Vista SP2 and Windows 7 more Secure than Mac Leopard or Linux

**MetalheadGautham** · 13-04-2009, 03:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Softpedia

Windows Vista Service Pack 2 is the absolute apex in security when it comes down to operating systems, Kevin Turner, chief operating officer for Microsoft, has indicated at the Midmarket CIO Summit earlier this week. Turner has had no problems applauding Vista SP2's superiority over rivals open source Linux and Apple's Mac OS X Leopard, although he has failed to offer any details related to the OS security-measuring content besides his perspective. At the same time, the Redmond company's COO has indicated that Windows 7, the software giant's next iteration of Windows will also be more secure than Linux and Leopard.

Continue Reading:
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Vista...d-109192.shtml

PS: I will eat my hair if Windows Vista SP2 or Windows 7 turns out to be more secure than Linux

**topgear** · 13-04-2009, 06:05 AM

A very good news for us windows users. TFS

BTW, I kepp linux in dual booting ( suse & fedora ) with windows vista & xp

**MetalheadGautham** · 13-04-2009, 10:34 AM

I still think MS is going a bit overboard here. While with each service pack Windows definitely gets more secure, it feels stupid comparing it to mac or a Linux Distro which are secure due to their respective architectures (BSD and Linux respectively).

Why can't MS for once say, "Windows 7 is the most secure windows yet and it's nomore vulnerable to common security issues and we are proud of it." Instead of trying to make tall claims about its security ?

Liverpool_fan · 13-04-2009, 10:41 AM

Ha ha ha... lol

This will do no more than put Windows users to a false sense of security...

-----------------------------------------
Posted again:
-----------------------------------------
Anyway, saying Windows is more secure than Linux is a very tall and generic statement. Which distribution are they comparing to? The old times of Linspire and Xandros are certainly highly insecure; Ubuntu and OpenSUSE are highly secure whereas well configured installation of Arch, Slackware, and debian; their security is highly dependent on the user setting it up.
Moreover setting up SELinux and AppArmour further enhances the security of the Linux distros as well.

I guess they are comparing Windows 7 + Firewall with a Linux logged in with root.

gxsaurav · 13-04-2009, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

I still think MS is going a bit overboard here. While with each service pack Windows definitely gets more secure, it feels stupid comparing it to mac or a Linux Distro which are secure due to their respective architectures (BSD and Linux respectively).

Do you know how the internal architecture of WIndows 7 & Vista SP2 is made? Do you know how many Virus attacks have been there for Vista? DO you know how Vista is coded? How do u know Windows 7 is less secure then Linux? Have u worked on Linux code or Windows Code?

If not, stop speculating & spreading word of mouth. Are you a security analyst yourself who has tested this? Or are you just talking on behalf of what you have heard the Lingeeks talking?

So now seems like you are correct when you know nothing about OS architecture etc while those proper certified security analyst & penetration testers are illiterate.

**MetalheadGautham** · 13-04-2009, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gxsaurav

Do you know how the internal architecture of WIndows 7 & Vista SP2 is made? Do you know how many Virus attacks have been there for Vista? DO you know how Vista is coded? How do u know Windows 7 is less secure then Linux? Have u worked on Linux code or Windows Code?

The fault with windows is the very nature of it, including the way you install apps. Its simply much easier to trick a windows user into letting in a malware than trick a Linux user.

You need to log in as administrator for simple actions. Windows needs something like SUDO to become safer.

Quote:

If not, stop speculating & spreading word of mouth. Are you a security analyst yourself who has tested this? Or are you just talking on behalf of what you have heard the Lingeeks talking?

So now seems like you are correct when you know nothing about OS architecture etc while those proper certified security analyst & penetration testers are illiterate.

For every 1 security analyst who thinks windows is more secure than linux, a hundred have proved otherwise.

As for Vista SP2, I am giving it time. Lets see how it looks when it comes out. As I said before, I will eat my own hair and upload a video to youtube if its more secure than my desktop.

desiibond · 13-04-2009, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

The fault with windows is the very nature of it, including the way you install apps. Its simply much easier to trick a windows user into letting in a malware than trick a Linux user.

You need to log in as administrator for simple actions. Windows needs something like SUDO to become safer.

Dude. ever heard about "restricted mode" login for windows and "Run as administrator" mode in windows. There are 11 different user account types in XP itself and each account has different set of security setup. Most of the users use Administrator type account for their userid and this is where the problem is.

setup your account as "standard user" or "restricted user" and when you try to install app using "run as admin" mode, it asks for admin password.

The reason for virus attacks is purely due to illiteracy on users' part. The last virus attack that my PC had was years ago and that too because of my idiot friend who connected my HDD to his PC (he thought his PC is virus free when it is fully loaded).

