Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Windows Chief Suggests Vista Won't Need Antivirus

CowboyNeal posted more than 7 years ago | from the steadfastly-bulletproof dept.

361

LadyDarth writes "During a telephone conference with reporters yesterday, outgoing Microsoft co-president Jim Allchin, while touting the new security features of Windows Vista, which was released to manufacturing yesterday, told a reporter that the system's new lockdown features are so capable and thorough that he was comfortable with his own seven-year-old son using Vista without antivirus software installed."

cancel ×

361 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

So that makes it... (1, Troll)

aliscool (597862) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790656)

As capable as my IMac I guess.
Good job Microsoft. Only a year or more after Apple.

right... (2, Funny)

quickpick (1021471) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790658)

that's like the annoying kid who's just asking to get his butt kicked in Bully...uh oh is that Jack Thompson??

windows? no antivirus? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16790662)

hahaha ho ho ho that's rich

i bet he still belives in santa claus

If users can... (5, Insightful)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790670)

Run a program which sends out mass mails, or communicates with a server or does other actions then malicious people will write malicious code.
Just because a virus cannot harm the operating system does not mean it is harmless.

Also reported: (5, Funny)

Spazntwich (208070) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790672)

Average user won't need Vista.

Hindsight being 20/20... (5, Funny)

Mad Merlin (837387) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790676)

Who plans on bookmarking this story so they can laugh heartily at it again in a year?

no antivirus? (4, Insightful)

Quasar1999 (520073) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790678)

Sure... and I'm comfortable driving a car with no airbags! Doesn't mean that everyone doesn't want an airbag!

bahahahahahhahahahahahahahhahahahah (4, Funny)

Bin_jammin (684517) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790682)

no, stop, you're killing me, ahhahahahahahhahahhahahhahahhahhahhha

I've used XP SP2 without AV for years (5, Interesting)

patio11 (857072) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790684)

Never had a problem. Of course, I use Firefox, a NAT, and don't visit porn sites or use P2P, which pretty much cuts my attack vectors to zero. Haven't had any AdWare in, hmm, 4 years or so either. I have AdAware installed on my computer but haven't bothered running it in about 2 years since it never picks up anything.

Now I'm using IE7 as my main browser (quiet!) and don't anticipate any problems with it, either. Heck, its *more* paranoid than FF is some of the time (it will quibble about http refresh redirects to executables, for example).

i have to concur (5, Funny)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790686)

i've been trying it out, and vista works for me, naked on the internet, without a single problem. in fact i would go so far as to say that V1AGRA HOOD1A GR0W Y0UR PEN1S L0W M0RTGAGE RATES L0SE WE1GHT MEET BARELY LEGAL TEENS SEE HARDC0RE SHEMALE ACTION

LIghtening fast (5, Funny)

luchaugh (860384) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790688)

That only took... what... 15-odd years. Seeing will be believing.

I remember.... (5, Interesting)

Bing Tsher E (943915) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790696)

....when they announced that Windows 2000 would never have a Service Pack release. One would never be needed.

(still have no use for XP, btw.)

Jeez.. (5, Insightful)

FunWithKnives (775464) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790698)

After summarizing that past statement, Allchin continued, "Please don't misunderstand me: This is an escalating situation. The hackers are getting smarter, there's more at stake, and so there's just no way for us to say that some perfection has been achieved. But I can say, knowing what I know now, I feel very confident."
If you RTFA, and then go back and read the title of this post, it's quite apparent that it's sensationalist and stupid. Of course Allchin thinks that this version of Windows will be the "Most Secure Evar". He works at Microsoft. Taking what he said out of context is just childish. But really, I suppose I shouldn't expect any less.

Reminds me of what they said about Win95. (4, Funny)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790702)

as I remember it was something like "you can't possibly write a virus for this operating system". Go get em boys.

Titanic (5, Funny)

fizzix (893004) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790708)

Sounds a bit like some unsinkable ship.

