| Unsinkable Vista? |
Nov. 10, 2006
Opinion -- Vista doesn't need anti-viral software? That's what Jim Allchin, co-president of Microsoft's platforms and services division, said in a recent phone conference on Vista's release to manufacturing (RTM).
Specifically, according to BetaNews, Allchin said, "I'll give you an example: My son, seven years old, runs Windows Vista, and, honestly, he doesn't have an antivirus system on his machine. His machine is locked down with parental controls, he can't download things unless it's to the places that I've said that he could do, and I'm feeling totally confident about that. That is quite a statement. I couldn't say that in Windows XP SP2."
He also hedged his statement, "Please don't misunderstand me: This is an escalating situation. The hackers are getting smarter, there's more at stake, and so there's just no way for us to say that some perfection has been achieved. But I can say, knowing what I know now, I feel very confident."
Why am I reminded of White Star Line Vice President P.A.S. Franklin, who said, upon the news that the Titanic was in trouble in the North Atlantic that, "We place absolute confidence in the Titanic. We believe the boat is unsinkable."
Could it be because the security companies like Symantec are already finding basic problems with Vista security?
Could it be because the Yankee Group -- a research house that historically has been friendly to Microsoft -- said that the intrusive nature of Vista's security will keep IT administrators and users alike from using it?
Could it be because in a recent comparison of anti-spyware programs, Microsoft's Microsoft Windows Defender (Beta 2), which is being built into Vista, came in last?
Or, could it be because people are already finding holes in Vista security?
For example, Microsoft has already had to patch a Vista attack vector, which could be used to slip unsigned drivers past its security policies. Then, there's Vista's Web browser, Internet Explorer 7. It still has an ancient window injection vulnerability that dates back to December of 2004!
Let's get real.
The Titanic sank. Vista will be cracked.
The better answer is, as it has been for years, the Linux desktop.
Don't get me wrong. It's not that Linux can't be cracked. It can.
Open-source software is vulnerable. Only a few days ago, for example, Mozilla released a group of critical security updates aimed at improving security in its Firefox v1.5x web browser series, Thunderbird email client, and SeaMonkey web application suite.
The key difference is that, comparatively speaking, the Linux desktop and open-source software applications have proven to be far more secure than Windows and proprietary software.
You can argue until you're blue in the face why that's so. You can say it's only because hackers target Windows far more than they do Linux. You're wrong. It's because Windows, and its software, has been, is now, and looks like it always will be fundamentally flawed. But, that's not the point.
The point is that for all practical purposes the Linux desktop is far more secure than any Windows desktop.
Allchin can let his kid run Vista without anti-virus software. You can also drive a car without wearing a seat belt. And, almost a century ago, you could have bought a round-trip ticket on the Titanic. Me? I'll keep using Linux, wearing my seat belt, and, if I had to sail across the Atlantic, I think I'd take a liner with a southern route.
-- Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
Do you have comments on this story?
Talkback here
NOTE: Please post your comments regarding our articles using the above link. Be sure to use this article's title as the "Subject" in your posts. Before you create a new thread, please check to see if a discussion thread is already running on the article you plan to comment on. Thanks!
Related Stories:
(Click here for further information)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