I have been using Avast+win7 UAC and I feel totally secure. Not even a single virus attack and now I don't have to worry about scanning external drives that my friends bring as Avast recognizes viruses as soon as I connect the drive.

PS: PC's have never been so much safer. If your PC has virus, it's solely because of you and nothing else.

SunnyChahal · 13-04-2009, 11:40 AM

MS gone nuts. Get ready for a new Mac ad pwning MS

BTW I've been using Vista SP2 Beta for 5 months now and it's very safe but you can't call it more secure than the likes of OS X or Linux. PERIOD!

**MetalheadGautham** · 13-04-2009, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by desiibond

Dude. ever heard about "restricted mode" login for windows and "Run as administrator" mode in windows. There are 11 different user account types in XP itself and each account has different set of security setup. Most of the users use Administrator type account for their userid and this is where the problem is.

setup your account as "standard user" or "restricted user" and when you try to install app using "run as admin" mode, it asks for admin password.

The reason for virus attacks is purely due to illiteracy on users' part. The last virus attack that my PC had was years ago and that too because of my idiot friend who connected my HDD to his PC (he thought his PC is virus free when it is fully loaded).

I have been using Avast+win7 UAC and I feel totally secure. Not even a single virus attack and now I don't have to worry about scanning external drives that my friends bring as Avast recognizes viruses as soon as I connect the drive.

PS: PC's have never been so much safer. If your PC has virus, it's solely because of you and nothing else.

11 different user modes ? How ? Give details.

I need to log in as administrator each time I need to alter files which are write protected against normal users.

I need to run several apps only as admin or they fail to run.

Does atleast 1 of those 11 user modes help here ? (non admin)

desiibond · 13-04-2009, 02:40 PM

"Standard User"

Users can change many system settings and install programs that don't effect Windows system settings
-----------------------------------------
Posted again:
-----------------------------------------
give it a try once.

Try windows 7 (you can take a copy of it from me if you want), setup up Avast home edition + UAC and see how much secure it is.

PS: when the OS is used by majority of PC user community, when every single hacker/cracker on earth tries to break it and it is still as secure as linux, then of course I would say that it's security is much more powerful than Linux or any other OS.

desiibond · 13-04-2009, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

11 different user modes ? How ? Give details.

You need to check for yourself mate

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

I need to log in as administrator each time I need to alter files which are write protected against normal users.

I need to run several apps only as admin or they fail to run.

That's what restriction means. Can you install an app in linux without changing to root. can you change permission on any file in linux for which you are not the owner?

As I said earlier, there is an option to run as admin:

If it's the same in windows, how does it become a negative point. Be reasonable dude. Be reasonable!!!

Does atleast 1 of those 11 user modes help here ? (non admin)[/quote]

abhijangda · 13-04-2009, 03:06 PM

Linux (Fedora) is best ever o.s

desiibond · 13-04-2009, 03:11 PM

^^okay.

demoninside · 13-04-2009, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by desiibond

You need to check for yourself mate

That's what restriction means. Can you install an app in linux without changing to root. can you change permission on any file in linux for which you are not the owner?

As I said earlier, there is an option to run as admin:

If it's the same in windows, how does it become a negative point. Be reasonable dude. Be reasonable!!!

Does atleast 1 of those 11 user modes help here ? (non admin)

[/QUOTE]

You can install app with out having root access in Linux = True without problem, this is the best part with having diffrent set of permission level.

and you can change permission of a file even if you are not owner.

I don't have anything against windows, and even they are trying there best to make it more secure and better looking, yet it yikes me to spend money to get an OS.

But windows is windows and Linux is linux. What and why to compare, if you like Linux then so be it, if u like windows then so be it.

PS : I still like Linux more, as I can actually own it, develope it, evolve it, bug it and fix it, can do stress testing on it, Can do verious security testing without being worried to pay up again for new installs even if it is 1000 times.

So for ppl like me Linux is more suited.

**MetalheadGautham** · 13-04-2009, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by desiibond

You need to check for yourself mate

That's what restriction means. Can you install an app in linux without changing to root. can you change permission on any file in linux for which you are not the owner?

As I said earlier, there is an option to run as admin:

If it's the same in windows, how does it become a negative point. Be reasonable dude. Be reasonable!!!

There is a difference here in Linux. I just need to fire up the terminal pressing one of the special keys on my keyboard and type a line to install an app using sudo. Basically speaking, I don't enter desktop of root EVER.

That's what I want to do in windows. I am forced to log OUT and log in admin mode. And the run-as option is awesome, but I still can't do things like run filemanager in administrator mode, etc.

And is there something like fakeroot for Windows ? I.E, some old games compulsorily need administrator access though there is nothing in the game justifying its need. So is there an app to execute another app while fooling it that its being run as administrator ?

In a nutshell, I don't ever want to have to look at the desktop of administrator user except in safe mode.