My first thought was... (5, Insightful)

Brad1138 (590148) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790712)

To laugh. It always surprises me when someone says "we'll never need this" or "computers will never..." I remember a computer magazine editorial saying we would never store music on Hard Drives, it would take up to much space. These people never seem to think more that a few months or maybe a year into the future.

all a ploy to make more $ (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16790714)

See, if you don't run av, then when you get infected, you'll have to reload vi$ta (which they only let you do once). Then, you'll have to buy another copy of said OS.

Brilliant marketing $cheme

@LiquidCoooled, about zombies (5, Interesting)

Toveling (834894) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790716)

Windows Vista severly limits access to raw packet sending to non-priviledged apps, meaning that packet forging is much more difficult. Although the zombies that are sending seemingly alright content (at the protocol level) aren't affected, those that are doing the SYN/ACK DDOS floods will be.

I'm Glad It Will (1)

mpapet (761907) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790718)

I'll have plenty of work babysitting those desktops.

vuja de (4, Informative)

KillerBob (217953) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790720)

wow... haven't heard that one before.... No, really. I haven't.

No system is immune to viruses. All it takes is a stupid user to allow it, and we all know there's no shortage of that. That's why antivirus products exist for every major OS out there. Even Linux has antivirus apps (though granted, most of them are geared towards Linux boxen running as servers for Windows-based networks).

Oh wait. Technically, if it requires a stupid user's interaction to get in, it's not a virus. It's a trojan. I guess Vista really could be immune to viruses.... ;)

Hmm, and where have we heard this before (4, Interesting)

rimcrazy (146022) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790726)

Yea..........and 640K will be plenty of memory..........
And the world will only need 4 computers...................
And no one would ever need a computer at home..............

Sheesh......where do they come up with this stuff?

Typical fundie... (2, Funny)

RetlawST (997563) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790728)

This man would risk his child's life on a mere belief rather than give him some decent protection!!

Duh (5, Insightful)

ewl1217 (922107) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790730)

Of course a seven-year-old on a locked down computer wont be able to do any harm. Kids that age aren't into the sites (porn, illegal downloads, etc.) that are notorious for viruses and spyware. Not to mention that the kid's using a machine secured by parental controls and is most likely on a limited account. Wake me up when the average teenager can safely use Windows with an administrator account and no extra security software installed.

@Toveling (1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790732)

Aren't most Syn/Ack floods just damned impatient users swamping a site after news breaks that its "under attack"?
We are the main vehicle of a ddos ;)

Wait until he gets older... (5, Funny)

Arakageeta (671142) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790738)

You'll need to start worrying when he turns 12 or 13. ;)

Take the Apple Challenge (2, Interesting)

Fujisawa Sensei (207127) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790740)

Take the Apple Challenge: Put a Vista machine one the Net, and IIRC, make sure a telent daemon and web server are also running and give out the admin password. If nobody can crack it, we'll believe you, otherwise STFU.

Why do execs say things like this? (2, Insightful)

jsheedy (772604) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790744)

I have always wondered why execs make claims like this?? Hey this is so great nothing will ever break it, I dare you to try. Really, do they think it will be virus proof, or is it just better? Just makes me wonder?

re: Hmm, and where have we heard this before (5, Funny)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790748)

rimcrazy
Yea..........and 640K will be plenty of memory..........
And the world will only need 4 computers...................
And no one would ever need a computer at home..............

Sheesh......where do they come up with this stuff?


A new one:

We will never have more than 16777215 comments.............

Anti-virus software (3, Insightful)

Mostly a lurker (634878) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790750)

A case can be made for running all Windows versions without anti-virus, especially if browsing the Internet routinely as a limited user. Unfortunately, the popular anti-virus products (McAfee, Symantec, Trend Micro) almost never prevent targeted attacks by cyber criminals, so one is tempted to avoid the performance hit and potential system destabilisation that comes from using these products and just rely on common sense, good backups, encryption of sensitive data, and acting all the time as if a keylogger might be installed on your system. I still use an anti-virus product personally, but I do not regard it as a reliable means of preventing infection.

