18 July 2006 | 6,898 views

Vista more insecure than XP

Prevent Network Security Leaks with Acunetix

Symantec has made a research and affirming to there research Windows Vista will be more insecure than Windows XP, because most of the new code is fresh, and the old code isn’t used anymore…

Microsoft has removed a large body of tried and tested code and replaced it with freshly written code, complete with new corner cases and defects,” the researchers wrote in the report, scheduled for publication Tuesday. “This may provide for a more stable networking stack in the long term, but stability will suffer in the short term.

Also by using new tehnologies, such as IPv6 and peer-to-peer protocol will be a part of the new insecurity thread:

“As these technologies see wider deployment, we expect IPv6 and the new peer-to-peer protocols to play an increasing role in the delivery of malicious payloads,” the Symantec paper said. “These features are critical to the success of Microsoft’s peer-to-peer initiative but are also the same features that attackers need to deliver malicious content.”

So it seems that besides the system requierments needed for Vista it’s even likely to be used because of the future insecurity issues…

Source: news.com.com



Recent in General News:
- Google’s Chrome Apps – Are They Worth The Risk?
- Twitter Breach Leaks 250,000 User E-mails & Passwords
- More Cyberterrorism – Taiwan Political Party Accuses China of Hacking

Related Posts:
- (in)Secure 1.10 Magazine – Infosec E-zine Released
- inSSIDer v1.2.3.1014 – Wi-Fi network scanner For Windows
- Vista Security Claims Debunked – Figures Skewed

Most Read in General News:
- Hacking Still Can’t Outdo Stupidity for Data Leaks - 125,098 views
- eEye Launches 0-Day Exploit Tracker - 85,082 views
- One Of The World’s Most Prolific Music Piracy Groups Busted - 43,465 views

Low-cost VPS Hosting

5 Responses to “Vista more insecure than XP”

  1. felix 19 July 2006 at 7:08 am Permalink

    I do not agree with the point.
    Although the code of Vista is fresh, it is well tested and the development of this OS is exactly followed the requirements of secure software development art.

  2. Gouki 19 July 2006 at 8:55 pm Permalink

    I don’t agree that Windows XP is insecure. It’s just a matter of how you configure it.

    … and let’s wait until we get a final release of Vista before making comments about the the security problems. These companies should know better.

  3. Maxwell 18 November 2006 at 8:42 pm Permalink

    I agree with the comment that it is “how you configure it(xp)”
    That is really true running as restricted user and using the “run as”
    feature is pretty good also xp pro does have alot of security features built in.
    The problem is Microsoft’s agenda of wanting to control people,and how better to do that than have the consumer pc market all run as admin and phone home to M$ headquarters every time you turn on the internet.
    They do nothing to educate people on how to run as restricted user.
    xp home is a joke they stripped all the security features you get with xp pro
    you don’t even get the security tab to set files permissions unless in “safe mode” I am really surprised M$ has not been sued for this crap.

  4. Gouki 18 November 2006 at 8:58 pm Permalink

    I think that as time passes by Microsoft has changed their standing on educating users.

    Several newsletters especially made for home users can be something very useful for the proper way of handling, using and administrating Windows.

    Are the home users interested in these? Fuck no!

    Are administrators interested in these? 40% of them are.

    What the hell then? If people think that it’s just installing and voilá, well, don’t expect it to do miracles.

    I don’t think Windows is a bad OS – it has like everything else, flaws – I think the users MAKE IT look bad (the stupid ones, at least).

    Fortunally there are ‘power users’ who understand what’s under the hood and how to work with it who try and share the truth: Windows is a good Operating System.

  5. backbone 22 November 2006 at 8:48 am Permalink

    yeah but there are better (and cheaper) alternatives of course… and don’t take so many resources as Vista does…