Cool G5 · 13-04-2009, 05:13 PM

Guys, stop the bloody Lin vs Win war here. Let discuss the feature which MS says will make Win more secure than Mac and Lin.

P.S : I can't stop Loling on this claim, still I won't spoil tha party/false feeling of Win user's. Rock On

a_k_s_h_a_y · 13-04-2009, 05:13 PM

duhh !! even a kid in my college can be a security analyst.
in fact already is, has given seminars in Singapore, Pairs, LA.. etc. ROFL.
he had the symantic engineers running to take cover when he was on stage.

Liverpool_fan · 13-04-2009, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abhijangda

Linux (Fedora) is best ever o.s

I know Fedora is good, but that's too much of a generic statement. Fedora may be best for you but Windows 7 may be best for someone else, Arch Linux for me and so on.

**MetalheadGautham** · 13-04-2009, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cool G5

Guys, stop the bloody Lin vs Win war here. Let discuss the feature which MS says will make Win more secure than Mac and Lin.

P.S : I can't stop Loling on this claim, still I won't spoil tha party/false feeling of Win user's. Rock On

Saurav was the only guy warring. I am asking questions here not bashing windows.

desiibond · 13-04-2009, 05:19 PM

http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/windo...windows-vista/

also, at run window, you can start command prompt in admin mode by using Ctrl+shift+enter key combination. yes, it's inferior to linux's command prompt, but it is there for use.

PS: It just needs some search to know. Windows that most of us know is user level but there is more to it.

For all your above needs, there is a simple option. As I said earlier use "standard user" login. It keeps windows safe and at the same time it gives you just the right priviledges. Try it out and let me know if you face any difficulties.

run windows explorer as Admin: http://blogs.msdn.com/aaron_margosis...07/175488.aspx

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cool G5

Guys, stop the bloody Lin vs Win war here. Let discuss the feature which MS says will make Win more secure than Mac and Lin.

P.S : I can't stop Loling on this claim, still I won't spoil tha party/false feeling of Win user's. Rock On

dude. who is fighting here???

**MetalheadGautham** · 13-04-2009, 05:23 PM

What about my question of fooling apps that demand admin access ? Some compilers and games for example do so.

Cool G5 · 13-04-2009, 05:27 PM

Some Interesting Links :

http://www.windowsvistaplace.com/is-...windows/linux/

http://forums.fedoraforum.org/archiv.../t-216227.html

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...5122356AAlzvc2

http://www.builderau.com.au/news/soa...9287864,00.htm

http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/is-lin...n-windows.html

Some articles are old, but I feel they still can be included here for a satisfying debate.

Liverpool_fan · 13-04-2009, 05:28 PM

BTW Has anyone tested SuRun on Windows 7? It worked great in XP and Vista. It Vista it felt less unobtrusive than UAC (except we had to enter password once), I'm unsure how well it works in Windows 7.

desiibond · 13-04-2009, 05:28 PM

^^ change your user mode to "Standard user" and try once

If it doesn't work, give me app names and I will try to find out a way to run them.
-----------------------------------------
Posted again:
-----------------------------------------
hmm. SuRun seems to be a good tool. let me try it out today after going home.

-----------------------------------------
Posted again:
-----------------------------------------

Quote:

Apple's Leopard OS lasted 30 second, Windows Vista Ultimate lasted until the third day, but Ubuntu's Linux distribution alone was left secure at the end of the "Pwn to Own contest" at CanSecWest security conference held in Vancouver.

LOL. 30 seconds????

Liverpool_fan · 13-04-2009, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by desiibond

hmm. SuRun seems to be a good tool. let me try it out today after going home.

You will LOVE it for sure, particularly in XP. It's sad though nobody knows about it though.

Cool G5 · 13-04-2009, 10:27 PM

For those who are not aware of Surun,

SuRun eases working with Windows 2000 or Windows XP with limited user rights.

The idea is simple and was taken from SuDown (http://SuDown.sourceforge.net).
The user usually works with the pc as standard user.
If a program needs administrative rights, the user starts "SuRun <app>".
SuRun then asks the user in a secure desktop if <app> should really be
run with administrative rights. If the user acknowledges, SuRun will start
<app> AS THE CURRENT USER but WITH ADMINISTRATIVE RIGHTS.
SuRun uses the trick from SuDown:
* Put the user in the local Administrators user group
* Start <app>
* Remove the user from the local Administrators user group

SuRun also installs a hook that appends "Run as admin..." and "Restart as
admin..." to the system menu of every application that does not run as
administrator. That makes it possible to accomplish tasks that you otherwise could not, e.g. setting the Windows clock by double clicking it in the task bar notification area would normally display a "Access denied" Message and exit. With SuRun you are able to click "Restart as admin..." and to set the clock.