^_- (1)

Longrifle (1025354) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790754)

ouch thats gonna backfire owww

Well gosh... (4, Insightful)

IANAAC (692242) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790756)

Let's just call the new "lockdown features" what they really are:

NATIVE ANTIVIRUS

Seriously, isn't this what third party antivirus vendors have been whining about?

School (1)

archcommus (971287) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790758)

Doesn't matter whether I could or not as my university probably won't agree with Allchin. But personally, yeah I'm sure I and many others would be fine without AV software on Vista.

sounds familiar (3, Funny)

DarthTator (937292) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790760)

He probably would have thought the lifeboats on the Titanic only got in the way too.

Everyone knows (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16790762)

that Windows is the most secure OS on the planet

And I though Allchin had at least half a brain... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Freak (16973) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790768)

I do understand the sentiment. His son is young enough, that as long as he has a decent firewall, and decent parental control software, (i.e. disallowing email and IM,) he should be fine.

But it's still an irresponsible thing to make as a blanket statement.

Okay... so perhaps it isn't that crazy... (5, Informative)

RootWind (993172) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790772)

From TFA, it sounds like you really might not need an antivirus... if you lock it down with the parental tools so you can't download anything at all except from your own approved sites, that covers up a large malware attack vector that an antivirus is suppose to protect. After all, the role of the antivirus now and in the future will be that of a blacklist of known bad software. Everything else an AV does can be obsoleted.

Any OS can be virus-ridden... (2, Insightful)

mark-t (151149) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790784)

... when a statistically significant percentage of administrators (this includes people who administrate their own home computer) are too ignorant to take precautions against executing unknown code as a superuser.

The door has been opened! (1)

Andrewlightstar (529897) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790788)

The door has been opened and now every hacker and virus writer will be working on proving those words wrong.

And XP has no buffer overflows... (5, Interesting)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790792)

Here's the same guy's promise about their last operating system:

Microsoft has said it has stamped out buffer overflows with the upcoming release of Windows XP. Jim Allchin, vice president, claimed the company has done a complete code review of its operating system and removed all buffers which could overflow. [vnunet.com]

I'll let somebody else post a list of all the critical updates caused by buffer overflows...

popular anti-virus products and non admin (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790794)

popular home anti-virus products (McAfee, Symantec, Trend Micro) also don't work non admin users

yeah, big whoop (3, Informative)

Maserati (8679) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790800)

Coupla key points:

1. He didn't say he let his kid on the Internet without an AV package running.

2. He didn't say "firewall". Speaking of which, ZoneAlarm just grabbed focus and I think I let something connect out to the Internet. I'm running an installer so I'm not gonna freak out, but I certainly hope Vista won't let apps steal focus while you're fracking typing.

3. He also didn't say the kid would be online unsupervised or without parental controls running.

4. It's a safe bet to assume he meant the kid would use IE if he went online, but he didn't actually say it either.

Nothing to see here, move along.

No One Would Ever... (1)

Scarletdown (886459) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790804)

I remember a computer magazine editorial saying we would never store music on Hard Drives, it would take up to much space.


Likewise, I also seem to recall that when hard drives were finally becoming affordable, people were claiming that the chances of actually filling up a 20 or 40MB drive were almost nil.

HAHAHAHHAHAHHHAA! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16790808)

Thanks for the laugh Slashdot.

Sure, that's conceivable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16790812)

...the system's new lockdown features are so capable and thorough that he was comfortable with his own seven-year-old son using Vista without antivirus software installed.

Perhaps he was referring to that great lockdown feature that lets you physically diconnect the PC from the network. Sure it's new; it used to be the other way round before.

What else is new? (4, Insightful)

istartedi (132515) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790814)

I've had two infections on my Windows over the years--Nimda and a video codec trojan. I'm not counting the second boxes that I used to use for experiments--I never put anything important on them, so I tended to just not care, and blow away Windows when they got nasty--that was back in the bad old dialup days when potential damage to others was minimal, and Windows was a lot less secure. I don't know if AV would have stopped Nimda, because I didn't use AV back then. AV didn't stop the trojan. I used to disable AV routinely because it *is* a virus. It used to slow boxes down way too much, and cause all kinds of problems with installers. I always un-do the stupid defaults in Windows and IE, and I try not to be too careless. Nimda is really the only one I can blame on MS, and it was patched ages ago. I would probably disable AV on my current box, but they seem to have gotten better about not hogging resources and/or crashing the box so I just leave it alone.

