|
|
User Controls
|
New User
|
Login
|
Edit/View My Profile
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac
|
Articles
|
Forums
|
Links
|
News
|
News Search
|
Reviews
|
|
|
|
News Centers
|
Windows/Microsoft
|
DVD
|
ActiveHardware
|
Xbox
|
MaINTosh
|
News Search
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats
|
The Lobby
|
Special Events Room
|
Developer's Lounge
|
XBox Chat
|
|
|
|
FAQ's
|
Windows 98/98 SE
|
Windows 2000
|
Windows Me
|
Windows "Whistler" XP
|
Windows CE
|
Internet Explorer 6
|
Internet Explorer 5
|
Xbox
|
DirectX
|
DVD's
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips
|
Registry Tips
|
Windows 95/98
|
Windows 2000
|
Internet Explorer 4
|
Internet Explorer 5
|
Windows NT Tips
|
Program Tips
|
Easter Eggs
|
Hardware
|
DVD
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews
|
Applications
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002
|
|
Hardware
|
Intel Personal Audio Player
3000
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse
Explorer
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info
|
About This Site
|
Affiliates
|
ANet Forums
|
Contact Us
|
Default Home Page
|
Link To Us
|
Links
|
Member Pages
|
Site Search
|
Awards
|
|
|
|
Credits
©1997/2004, Active Network. All
Rights Reserved.
Layout & Design by
Designer Dream. Content
written by the Active Network team. Please click
here for full terms of
use and restrictions or read our
Privacy Statement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time:
00:28 EST/05:28 GMT | News Source:
ComputerWorld |
Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum |
As corporate vice president of Trustworthy Computing (TwC) at Microsoft Corp., Scott Charney is among those at the helm of the company's long-standing efforts to improve the security of its products. In an interview with Computerworld, Charney -- a former federal prosecutor of computer crimes and an assistant district attorney in the Bronx before that -- talked about TwC, the changing threat environment and what security fears keep him awake at night.
|
|
#1 By
1401 (65.255.137.241)
at
9/24/2007 11:03:09 AM
|
I think Windows Vista has taken over the role as Microsoft's laughing stock...
|
#2 By
15406 (216.191.227.68)
at
9/24/2007 12:09:05 PM
|
#1: Ba-da-boom! But seriously, who would actually believe anything MS says when talking about it's own security track record?
|
#3 By
7754 (206.169.247.2)
at
9/24/2007 1:47:46 PM
|
Latch, which track record do you want to discuss? The one from YEARS AGO--IIS 4/5, Windows 2000, SQL 2000 pre-SP4... or the one from NOW--IIS 6, Windows 2003/Vista, SQL 2005?
You've already decided what you believe, so what difference does the evidence make?
|
#4 By
32132 (64.180.206.166)
at
9/24/2007 3:45:40 PM
|
We certainly know that VMWare dumped RedHat out of ESX for security reasons.
|
#5 By
37047 (74.101.157.125)
at
9/24/2007 6:29:29 PM
|
"Microsoft no longer a 'laughingstock' of security" says Microsoft.
This will become worthy of discussion if, and only if, some reputable source makes the claim. Otherwise, with Microsoft making the claim on its own behalf, it is not even newsworthy.
|
#6 By
15406 (99.224.112.94)
at
9/24/2007 7:35:20 PM
|
#3: It's impossible to gauge MS as all you have to go on is released patches instead of submitted issues. Just the other day someone went public with a bug that they submitted to MS 3 months ago. Then there's their habit of releasing a single patch that fixes many problems and spinning it like it's one problem per patch. Then there was the kerfuffle about how they decided to change their own rules on severity rating so that issues were made to look less severe. We've been through all of this before. While I believe MS is getting better, I just don't trust a word they say, especially when it's totally self-serving.
|
#7 By
32132 (64.180.206.166)
at
9/24/2007 8:04:38 PM
|
A factual refutation from the 2 stooges would shock me to the core. Not going to happen is it?
|
#8 By
20505 (216.102.144.11)
at
9/24/2007 8:37:14 PM
|
#6
Do you use Windows XP?
