Printable View
So, everybody loves to make fuss of things about windows. I personally feel every tool can be efficient if used properly. Today, someone asked me to outline 10 points why geeks think that Windows is unsafe?
I can think of 1 at the moment. Love to see your reason! ;)
1 - access to root
2 - [your reason]
3 - [your reason]
4 - [your reason]
5 - [your reason]
6 - [your reason]
.......
central registry
embedded applications ie. Internet explorer
lack of diversity , as in most everyone uses outlook express and IE
closed source
1 Files are shattered all over your disk (do you know what the files do ?)
2 It is closed source (do you know what your files do ?)
3 initial sequence prediction
4 VBScript/ActiveX (Do you know what is happening when you browse the web ?)
5 Bad code/DLL injection
6 Bad implemantation of default mail client, highly vulnarable.
7 Open ports that dont need to be opened on a normal install (135, 137-139, 445, 1024, 1900,5000,)
8 Bad documentation
9 Bad impemantation of a firewall (XP) which interferes with other firewalls.
10 Lack of anylising tools.
You asked for ten, I just made ten up quickly.
Interesting question. I really want to see more opinions on this one.
Keep in mind that MS developed Windows originally with 'Ease of Use' in mind, not security. This was quite a while back. They did a pretty good job in developing an easy to use system. But today we need secure systems.
I like MS OSes as long as they are behind NAT or protected by a good FW.
;)
*sigh* Another Microsoft bashing thread.
lol, what's new??Quote:
Read the following story and you'll know why I was making fuss of M$ Windows again! :)
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...l=969048863851
But M$ still insists their systems are secure! heheQuote:
Keep in mind that MS developed Windows originally with 'Ease of Use' in mind, not security. This was quite a while back. They did a pretty good job in developing an easy to use system. But today we need secure systems.
No they dont.Quote:
But M$ still insists their systems are secure! hehe
They started a 'trusthworthy computing initiative' because they realise what time is it.
They never intended to make their systems secure untill a couple of months ago when the TWComputing started.
They made their systems with ease of use in mind and they did a pretty good job at it.
Now with highspeed internet available to more and more people they realised that security is a big issue.
If you connected your Windows 95 to a BBS you did not have to worry about all the skids and other scum you have to worrie about now. Security was not that much of an issue back then.
Do the knowledge.
Never thought i would see a pakiblue person in here. For those of you who dont know pakiblue or pakisblue (think thats right) is a hacker group. They have a website out there somewhere but my question is why would you choose that name if your not one of them and if you are why would you join a security site?
Hmm Windows security issues...
it is funny, many of the things several of you have said are not only not weaknesses, but are in fact security strengths and are part of why the NT line is the most secure standard operating system. (central registry!)
Others of you are just off in lala land (Windows doesn't have a root user!)
The main security issues Windows suffers starting with the most obvious include:
Too large a market. This means that a good portion of it's users will not be nor inclined to be educated on the system, thus requiring MS to ship a more functional, less secure product. While on an objective system vs system comparison Windows beats the hell out of systems like Linux and even OpenBSD as far as security is concerned. (against both tcsec and iso15408)
Windows lacks mandatory access controls. Add a two tier MAC system (hierarchical + intralevel domians) for both integrity and confidentiality and Windows would be in the top 5 most secure operting systems that exist (up there with the likes of STOP, LOCK, and AITS)
Lastly NT has been designed with security foremost in mind since NT 3.51 hence it features a nice balance between usability (simple ACL inhieritance) and high security that doesn't require the users to learn new things. (B2 audit trails)
catch
Your probably going to catch hell for that one catch. Personally though I agree. I have been using windows for years without any problems...other than the bsod...and I haven't had a single one of those since upgrading to xp. I have never had a virus or worm infect my computer, nor has it ever been hacked. Windows is always pointed to as the "unsecure" os because of the publicity M/S receives in general. Why are they always having virus' and worms developed against them? For the simple reason that they have the most popular os out there. You buy a computer...it has windows on it (until recently or else you bought a mac). Why should the skiddies and haxors "waste the time" trying to learn how to crack a linux box when there are so many thousands more out there with windows on them. IF linux or any other os ever engenders the popularity that windows receives then you can bet your ass that the skiddies and the haxors are going to get busier against them too.Quote:
While on an objective system vs system comparison Windows beats the hell out of systems like Linux and even OpenBSD as far as security is concerned. (against both tcsec and iso15408)
Thats my opinion and I'll probably get burned for it too. :D
i always figured windows 9x with any decent firewall (zone alarm) to really be one of the safer systems out there for the basic guy. Why? 'Cause windows 9x was never intended to be a big time network os with lots of services. As long as file and print sharing is off and a firewall is active, what is there for major remote-access security risks/holes?