I wonder if Vista is finally going to display extensions by default. That was always irritating. It would be *nice* if you had to enable active content on a per-site basis by default. It would be better if they just didn't have so much active content out there. Would I "just trust" a Vista box? No way. But would I run it without AV if there was none pre-installed? Yes, in a heartbeat--but I would still be very careful about how I conducted myself on the web, and I would still want to go through all the settings to make sure there was nothing stupid in there. And I would *still* be checking up on processes and registry keys from time-to-time.

But anyway, XP without AV is not a big deal--if you know what you're doing. Unfortunately, that's a big if. Nevermind 7 year olds. It's the 57 year olds that you have to worry about.

I havent Laughed so HARD in Years (1, Redundant)

skelator2821 (958729) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790820)

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Hahahahahahahahahahaahaahahaahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahah.. Whew Ohh now my stomach hurts...

Yeah, we don't *need* clothes either (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790822)

but you go first....

Hot Air (1)

amavida (898618) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790826)

From exec types i ephemeral

What's the big deal? (1)

WK1 (987981) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790830)

No operating system has ever needed an antivirus. I don't recommend using Windows, but I have used it in the past, and although I ran antivirus software, I never needed it. It never picked up anything but false positives.

Now that I'm using linux, I have clamav installed. I rarely scan, and I never find anything.

Antivirus is an EXTRA precaution that sits behind the front lines. It also is never 100% reliable.

What he meant: (4, Funny)

Enoxice (993945) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790832)

What he actually meant to say was that it won't need any antivirus...for the first 10 minutes. That's almost a two-fold increase from XP!

Re:I've used XP SP2 without AV for years (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16790838)

I have AdAware installed on my computer but haven't bothered running it in about 2 years since it never picks up anything.

If you haven't used it in 2 years, how do you know it never picks anything up? To re-phrase... It doesn't pick anything up because it hasn't been run in 2 years...! The db must be 2 years out of date too...

ROFLMFAO - n/t (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16790844)

n/t

It's not the viruses you need to worry about... (5, Insightful)

NeumannCons (798322) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790848)

Viruses, these days, are not what you need to worry about.

The main attack vectors these days seem to center on "drive by downloads" or pop ups that trick you into downloading executables ("WARNING! Your PC is infested with SPYWARE - CLICK HERE to remove"). Most Antivirus software is unbelievably pathetic when it comes to identifying/dealing with spyware. I've seen dozens of clients who have so much spyware, it can take 30 minutes or more to boot up and then spend more time closing all the popped-up windows. FF and it appears IE7 as well will hopefully go a long way to closing this attack. Now we just need to wait for everyone with win95,98,ME, NT, etc. to upgrade.

And my dog... (3, Funny)

frank_adrian314159 (469671) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790860)

... doesn't need to be walked if you don't mind it using your house as a toilet.

Coming soon to a virus near you? (2, Insightful)

QuantaStarFire (902219) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790862)

"I'll give you an example: It's my favorite feature within Windows Vista, it's called ASLR (Address Space [Layout] Randomization). What it does is, each Windows Vista machine is slightly different than every other Windows Vista machine. So even if there is a remote exploit on one machine, and a worm tries to jump from one machine to another, the probability of that actually succeeding is very small."

Anybody else thinking that we'll have Vista viruses that mutate and adapt to the ASLR of a particular system within a year or two? I mean, seriously, what is it with software companies (or rather, security companies) and this apparent hubris that "our product is bullet-proof"? I mean, haven't we seen enough security systems and copy protections go down in smoke, even when people were convinced that "it can't be cracked"? Give me a break...

As much as I hate anti-MS zealots... (1)

continuouslife (934428) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790864)

...it becomes really difficult to defend Microsoft when they say stupid shit like this.

