With Win7 you can't create a file in the root of C:, %systemroot%, %PROGFILES% etc unless you're elevated.
Dave -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 10:33 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: WTF? Fake AV Let me restart. I agree that the MAC OS is not more secure because it has a less infection rate. Horrible way to justify security. It's a better security model because by default all users are non admins, and the installation of anything requires the root password to install. This limits exploits the to the user rights and does not completely trash the box. This does not account for buffer overflows, memory exploits etc..but even those most tech releases show its still limited to user context not root.. I wanted to see a document that showed how Windows 7 helps limit exploits to the user context, and even if a user was higher privledge what does Win7 do to protect the kernel and main system files? -----Original Message----- From: Steven M. Caesare [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 1:22 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: WTF? Fake AV Let's not out words in my mouth, OK? I'm not arguing that the Win7 security model is "so much better than the OS/X security model." My stance is that the conclusion that was stated: The Mac OS is superior to Win 7 from security model perspective based on virus infection numbers is flawed. I've said before, and I'll say again: If you want to argue that the choices made for defaults in that model were not clamped down quickly enough in the name of compatibility, I might even be inclined to agree with you. But the mechanisms are there, and as of the last few years, much more sensible in terms of defaults, IMO. -sc > -----Original Message----- > From: John Aldrich [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 1:05 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: WTF? Fake AV > > Ok, Steven. As you say, the OP was comparing Win 7 with OS/X. Tell me why > you think the *current* Windows security model is so much better than the > OS/X security model? It would seem to me that the Linux\Unix\OS/x security > model would be stronger than Windows, as at least in Linux, if you try to > install something as a user it simply fails stating you don't have permission, > but in Windows, UAC actually *prompts* you to escalate privileges. At least > that's the way I see things (from a limited experience with Win Vista and Win > 7.) > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven M. Caesare [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 12:54 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: WTF? Fake AV > > A) hardware driver models are a somewhat different beast, and that's held > true for many a platform, and isn't really germane to what we are discussing > here. > > B) MS provided that info to HW devs FAAAAAR in advance. > > > The point is, carrying forward a user base in the 100's of millions and an app > base in the 10's of thousands requires some significant transitioning. Now > you can argue their timeing all you want, but the OP's comment had two > basic tennents that bear on this: > > 1) He was comparing current day OS's (i.e. Win7 vs "the Mac") > > 2) He was discussing the OS, not the apps written for them > > Using AV infection #'s to compare those things and draw the conclusion he > did is no accurate, IMO. > > -sc > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ben Scott [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 12:47 PM > > To: NT System Admin Issues > > Subject: Re: WTF? Fake AV > > > > On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Steven M. Caesare > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> " But when Microsoft wants to, say, create a new API for something, > > >> they just do, and abandon the old one, and everyone else has to > play > > catchup" > > > > > > I guess I haven't seen those multitude of Technet articles ... > > > > Yah, tell that to anyone who had hardware that lacks Vista drivers. > > Or has stuff written around Office 97-2003. The fact that sometimes > > Microsoft plays nice doesn't mean they always do. > > > > -- Ben > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ > > <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ > <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ > <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