On the other hand, *nix, *bsd or any unix based os is incredibly difficult to secure and even when you think it is, another hole comes out. I'll probly get hell for liking windows, sorry folks. I happily accept any constuctive (constructive being the key word) critisism for my opinion, just dont hurt me.
Every OS is going to have weaknesses, just like pretty much any security program. There are always backdoors that someone is going to find. Like amorphous said, how many "mainstream hackers" are going to develop a worm or trojen for Linux or openBSD? The only reason that Windows is weaker is because it has the largest number of people aimed at hacking it.
I think a few people are just to use to the Window bashing threads or something - and are taking this as being like the rest - as it seems the last few posts had nothing to do with the subject of the thread...
This thread was NOT about what OS is better or safer then the next, if that was the case there is no real point in discussing it - as Catch pointed out there are simple security standards each system has been compaired to and scored on. Its a matter of fact not debate, unless you're debating the legitimacy of the standards...
As Cerveza and catch have both done - this thread is nothing more then someone asking what in each of our own "OPINIONs" are the weaknesses to Windows OS, as ALL OSes have some weaknesses and what some people think of as a weakness others may not - which is why their called opinions... (No where did he say - 'security weaknesses' or 'exploitable weaknesses' - just weaknesses in general)
ANYWAYS, back onto the topic... Hmm some of the things I think of as weaknesses to Windows:
1- File Fragmentation
2- Imbedded applications (IE, OutlookExpress,etc)
3- Overly Dumbed Down (MACs - OSX excluded - are for people looking for toys, PCs are machines and should be learned how to be used first)
4- DLL H*ll
5- Overly Used (relates to #3)
Are what I come up with quickly...
RRP
I'd say the #1 weakness is the people that use it. The only reason viruses get around in the first place are the people who Download e-mail attachments titled "vacationpic.exe" and assume it's safe because it's from a friend. So, before everyone says "Microsoft doesn't give a crap about security" just remember that a lot of people don't know what a firewall or antivirus is, and that's part of the reason why so many Windows Boxes get attacked. Now the vulnerabilities are MS's fault, but they atleast patch them when they're discovered and don't just sit on their ass and act like nothing happened.
The actual question was:
That sounds a pretty level question to me?Quote:
So, everybody loves to make fuss of things about windows. I personally feel every tool can be efficient if used properly. Today, someone asked me to outline 10 points why geeks think that Windows is unsafe?
I suppose the answer is in what do you mean by a "geek" I would venture to suggest that a large number of IT professionals who visit this site probably make their living in part at least out of Microsoft products (patching them probably :D ).
Also, if it is that unsafe, why is it the biggest and most popular OS in the World?
If "geeks" think that Windows is unsafe, it is because they are ignorant of how it works, and prejudiced, possibly as a result of some kind of inverted snobbery. I think that you answer that part of your own question when you say that every tool can be efficient if used properly.
All operating systems have flaws, Windows is the biggest and most successful of them, so it is subjected to the most attacks, and is the most fashionable to "knock"
I am not really that interested in what this mythical tribe of "Geeks" think, do or say. I AM interested in the opinions of senior IT professionals, CIOs and the like, who have the power to sign off multimillion dollar corporate purchase orders. After all they made Bill Gates the richest man on Earth didn't they?
I still believe that there is far more danger from unsafe implementations of operating systems, than from the OSes themselves.
Just a little philosophical slant, and my answer to the first part of your question.
Cheers