CRN Testers shocked
AFTER A week of testing,
Computer Reseller News testers have found that Windows Vista is only marginally more secure than its predecessor Windows XP.
In a comparison review found
here, it seems that if you strip Vista and XP down to the bare bones you can find little between them.
The review said that Vista is 'riddled with holes', despite its much touted multilayer security architecture and embedded security tools.
It provided no improvement in virus protection. Vista brings little or no security gains over its predecessor against such threats as RDS exploits, script exploits, image exploits, VML exploits, malformed Web pages and known malicious URLs, the Test Centre found. Both failed to detect two worms and a virus.
While Vista's Windows Defender, which is designed to detect various malware, gave the new OS a slight edge over XP when detecting spyware and adware sites.
Vista blocked a trojan executable called Backdoor.Win32.Hupigon.emb but missed named Trojan-Spy.Win32.Goldun.ms and detected in September 2006, months before Vista's release.
Vista with IE 7 detected a bad remote data services ActiveX control from only one out of five PHP-based Web sites. Both failed to block spoofed content and vector-based images that had embedded scripts.
The review said that businesses that migrate their Windows PCs from XP to Vista will get a slightly more secure OS but one which is still 'wafer thin'.
The INQuirer
Linear Mode