When was the last time you got a virus?
With patched computers at my office and home (say 40 or so machines), a good firewall and anti-virus program I haven't had to deal with a virus in some time.
Before telling me that with, say, Linux or OSX you don't need a firewall or anti-virus program - I would submit that going without such security is foolish in the extreme. So what's the diff?
|
#9 By
7754 (75.72.156.204)
at
9/24/2007 10:08:53 PM
|
I just don't trust a word they say, especially when it's totally self-serving.
The fact of the matter is that you don't trust what anyone says when it comes to Microsoft, unless it supports your pre-existing beliefs about them, i.e., when it's negative. Who would you believe? Do you really expect Linus to come out and say, "Oh yeah, Microsoft kicks our butt now in security"? Do you expect the Slashdot crowd to say it? If it comes from anyone besides Microsoft, obviously they were paid off, so we as the judge and jury find them guilty, and let's attack them. No, no need to look at the evidence. There's no reason even to examine it.
Is a person in court representing themselves automatically discredited because of it? No. It's still all about the evidence. And, the recent products from Microsoft speak quite well for themselves, regardless of what I say, what you say, what Microsoft says, what Linus says, what Steve Jobs says, what Symantec says, what Rutkowska says... what anyone says.
|
#10 By
28801 (65.90.202.10)
at
9/25/2007 7:18:56 AM
|
In Latch's programming experience, he has completely secured his "Hello World" app. He expects nothing less from Microsoft.
|
#11 By
15406 (216.191.227.68)
at
9/25/2007 8:54:42 AM
|
#8: What you're overlooking is that the people here on ActiveWin (yes, even parkkker, scary as it sounds) are in the top 1% of computer users globally. We know how to protect against the deficiencies in Windows as best we can with anti-virus, anti-malware, anti-rootkit software. The majority of users don't know about these things. Why do you think there are millions of bots being used to spew spam and DDoS sites?? With MS saying that they are no longer a laughingstock, that is confirmation that they consider that they *used* to be poor with regard to security. But during that time they were poor on security, they were still claiming they had a handle on security. So, why should anyone believe them now? That goes hand in hand with the ir usual line "Yesterday's Windows was crap, but our new shiny Windows is da bomb"... 3 years later: "Yesterday's Windows was crap, but our new shiny Windows is da bomb"... rinse, lather, repeat.
#9: When someone or something has a long track record of outright lying, twisting facts and other distortions, I tend to cast a cynical eye on everything they say and do.
|
#12 By
28801 (65.90.202.10)
at
9/25/2007 9:12:39 AM
|
"But during that time they were poor on security, they were still claiming they had a handle on security. "
Uhhhh No! Don't you remember the trustworthy initiative. Microsoft realized they sucked with with respect to security back then and took steps to remedy it. They are light years ahead of where they were. In fact, given the number of apps, the lines of code, and the integration of their apps, I am suprised they are as good as they are. Can they do better? Sure, but so can every other software company.
|
#13 By
47914 (24.225.231.107)
at
9/25/2007 9:31:03 AM
|
#11 This may sound sarcastic, but how do you know "The majority of users don't know about these things. " Plus how do you know activewin users are the top 1% (whatever that means)?
|
#14 By
32132 (64.180.206.166)
at
9/25/2007 10:43:27 AM
|
#11 "When someone or something has a long track record of outright lying, twisting facts and other distortions, I tend to cast a cynical eye on everything they say and do."
Everytime you look in the mirror that "cycnical eye" gets a workout.
|
#15 By
37047 (216.191.227.68)
at
9/25/2007 10:49:52 AM
|
#14: "Everytime you look in the mirror that "cycnical eye" gets a workout."
Ahh, another ad hominem attack, without any facts or examples to back it up. Just what we have come to expect from you. Typical of the Microbot mentality around these parts, which you exemplify well.
