05.20.10
Gemini version available ♊︎Disable Aero in Vista 7
Summary: Resource-hungry visual effects become a security threat to Windows
YET another security problem is found in Vista 7, which begs for the question, “how on Earth does the GUI/presentation layer pose a risk to the entire operating system?”
Microsoft on Tuesday warned users of a vulnerability in 64-bit versions of Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2 that could expose users to malware attacks.
[...]
Bryant said a patch would be forthcoming, but didn’t say when. In the meantime, users can prevent attacks by disabling the Windows Aero Theme. To turn it off, choose Start > Control Panel and click on Appearance and Personalization. Then click on Change the Theme. Then select one of the Basic and High Contrast Themes.
Vista 7 — like its predecessors — is not secure. Also see:
- Vista 7 Cracked Again
- Trend Micro: Vista 7 Less Secure Than Vista
- Vista 7 Less Secure Than Predecessors? Remote BSoD Now Possible!
- Cybercrime Rises and Vista 7 is Already Open to Hijackers
- Vista 7: Broken Apart Before Arrival
- Department of Homeland Security ‘Poisoned’ by Microsoft; Vista 7 is Open to Hijackers Again
- Vista 7 Security “Cannot be Fixed. It’s a Design Problem.”
- Why Vista 7 Could be the Least Secure Operating System Ever
- Journalists Suggest Banning Windows, Maybe Suing Microsoft Over DDoS Attacks
- Vista 7 Vulnerable to Latest “Critical” Flaws
- Vista 7 Seemingly Affected by Several More “Critical” Flaws This Month
- Reason #1 to Avoid Vista 7: Insecurity
- Vista 7 Left Hijackable Again (Almost a Monthly Recurrence)
- Out-of-Cycle Patches for Vista 7 (Not Stable), Security Issues Noted by Google
Did anyone really think that Vista 7 would improve security? Some say that Vista 7 is less secure than Vista. What’s even more perplexing:
People who paid for Vista do not feel they should pay again for “7″. Folks who sell defective cars should expect no more custom. Consumers may find “7″ acceptable but business wants to be free of the burden of that other OS. Some businesses and organizations will go with “7″ as the line of least resistance but GNU/Linux really looks good to users and administrators who have kept XP going for years. My users are asking for something fast that runs on our hardware. “7″ is not happening. We even were given some brand new machines with 3gB RAM, and, to my surprise, find they shipped with XP… That says something about this notion that customers are demanding “7″. Why would an OEM ship us XP if that were the case?
Best of Windows is not the best operating system. █
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA
your_friend said,
May 20, 2010 at 12:57 pm
Vista 7 is pretty? It’s one of the ugliest and least efficient interfaces inflicted on users. Virtual desktops are still rudimentary and the flip view is useless for anything but advertising to the ignorant. Microsoft’s ribbon interface is a confusing change for prior users that wastes screen space in the more limited direction of most LCDs, forcing people to bow their heads and scroll a lot. The looks themselves are a step backwards from previous less cluttered versions of Windows. The proportions are even worse, being more complicated and less coherent than others that were forced by technical limitations. The overall result is something that is more cluttered and bewildering than the electronic games section of a casino but twice as crass.
Yuhong Bao said,
May 20, 2010 at 8:08 pm
“Vista 7 — like its predecessors — is not secure. Also see:”
I already rebut some of them, particularly bad is the “Vista 7 Security “Cannot be Fixed. It’s a Design Problem.”” one (see the IRC logs).
your_friend Reply:
May 20th, 2010 at 11:29 pm
A dozen cases of complete failure can be rebutted? After 25 years of the worst kinds of software insecurity you still think Windows can be used for anything but non networked games or toys? What amazing faith you have.
Yuhong Bao Reply:
May 21st, 2010 at 3:28 pm
I was rebutting the evidence used. See old IRC logs.
Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:
May 21st, 2010 at 3:41 am
Microsoft will need to rebuild Windows. It still lacks security features that are found in UNIX/Linux.
Marketing hype campaigns about “security” and UAC restrictions are not enough.
Yuhong Bao Reply:
May 21st, 2010 at 3:28 pm
It still lacks security features that are found in UNIX/Linux.
What features? UAC is a pretty close clone of sudo, for example.
Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:
May 21st, 2010 at 3:30 pm
Repositories for starters. I can’t give you a complete list right now. See http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/22/linux_v_windows_security/
Yuhong Bao Reply:
May 21st, 2010 at 3:35 pm
Yea, I have read this. Let me try to rebut some of them. The first one “Windows has only recently evolved from a single-user design to a multi-user model” is just plainly not true. NT has existed since 1993, even before Windows 95! On RPC, I know (I have seen Blaster, for example), but that is not easy to change even if Windows is rewritten since it is a network protocol, for God’s sake. And yes MS has been trying to make Windows more modular, see Windows Server 2008, for example, which was released after the article.
Yuhong Bao Reply:
May 21st, 2010 at 3:37 pm
Now 95 indeed ended up more popular than NT, which led to for example a lot of Win32 applications written without the NT security model in mind.
Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:
May 21st, 2010 at 3:45 pm
Please provide me with proof that it’s more modular. Microsoft patented a modular O/S, but it does not mean this was properly implemented (or that Microsoft invented it).
The article is not from early NT days. It’s just several years old. I think you are nitpicking.
Yuhong Bao Reply:
May 21st, 2010 at 3:48 pm
Please provide me with proof that it’s more modular. Microsoft patented a modular O/S, but it does not mean this was properly implemented (or that Microsoft invented it).
Windows Server 2008, with it’s Server Core support, should be proof that MS is at least trying to make it more modular.
Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:
May 21st, 2010 at 4:41 pm
Trying. It’s still not there. For a truly modular architecture see how Linux/GNU/X can be decoupled.
Yuhong Bao said,
May 21, 2010 at 3:51 pm
“The article is not from early NT days. It’s just several years old. ”
Which only makes the claim that “Windows has only recently evolved from a single-user design to a multi-user model” even less true. NT has existed for more than a decade by then.
Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:
May 21st, 2010 at 4:41 pm
That’s just a distraction really. It’s not the ‘meat’ of the article.