And he likely is right... (3, Informative)

Nightspirit (846159) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790876)

...in certain circumstances. Hell, I haven't had a positive virus under XP for years. I'm running avast right now, but I'm contemplating just removing it completely. The only reason I haven't is because I occasionally get emails from relatives such as "click on this funny card!" containing links to god knows where.

IIRC the only times I ever did get viruses were downloading porn or cracks. Sandbox what you can download (which at least they said they did in vista, who knows if it will be effective) and that eliminates most vectors, other than relative spam mail.

Re:windows? no antivirus? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16790878)

i bet he still belives in santa claus

Wait... what are you trying to say here? Of course we all believe in Santa Claus.

Bye The Way (1)

wildman6801 (763038) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790880)

AND PIGS FLY?

*/ Note: hope you don't mind a little bit of a shout! Sorry Slashdot /*

ObSimpsons (2, Funny)

Amazing Quantum Man (458715) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790886)

<VOICE type="Nelson">
Ha ha!
</VOICE>

*Outgoing* Microsoft co-president? (1)

JoeWalsh (32530) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790894)

Sounds like somebody's trying to set his previous employer up the bomb.

It's not the OS that needs antivirus... (2, Insightful)

h4rdc0d3 (724980) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790896)

If you think about it, it's not the OS that needs an anti-virus program; it's the user(s). I have been working in Windows since the 3.1 days, and I have never gotten a virus. And I have never once installed anti-virus software. The average user is just ignorant and sometimes a bit lacking in common sense. These users need virus protection, but technically the OS itself doesn't. They only need to educate themselves and be a bit more careful.

Re:Also reported: (1)

jlynd (1025333) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790904)

average user will GET vista... when they buy that shiny new PC.

He is correct (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790912)

I haven't experienced issues with Windows viruses in years. The trouble is spyware, adware, trojans, junkware and crapware...

RMS Vista (1)

kitzilla (266382) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790914)

RMS Vista: "Even God himself could not sink her!"

Re:It's not the OS that needs antivirus... (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790922)

What you say is only half true as there are holes in windows that can let a virus be installed without the user telling the system to install it.

Re:Hindsight being 20/20... (1)

SYFer (617415) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790924)

Heh. The name "Jim Allchin" will probably live on for years as a bullet point in Powerpoint slides, lists pinned to the sides of office cublicles, coffee mugs at security companies and in unwanted e-mail forwards with subject headers like "Yep, they really DID say it!" Ah, the hubris!

4 words (or letters)... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16790926)

*ROFL*

Big Boldfaced Lie (1, Informative)

HermMunster (972336) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790932)

We already know that systems can become infected under Vista. There was a big long write-up of someone installing all sort of malware under Vista via iexplore. There's no question that what Allchin is saying is in direct response to the outcry that there's no compelling reason upgrade and that the security in Vista is really a minor feature. Maybe he's doing it to up his stock value so he can get out from under Microsoft with a big windfall in stock.

He's out-going employee so he may feel he can lie all the wants. When the time comes a lot of people will be very disappointed in Microsoft and they'll also already have been duped.

I wonder if Microsoft can be brought to court early for such fraudulent claims, maybe even to the point halting Vista's release. Making such false claims are akin to fraud. To let that out to encourage sales is to make those sales based on fraud.

7? (1)

tezbobobo (879983) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790938)

Try 13 - 7yos don't search porn

DEP (1)

Wilson_6500 (896824) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790940)

Yeah, well, if their "lockdowns" operate anything like DEP, which seems to do little good aside from crashing random programs now and then...

Can be done with w2k already (1)

daniel23 (605413) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790942)

Sure thing, where is the news?

I'm running w2k here with 6 years history of not a single trojan, worm, virus etc. infection. (Before that it was NT4, w95, w31, DOS, cpm+, together 21 years of computing w/o malware infections).
I scan my system for malware about once/quarter, with a number of different scanners. But no "protective shield" scanner running all the time.
Oh, and I don't do windows update, I ran w2kSP2 until iTunes forced me to update to SP4. SP3 had an evil EULA, that's why.

