The Business Centre

Vista as insecure as Windows 2000
John E. Dunn (Techworld.com) 12/05/2008 12:32:23

Additional Resources

Newsletter Subscription

Sign up for our Good Gear Guide newsletters!
Each day the GearDaily Newsletter covers the latest from the last week in a specific category. Monday is "Computing, Small Office and Home Office", Tuesday is "On the Move", Wednesday is "Digital Cameras, Video and Imaging", Thursday is "Mobile Phones and Communications" and Friday is "Home Entertainment".
See the latest products and comparison prices added to GearShop each week.
The GoodGearGuide portfolio of services is rapidly expanding. By joining this list you will be pre-registered for any new email services we launch so you won't miss out on any of our independent product guidance and purchasing information. You will be automatically subscribed and receive the new service(s) but dont worry, should you wish to unsubscribe you can do so with only one click.

Good news for users of Windows Vista. According to figures compiled by PC Tools, the OS has experienced only slightly more vulnerabilities than Windows 2000, which appeared eight years ago when malware was far less common.

Or is that the bad news? Despite having a reputation as the least vulnerable of Microsoft's operating systems, Vista still managed to record 639 unique vulnerabilities over roughly the last half year, which puts it in a worse position than the aging Windows 2000, which experienced 586 over the same period.

Windows XP, which still accounts for the overwhelming volume of the Windows user base, had 1,021, with Windows 2003 Server reaching 478.

The Australian security company collected statistics on the number of infections by analyzing figures from anonymous users of its ThreatFire community, with vulnerabilities double-confirmed by third-party anti-virus engines. The numbers are per 1,000 machines on each platform.

"Microsoft has invested a great deal in making Vista more secure, by providing a number of security enhancements which were not in prior Microsoft operating system releases," concluded PC Tools CEO, Simon Clausen. "But industry experts have been reluctant to confirm its improved resistance to malware with good reason."

"Since its launch, Microsoft has flagged the increased level of protection Vista provides as one of the key reasons why consumers should upgrade from Windows XP to Vista. If Microsoft's forecasts for the operating system are correct and Vista's market share increases significantly, we could expect infection rates to increase further on Vista," he added.

The problem with these bare statistics is that they make no mention of how serious these vulnerabilities were -- Vista has recorded few that come into the 'most serious' category by comparison with XP. They also don't specify where the vulnerabilities were uncovered. The majority of vulnerabilities are not in the OS itself and are traced to problems in browsers, for instance, and can even apply across platforms.

Microsoft would also point out that the user access control (UAC) feature of Vista stops malware from exploiting the OS without the user at least being aware that something is happening. Windows 2000 and XP lack even this basic level of protection.

On the other hand, Vista has had its embarrassing moments, securitywise. Only weeks ago, Microsoft had to explain how the .ANI animated cursor bug was allowed to find its way into Vista code without being patched as part of the much-vaunted Security Development Lifecycle (SDL).

Market Place

Good Gear Guide Member Login

 
close
CareerOne
Sponsored Links