someone want to explain to me what's so amazingly insightful about this that it's newsworthy, other than Cisco throwing barbs and a company they know they're going to be competing hard against in the near future?
I suppose this is CNet's version of linkbaiting, although I wish they'd stick to real news. Leave the linkbaiting to the Register.co.uk, Microsoft Watch & and other industry leeches that make their living off of synthentic media hype.
If the new cybersecurity czar, Gregory Garcia, had any intestinal fortitude at all, he'd call for an investigation into the security of Vista before it is shipped, complete with source vetting by the NSA.
But, as a lifelong industry hack, he'll sit and collect his check and stare out the window.
Roberto
should consider selling or atleast co-operating with Microsoft on
Mac OS 10, under the agreement that the next OS they make be
done as a joint venture.. of course it would be a seperate entity/
OS from Vista and OS 10 but of course be based on OS 10's
current technology and not branded specifically to one company.
It would fulfill so many purposes..
It would cut the cost of R&D for Microsoft.. Guarantee OFFICE as
the no.1 business software (as if their worried about this) but it
would definitely put an end to other competing suites, most
security issues would vanish, and Microsoft can focus more on
Networking and the business side of computing which Apple and
Microsoft have already drawn fine lines with. I simply don't
think Vista is going to sell though.. Why? it already has a bad rap
attached to it and whats worst is, its under the scrutiny
microscope, and its not even 75% full proof so its safe to say it
won't do well in its first two years of existence..
For Apple; they will get the marketshare they want, insure that
their OS technology will survive, because afterall it really is
good), probably sell more computers and give Dell & HP some
real viable competition, guarantee Ilife as the no.1 suite for
handling digital media for the average consumer. Issues of
incompatibility would disappear, I can probably go on and on...
it opens up so many more possiblities.. for both companies.. of
course there will be tariffs on certain aspects on features for the
OS but it will benefit everyone...
Do you remember IBM used to have an OS? That too was sunk by Microsoft short handing IBM and not cooperating as fully as they let IBM believe they would. It may be time for Microsoft to work with a partner but they have burned any they worked with in the past.
Microsoft has really blown this development cycle.
You sure do extrapolate a lot, don't you? Whether Vista is "like"d or not will depend on the public, not you or I.
My point is simple: MSFT dominates now. They may not dominate 10 years hence, mostly due to their own short-sighted policies and coding methods.
After all, Apple was once the dominant, until their own hubris and (at that time) bad practices knocked them way back.
/P
I mean that theme song is incredible and the show is entertaining.
It is a ignorant LCD show.
And Cisco, a network company that now wants o be a security company probably has had more vulnerabilities against their network AND security products than any other vendor I know.
The Cisco Exec cites not one identified security flaw - just "Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt". This article is not news - it's propaganda.
(and no, I'm not a MS fan either. I just can't stand it when people spew FUD)
position to make any conclusions about his comments at all.
- Anti-competition is OUT
- by wbenton September 20, 2006 8:26 AM PDT
- Until Microsoft learns to abide by competitive rules... which aren't adhered to in the US... and to which the government tends to turn a blind eye... much of the rest of the world wants to ensure that their vendors markets don't succumb to the same fate which MANY American corporations have... the most noted one NetScape!!!
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (79 Comments)I wish the EU all the success in the world in trying to keep Microshaft abrest of competitive regulations while hoping that the US will catch wind of the fact that Microsoft CAN BE HELD accountable... but one must stand up and be defensive about it!
Something many corporations have given up throughout the years... but which they should not have given up on.
Walt