SuRun integrates with the windows shell and adds "Start as admin..." to the
Shell context menu of bat, cmd, cpl, exe, lnk and msi files.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not use the built in "Run As..." Windows command?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Windows loads the registry and environment for the user that you run as.
If a software is about to be installed, the installation program will see
the admins HKEY_CURENT_USER and may create registry entries there.
Also the software sees "C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator" as the users profile path.

SuRun uses the current user account, so all registry entries and file system
paths are the same as the user would expect.

*Windows asks for the user name and password directly on the users desktop
Any spy (or even the friendly Autohotkey) could get an administrator password.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not use SuDown?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*SuDown can very easily be used to spy your account password.
SuDowns password dialog runs in the users desktop and the password can be caught by any application that uses Windows hooks, even by autohotkey.
*SuDown puts every SuDoer, after he logged on, into the Administrators group.
Spying the password and using it in a call to CreateProcessWithLogonW
would make the spy running as administrator.
*SuDown starts any process as administrator without asking for permission for a couple of minutes after the user entered the correct password.
*SuDown does not work in a plain Windows 2000 because the windows function "LogOnuser" in Windows 2000 requires a privilege that only system processes have.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why use SuRun?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*SuRun uses a secure desktop for sensitive user interaction:
SuRun uses a service to create a secure desktop in the window station of the users logon session. On that desktop it will ask the user for permission or the password. The desktop is not accessible by user applications. Keyboard and mouse hooks will also not work on that desktop.
*SuRun does not leave the user in the administrators group.
After creating the administrative process, SuRun removes the user from the administrators group immediately. So spying even out the password would not increase the chance that the system could be infected by malware.

Source : Another forum

To top it all, Surun is an Open Source Project 8)

gxsaurav · 13-04-2009, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

The fault with windows is the very nature of it, including the way you install apps.

What is wrong in it? Care to elaborate.?

Quote:

Its simply much easier to trick a windows user into letting in a malware than trick a Linux user.

No it is not unless you are using 8 years old Windows XP SP0. You tell me a such scenario how the user can be fooled?

Quote:

You need to log in as administrator for simple actions. Windows needs something like SUDO to become safer.

Its there, call UAC in Vista. And do tell me what simple actions r those for which windows needs Admin access

Quote:

As for Vista SP2, I am giving it time.

It doesn't matter if you give it time or not. You r not an analyst & your opinion hardly matters.

Quote:

BTW I've been using Vista SP2 Beta for 5 months now and it's very safe but you can't call it more secure than the likes of OS X or Linux.

Why not, please stop believing in word of mouth, learn something from the Mojave Project & state why u think Windows is not as secure or more secure then Linux.

Quote:

I need to log in as administrator each time I need to alter files which are write protected against normal users.

If they are system related files, then it will ask your for admin access which is logical. The same happens in linux so why is Windows wrong when it does the same thing in a better GUI way instead of typing a command.

Quote:

I need to run several apps only as admin or they fail to run.

Which apps r they? I am using Vista since it came & no app requires me to use it as admin.

Quote:

Originally Posted by demoninside

you can change permission of a file even if you are not owner

Then it is a security flow in Linux. This way something can change access of a file without admin rights & make changes to the computer.

Quote:

yet it yikes me to spend money to get an OS

It doesn't yikes to use the electricity, water for which you pay Bill so why does it yikes u to pay for a software which you use everyday of your life for many years to come whose return value is tremendous.

Quote:

There is a difference here in Linux. I just need to fire up the terminal pressing one of the special keys on my keyboard and type a line to install an app using sudo. Basically speaking, I don't enter desktop of root EVER

Windows makes this task easier for you instead of your pathetic Linux way. Just enter the admin password. its better then typing a command

Quote:

That's what I want to do in windows. I am forced to log OUT and log in admin mode.

No u r not, even if u r using XP/

Quote:

And the run-as option is awesome, but I still can't do things like run filemanager in administrator mode, etc

You can, right click on teh file, go to compatibility tab in Vista -> Run as admin. Done.

Quote:

In a nutshell, I don't ever want to have to look at the desktop of administrator user except in safe mode.

You don't have to. My sister's user in my PC is Standard user, when she tries to install an application UAC blocks her & asks for my user password as I am the admin. Once I enter my password, the software installs fine.

iMav · 13-04-2009, 11:46 PM

FUD alert! GX go to Delhi dude! The forums aren't any fun without the ghost of DRM.

Charan · 14-04-2009, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iMav

FUD alert! GX go to Delhi dude! The forums aren't any fun without the ghost of DRM.

lol

axxo · 14-04-2009, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gxsaurav

You don't have to. My sister's user in my PC is Standard user, when she tries to install an application UAC blocks her & asks for my user password as I am the admin. Once I enter my password, the software installs fine.

isn't the fact..you got to share the root password then? In unix sudo you still use your(user) password not the admin password.