Print 77 comment(s) - last by JMecc.. on Oct 4 at 3:34 PM

Vendors claim that being denied access to the core of Vista seriously hampers their ability to protect users

McAfee Inc. has thrown down the gauntlet in its dispute with Microsoft's decision to lock down the core of their Vista operating system. The security software vendor has a full-page ad in today's Financial Times which berates Microsoft.

McAfee argues that Microsoft is making its upcoming Windows Vista operating system far more difficult to protect by locking non-Microsoft processes out of the kernel. Symantec had a similar beef with this move by Microsoft which was reported on recently by Windows IT Pro:

Symantec has also complained about a new security feature called Kernel PatchGuard that prevents software--malicious or otherwise--from altering the Windows kernel at runtime. In the past, security companies have been forced to patch the Windows kernel because so much malicious software does so as well. That process will not be possible in Windows Vista, which should make the system more secure. Symantec wants it removed.

Microsoft claims that this will keep Vista more secure by allowing only certified programs to access vital components of Windows, but McAfee openly mocks this in its advertisement by challenging:

"Microsoft is being completely unrealistic if, by locking security companies out of the kernel, it thinks hackers won't crack Vista's kernel. In fact, they already have."

A Microsoft representative dismissed this accusation, citing a close relationship with security partners during the development of Windows Vista. On the other side of the coin, vendor Trend Micro currently has a beta release of their anti-virus software available for Vista, which may have prompted other companies to suspect preferential treatment.

A scan of the article was unavailable at the time of this posting.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Norton sucks
By exdeath on 10/2/2006 3:12:42 PM , Rating: 3
Does anyone ever willingly use the Symantec/Norton crap? We get brand new Dell PCs here at the office and you can't do anything the first 10 minutes the machine boots because of all the Norton stuff popping up on the system tray.

Then when there is a network problem you can’t diagnose it because there are 20 Symantec services hooked into the network stack that you have to disable to remove them from the troubleshooting equation, and then disabling those leaves disconnected gaps in the stack so it doesn’t function like normal, only real option is to uninstall.

That shit is the first thing I uninstall when optimizing a new OEM machine

RE: Norton sucks
By Ard on 10/2/2006 10:42:49 PM , Rating: 2
Can't say I agree. Now, I'm a home user, not a corporate one, but I've never had any issues with NIS 2006 (whether we're talking about resource use or system slowdown). I recently purchased NIS 2007 and I love it even more. It's incredibly streamlined and far less intrusive. So yes, there are those of use who use it by choice.

"You can bet that Sony built a long-term business plan about being successful in Japan and that business plan is crumbling." -- Peter Moore, 24 hours before his Microsoft resignation
Related Articles

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki