Microsoft Windows has the lowest number of vulnerabilities and the fastest turnaround time for patches of all commercial operating systems--but it also has the most serious flaws, according to Symantec.
Symantec's latest "Internet Security Threat Report" (PDF) reveals 39 security holes were discovered in Windows during the second half of 2006, with an average patch development turnaround time of 21 days, up from the 22 Windows holes found in the first six months of the year.
Red Hat Linux had 208 vulnerabilities for the same period with an average patch time of 58 days, a huge increase on the 42 patched vulnerabilities for the first half of the year.
Apple's Mac OS X had 43 vulnerabilities--more than double the number for the first half of 2006--and an average patch time of 66 days.
But almost one-third of the 39 Windows holes were high severity, and 20 were medium severity. Just two of the 208 Red Hat Linux security holes discovered were high severity, with 130 medium severity and 70 low severity. Only one of the Mac OS X holes was considered high severity, with 31 classed as medium and 11 as low severity.
The report found that Windows also had the most vulnerabilities with exploit code and exploit activity, which Symantec claims may be one explanation why Microsoft has been pressured to develop and issue patches more quickly than other vendors.
Mozilla Web browsers, such as Firefox, are also more secure than Microsoft's Internet Explorer, according to the report.
It found 54 holes in IE during the second half of 2006, with one of these being of high severity, compared with 40 holes in Mozilla browsers, which had no high-severity vulnerabilities. Only four holes were found in the Safari and Opera browsers over the same period.
The latest Symantec threat report, which covers the six-month period from July 1 to December 31, 2006, also reveals the number of "zombie" PCs hijacked by hackers and used to launch denial-of-service attacks or send out spam has risen by almost 30 percent in the past year.
Arthur Wong, senior vice president for Symantec Security Response and Managed Security Services, said attack methods used by cybercriminals are becoming more complex and sophisticated to escape detection.
... has the lowest number of vulnerabilities and the fastest turnaround time for patches of all commercial operating systems--but it also has the most serious flaws, according to Symantec...". What else to expect from a scenario such as this when Microsoft Windows (Code-Base OS/2)--from all appearances are still works-in-progress and also commands 90% plus market share!
There at at least 5 critical vulnerabilities reported in the second half of 2006, and Mozilla defines "critical" as "Vulnerability can be used to run attacker code and install software, requiring no user interaction beyond normal browsing."
OMG, but isn't this akin to Lucifer knocking on your door and saying "Hi, I'm here on behalf of Vacation in Hell Tours and we're offering a free all-expense paid trip if only you'll sign right here obligating you to believe that Windows is secure...and that you'll buy all Symantec products to assure so."
Is it right to bunch flaws with the operating system with flaws from 3rd party applications? Certainly MS, Apple and Red Hat aren't responsible for bugs found in others manufacturers products?
I'm also not really keen on the 'security researchers'. Heaven knows I'd love to have a job where I point out someone else's flaws all day but is is really all that beneficial?
I'd love to see a study on how much of these increases can be attributed to the exploits being 'known' (i.e. reverse engineered from the patches) versus them being genuinely exploited?
... to the bunching of "flaws with the operating system with flaws from 3rd party applications... are the overarching questions of certain computing functionalities/limitations--when are these issues (that might really matter) are really going to be addressed after over two decades and counting!
CNET's headline writers ought to spend more time reading the content that they attempt to summarize in a few words, because the headline of this particular is quite misleading. Based on the text of article, better, more accurate headlines ought to say:
Windows Security Holes Are Most Critical
Windows Has Most Critical Security Holes
Security Holes in Windows Rated Most Critical
Security Holes in Windows Tend Toward Most Severe
I think those tell the story better than the current distorting headline
... even if CNET's headlines repeated state "Windows Security Holes Are Most Critical Windows Has Most Critical Security Holes Security Holes in Windows Rated Most Critical Security Holes in Windows Tend Toward Most Severe... will these "Security Holes" stop users from opening their pocket books to purchase even more Windows and Windows Products; besides, wouldn't articles like these (as one poster stated above) make companies like Symantec rush to smilingly offer super "Vacation in Hell Tours"!
Windows has fewer problems only because they fix the holes quicker and more people reported the bugs. More people worked on the bugs/problems. Norton/Symantec did an unbias study despite of their displeasure of Microsoft. I appluded them for that effort. Apple OS and Linux have more problems just because they took their time to fix their tech issues. In the other hand, Microsoft has more problems popping up everytime and more conflicts with software like Firefox browser or even with their own family of software like Windows Media Player. These are remaining ever ending vicious cycle of OS manufactures to deal with more the quicker the hacker hack the OS systems or softwares.
Google creates an animated doodle that features a boy, a girl, Google's search engine, and a jump rope. But might there be darker, more analytical, more troubling interpretations to this tale?
The Silicon Valley online payments startup grew by 1,000 percent last year and is hopeful it can repeat that level of growth this year. To do that, it's had to move away from its early friends-and-family roots and embrace small businesses.
Chamtech's spray-on antenna uses a nano material to provide a low-power boost to antenna range. The wireless-in-a-can product may some day bring an end to unsightly cell towers.
EnerG2 opens a plant to make an engineered carbon that will improve performance of energy storage devices and make storage for start-stop hybrid cars less expensive.
vulnerabilities with associated exploit code and exploit activity in
the wild."
And that is all that matters.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/known-vulnerabilities.html" target="_newWindow">http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/known-vulnerabilities.html</a>
There at at least 5 critical vulnerabilities reported in the second half of 2006, and Mozilla defines "critical" as "Vulnerability can be used to run attacker code and install software, requiring no user interaction beyond normal browsing."
IE holes, on the other hand, are exploited quite regularly.
/P
Microsoft NEVER talks on the same wave length as the rest of the security industry.
Walt
from 3rd party applications? Certainly MS, Apple and Red Hat
aren't responsible for bugs found in others manufacturers
products?
I'm also not really keen on the 'security researchers'. Heaven
knows I'd love to have a job where I point out someone else's
flaws all day but is is really all that beneficial?
I'd love to see a study on how much of these increases can be
attributed to the exploits being 'known' (i.e. reverse engineered
from the patches) versus them being genuinely exploited?
Windows Security Holes Are Most Critical
Windows Has Most Critical Security Holes
Security Holes in Windows Rated Most Critical
Security Holes in Windows Tend Toward Most Severe
I think those tell the story better than the current distorting headline
Such a farse of a title deserves to be ignored!!!
Walt