Report From Symantec - Vista Blocks Almost All Malware

[Saucy]

[Symantec: Vista Blocks Almost All Malware, For Now]
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2099225,00.asp

Interesting.

 

[NoStop]

[Symantec: Vista Blocks Almost All Malware, For Now]
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2099225,00.asp

Interesting.

Yes, it is interesting, but certainly not new news.

"Symantec's researchers concluded that Vista isn't a secure operating
system – just more secure than previous versions. While many existing
malware threats can't install under Vista, Symantec anticipates malware
authors will quickly adapt."

I wonder how much more secure Vista is then previous versions if users turn
off UAC?

Cheers.

 

[Mark]

I wonder how much more secure Vista is then previous versions if users turn
off UAC?

UAC in Vista is a real annoyance and its ashame that users may need to
learn how to use the Local Security Policy to modify its behavior.
However, if Microsoft would have changed UAC's behavior where it prompts
for Administrator access, such as accessing root in Linux or Mac OS X to
run an administrative process, this method would make Vista appear more
controlling of its security rather than security by scarcity.

The UAC is annoying and tiresome in Vista. This is one reason I
continue to use Windows XP over Vista.

Novice and average users may not want to modify the Local Security
Policy to tame the UAC behavior. UAC's design and behavior should
already have been tamed.

Windows Vista Secret #4: Disabling UAC
http://blogs.msdn.com/tims/archive/2006/09/20/windows-vista-secret-4-disabling-uac.aspx

 

[Saucy]

Something had to budge one way or another. Since most people want/need to
have admin power over their personal computers .. and yet remain 'dumb'
about security, Microsoft has introduced this UAC device. How could it
possibly please everyone? It can't. But it is a good effort and will reduce
some of the problems inherent in having a huge user base running a general
purpose operating system.

One can re-enable UAC through User Accounts found in the Control Panel.
While some of the savvy might want to turn it off at first while installing
all their apps and configuring their devices, once done it might be a smart
idea to re-enable it - especially if more than one person is at the machine
or if one wants a double-check done on security.

 

[Mark \(MCP\)]

Something had to budge one way or another. Since most people want/need to
have admin power over their personal computers .. and yet remain 'dumb'
about security, Microsoft has introduced this UAC device. How could it
possibly please everyone? It can't. But it is a good effort and will
reduce some of the problems inherent in having a huge user base running a
general purpose operating system.

Vista's UAC does not prompt when a program runs in the background from
another process or task, only alerts the user when the user runs (or
double-clicks on to run) on the program. Since malware, viruses, etc. all
run in the background and without user intervention, I just don't the UAC
prompting to warn the user or users about these types of programs.

I use both an Administrator and Standard User accounts in Vista and I have
ran programs requiring Administrator access in the Standard User account
bypassing the UAC. After I thought the UAC didn't prompt, I ran the program
again and held down one or two key combinations to bypass the UAC. Although
I haven't consistently found a pattern that works, it seems the UAC can be
bypassed through a Standard User account.

I'm not saying the UAC is a bad feature or a wrong feature, just the UAC
feature could have been implemented more intuitively without annoying the
user.

 

[Saucy]

Vista's UAC does not prompt when a program runs in the background from
another process or task, only alerts the user when the user runs (or
double-clicks on to run) on the program. Since malware, viruses, etc. all
run in the background and without user intervention, I just don't the UAC
prompting to warn the user or users about these types of programs.

I use both an Administrator and Standard User accounts in Vista and I have
ran programs requiring Administrator access in the Standard User account
bypassing the UAC. After I thought the UAC didn't prompt, I ran the
program again and held down one or two key combinations to bypass the UAC.
Although I haven't consistently found a pattern that works, it seems the
UAC can be bypassed through a Standard User account.

I'm not saying the UAC is a bad feature or a wrong feature, just the UAC
feature could have been implemented more intuitively without annoying the
user.

Yes, but malware has to have a "first run". It must get installed somehow.
It's when the user first clicks that the downloaded malware is caught by
UAC - before it executes etc. etc. If the malware gets installed, well,
then, essentially it could be too late by that time. I agree, though, that
it is naive to think UAC is the end all of malware.

 

[Mark \(MCP\)]

Yes, but malware has to have a "first run". It must get installed somehow.
It's when the user first clicks that the downloaded malware is caught by
UAC - before it executes etc. etc. If the malware gets installed, well,
then, essentially it could be too late by that time. I agree, though, that
it is naive to think UAC is the end all of malware.

The UAC is not very alert to background processes that run without user
intervention, such as installers. Thus the malicious software and whatever
else that may install will get installed. The UAC does NOT prompt the user
in these situations, only what the user clicks on in Vista. This does not
seem like security to me.

I have yet to read (or see) documentation on why users should not disable
the UAC. I've read a lot of messages not to disabled the UAC, but no
information provided what is does not prevent. However, its possible that
if this information had already been provided in this newsgroup I missed the
message(s).

 

[Guest]

Vista's UAC does not prompt when a program runs in the background from
another process or task, only alerts the user when the user runs (or
double-clicks on to run) on the program. Since malware, viruses, etc. all
run in the background and without user intervention, I just don't the UAC
prompting to warn the user or users about these types of programs.

YOU'RE WRONG!!!
The program runs in the brackound is suspended on UAC window that is
minimized and only when the user maximized that windows, the user gives the
permissions by UAC

 

[Guest]

The UAC is not very alert to background processes that run without user
intervention, such as installers. Thus the malicious software and whatever
else that may install will get installed. The UAC does NOT prompt the user
in these situations, only what the user clicks on in Vista. This does not
seem like security to me.

YOU'RE WRONG!!!
The program runs in backgound is suspended on UAC window that is minimized
and only when the user maximized that windows, the user gives the permissions
by UAC