I let my kids run their boxen under a similar setup, w/o problems, and I believe almost anyone could do the same.

All it takes is
- no outlook
- no MSIE
- a linux firewall/gateway protecting the lan
- wlan connects to the foreign side of the firewall and tunnels in via openVPN
- clamAV/Amavis and postgrey on the mail server with some basic restrictions about file types of attachments

This is exactly why.... (4, Funny)

Sergeant Beavis (558225) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790944)

Microsoft needs to have drug testing.

duh? (1)

Razed By TV (730353) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790948)

Duh, of course the computer is safe in the hands of a child, the operating system hasn't even been released yet. I wouldn't bet on that security through obscurity once the OS becomes mainstream.

Re:I've used XP SP2 without AV for years (1)

jlynd (1025333) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790950)

Same here, I guess only using your computer for WoW has its advantages... /cry in the corner

Re:I've used XP SP2 without AV for years (2, Insightful)

the_unknown_soldier (675161) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790960)

I have that experience as well... Any mildly technical user of windows can avoid viruses. I haven't run virus checking ever since SP2 came out. The truth is that most viruses are executed because of user stupidity.

firefox + nat=no anti virus not needed

You're crazy for using ie7 though.. you can still run activex, its not safe.

Misleading title (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16790972)

What he said was that the lockdown features were so tight that he was happy to let his 7-year-old son use the computer without an AV installed. In other words, he was confident that his son wouldn't be able to install any software.

He did not say that regular users, who want to be able to install programs, should not use an AV. Nor did he say he was so sure the system had no holes that it wouldn't require a firewall.

In other words, yet another pointless anti-MS story posted on Slashdot, that basically hurts Slashdot's credibility more than it does Microsoft's. Nothing new there. Gone are the days when Slashdot actually had any news, or any stuff that mattered.

vist does not need antivirus (1)

Stanneh (775821) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790978)

like earth does not need gravity.

Non-Believer? (1)

Scarletdown (886459) | more than 7 years ago | (#16790996)

Wait... what are you trying to say here? Of course we all believe in Santa Claus.


Wasn't he picked up by the cops last year on a 1492, for not believing in Columbus?

He's right you know (1, Troll)

syousef (465911) | more than 7 years ago | (#16791002)

With Vista being so DRM ridden and such a hog you'll never want to use it. Therefore you'll never do anything with it, and never have data to protect on it. Hell if you try to type in anything more than a couple of characters, the UI will prevent you from doing so with "security popups". The new secret weapon is MS Clippy Nazi (tm) which will come up with phrases like "I'm sorry but you appear to be entering a credit card number. Zis vil not be tolerated." and "I refuse to accept responsibility for your data" and "You entered that data over 4 weeks ago. Please call Microsoft support to reactivate your data".

Problem solved. No need for Antivirus.

Thought Experiment (1)

rlp (11898) | more than 7 years ago | (#16791004)

Step 1 - PC running newly installed vanilla Vista is connected directly to the Internet via cable modem. No third party firewalls / AV software, no hardware router / firewall.

Step 2 - seven year old kid uses it for Web surfing for two hours.

Step 3 - Mr. Allchin uses the PC to access his brokerage / bank accounts.

Well DUH! We were already told this about Vista... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16791010)

"system's new lockdown features are so capable and thorough that he was comfortable with his own seven-year-old son using Vista without antivirus software installed."

Not because the lockdown feature stops any virus from getting on, but because he can't get McAfee or Norton to work right on Vista without a hack!

The emperors new clothes... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16791014)

There will be no such system that will not be attacked any means electronically... unless it is not connected to an network or turned on.

Quick! Before it's too late! (1)

nobodynoone (940116) | more than 7 years ago | (#16791016)

Buy stock in Symantec!