I'll have fries with that.
|
#16 By
23275 (71.12.191.230)
at
9/25/2007 11:06:02 AM
|
I don't think that any operating system is any more secure today than it was - not relative to the highly capable people working against them. I asses any person and any company that does not respect the skills of even the most criminal of hackers is being naive.
What has definately improved is the skill and awareness of the user, small network admin, and business owner. I assess many enterprises have always had great admins.
The validity of what Microsoft asserts as being improved in this context, does in part to their efforts to approach security from a perspective of layers - now objects, too.... as in securable objects.
MS has worked very hard to inform and educate users of its software and appropriately include them in the solution - making them a principle component in a safer and more secure computing environment. I do assess that these efforts to educate and inform on a continuous basis, have done more to secure systems than we may assume. As part of a much more comprehensive program to improve security, MS has indeed done very well - apply aided by the users of their products.
|
#17 By
37047 (216.191.227.68)
at
9/25/2007 11:33:11 AM
|
#16: Well said!
The best security measure is a user well educated on security matters. Everything else can be coded around.
|
#18 By
32132 (142.32.208.232)
at
9/25/2007 12:16:49 PM
|
"Ahh, another ad hominem attack"
Really? Latch said he had a "cynical eye". Logically I assumed that when he looks in the mirror he would see that "cynical eye" in action.
Are you suggesting he didn't claim to have a "cynical eye"?
Are you suggesting he has a black patch over it so he wouldn't see it in the mirror?
You and the other stooges are not very bright are you?
This post was edited by NotParker on Tuesday, September 25, 2007 at 12:17.
|
#19 By
2960 (68.100.112.199)
at
9/25/2007 12:26:24 PM
|
As long as drive-by spyware installs still happen (and they do), then ain't nothin' been fixed.
TL
|
#20 By
37047 (216.191.227.68)
at
9/25/2007 1:13:37 PM
|
#18: More hair splitting and truth bending. Signs of the truly desperate. And more ad hominems. Just more typical nonsense from the chief shill. And another post you couldn't manage to get through without having to revisit it. At least there are others here who are able to make an intelligent statement.
lketchum: How is it going with that twit filter? We could really use it here. Then, I, Latch, and a few others could filter NotParker, and he could filter us, and we'd all enjoy this site much better.
|
#21 By
37047 (216.191.227.68)
at
9/25/2007 1:14:15 PM
|
#19: I'll second that!!
|
#22 By
32132 (142.32.208.232)
at
9/25/2007 3:35:52 PM
|
#20 "More hair splitting and truth bending."
Where?
You stooges should learn to read before coming here to post your crap.
|
#23 By
20505 (64.60.114.101)
at
9/25/2007 3:48:59 PM
|
#19
Not to be argumentative but for my info only. Does this happen with Vista?
|
#24 By
23275 (71.12.191.230)
at
9/25/2007 9:17:51 PM
|
#20 Awin 3.0 is actually going very well. Much better than I thought it would. It's a tough kind of site to build, in reality - since it has to be exactly what each person wants and the way they want it. We set some really tough design goals. I didn't want it to be just like all other, or even like anything we had done. The best way to put it is it has been like really training hard - almost to the point of over-training, but not quite - to see what really could be done in SW in the browser as well as brand new Rich Internet Applications. My hope for it is that the RIA side will off-set the propensity for people to just RSS sites like this and be able to fold in relevant ads in ways that work with and for the user as well as the site owners. As I said, it has been tough - it has things like the ability to find the right answers and people to the questions people may have and to chain threads, ideas, and logic - so if people want to just have fun they can, but if they want to seriously explore a subject, they can do that, too.
#23, Vista presents an OS that for now, has a lot less surface area - opposite better educated users all that really means is that for now, Vista is easier to make and keep more secure. If you want to end drive-bys, use Haute Secure for IE 7 on XP and Vista - http://www.hautesecure.com/ it really does work.
|
#25 By
7754 (206.169.247.2)
at
9/26/2007 10:35:43 AM
|
#19, for the love of Pete, switch to Standard (non-admin) users already.
|
|
|
|
|