Here fixed the Media Spin (1)

lumber_13 (937323) | more than 7 years ago | (#16791018)

Here http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/ZDM/story?id=2639 246 [go.com] Fixed for you. Its called Media Spin. Allchin also addressed concerns that Vista would be inherently insecure. The OS has already suffered so-called "pen" or penetration testing during its development, and is the first product to go through Microsoft's secure development lifecycle program, he said. "Thousands" of applications have been tested against the software. Allchin's own son uses a prerelease version of Vista without any antivirus software, Allchin said, although he advised customers not to do the same.

monological discussions (4, Funny)

daniel23 (605413) | more than 7 years ago | (#16791022)


did I mention how /.'s new discussion system now reminds me of my wife, like, we're having a discussion and there is no way for me to successfully launch a reply.

oh wait, this is /. after all. A wife is, ehmm, ... well, - just forget it.

If his son is not an Admin on the box, why not? (3, Insightful)

dioscaido (541037) | more than 7 years ago | (#16791028)

Without Administrator access, a virus can at best mess around with his son's account. Easy enough to fix by killing and recreating the account. This is actually true of XP as well (and OSX/Linux, obviously), but Vista is the first MS OS to handle Standard User in a straightforward way.

And with UAC, since Administrators don't even run with full token by default, 3rd party applications will quickly move away from assuming Admin access (a huge problem with running XP as limited -- apps blow up).

yay for him.... (3, Informative)

zcat_NZ (267672) | more than 7 years ago | (#16791030)

My kids have been using Linux "with no antivirus" since before they could type (they started with things like tuxpaint and gcompris)

Windows is finally catching up?!!

Off the grid - it's mostly safe. (1)

binaryspiral (784263) | more than 7 years ago | (#16791032)

Sure, go right ahead and don't install AntiVirus or any protection what so ever. As long as the machine stays off the 'net, you should be mostly safe.

I absolutely agree! (1)

Eric Damron (553630) | more than 7 years ago | (#16791036)

I also feel completely comfortable letting his seven year old child run vista on his computer without anti virus software!

what if you get a lemon? (1)

binarybum (468664) | more than 7 years ago | (#16791042)

"Address Space [Layout] Randomization). What it does is, each Windows Vista machine is slightly different than every other Windows Vista machine"

  Sweet. now my computer can crash in ways yours can't even dream of.

What an idiot. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16791046)

What an idiotic statement to make. He basically said that it is impossible to get a virus while running Vista which sure sounds like a challenge to all virus writers abroad. There WILL be viruses for Vista, I don't care how secure it is just like there would be viruses for Linux if it were the mainstream OS. Maybe the damage will be more contained or the malware will be easier to detect, but one should never underestimate the cleverness of a basement dwelling greasy haired hacker.

Re:windows? no antivirus? (1)

Ruff_ilb (769396) | more than 7 years ago | (#16791050)

I doubt that's true.

After all, who needs Santa when you have PONIES?!!!!!1111

Re:I've used XP SP2 without AV for years (2, Interesting)

clymere (605769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16791052)

Just because you haven't had a problem doesn't mean you're not one for someone else. If you havent run scans, how do you know you're not infected?

Translation: (1)

xactuary (746078) | more than 7 years ago | (#16791056)

Bring 'em on!

ASLR (1)

Joebert (946227) | more than 7 years ago | (#16791060)

A
Sorry
Last
Resort

Tag, you're it! (1)

zigziggityzoo (915650) | more than 7 years ago | (#16791064)

For once, the tagging system is 100% accurate!

I don't see what the problem is. (1)

loftwyr (36717) | more than 7 years ago | (#16791072)

His son's computer isn't hooked to the Internet, and only plays store bought games aimed at 7 year olds.

Viruses shouldn't be a problem for him. Now, mind you if it gets hooked to the internet for 30 seconds, all bets are off... :)

Context (3, Insightful)

lilfields (961485) | more than 7 years ago | (#16791074)

I don't believe he was saying "Vista can't get viruses", but rather UAC (user account control) stops code from executing, thus making him feel safe that even his son could surf the web (with UAC on) without obtaining a virus blindly. I think the biggest weakness with past Windows have been uninformed users thinking that clicking "yes" in dialog boxes to execute an unknown program or script is a witty thing to do. I believe UAC tries to solve this, and most "average" users will be too lazy to turn it off (or won't know how), while advanced users can simply surf responsibly with it off.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>