Can we make Anti-Patchguard Online Petition?

Unfortunately, it's not

Linux....

I don't want Linux, I don`t want "SECURE" OS.
I do want Windows! But better one.

Nevermind, I think we will never understand each other We are just going rounds and rounds....

Do you want one more point why this petition is weak?
Because we are talking about: Millions vs Thousands.

millions of stopped malware vs Thousands..

I see you are confused...

As I have already showed you in last post, It will kill PatchGuard in someway or another.
And maybe give life to small developers, who products used by only thousands of people, who are ALREADY capable of protecting themselves even without Those products...

But by killing Patchguard, it will open millions of system (which are already unprotected)....

Nevermind, we just have different opinions on this.
I do respect your opinion, but unfortunately I still believe on the opposite

 

No problem, my friend. Anyway, when will you sign the petition?

 

Look, if PatchGuard is on by default, it will protect regular users. They will not know if it exists at all. How many average Joes know about LUA, SRP etc.? So, the regular user is protected out of the box.

But if an advanced user wants a better protection, why not allow him to do it his way? Let him boot into Safe mode, disable Patchguard on his own responsibility and set up his own security. After all, it's his PC and his OS he paid for.

That way everybody is happy.

 

Well, it´s real simple, Patchguard has got some advantages, but it also got some serious drawbacks. And at the end of the day I think the drawbacks are outweighing the advantages. The quotes are from a M$ document out of 2006 named: Microsoft® Windows Vista™: An Inflection Point for Kernel Security and 64-Bit Computing

But what if Patchguard gets bypassed by advanced malware, who is going to protect you? IMO security tools should always have full access to the kernel, because without it they will never be able to offer full blown protection.

This is true, but it is indeed possible to patch the kernel and still have a perfectly stable running machine. I think about 6 apps have hooked into the kernel on my machine (XP Pro 32 bit), and no problems whatsoever, no slowdown, no stability problems.

 

That's not true for the NT OSs, it's the default configuration that is insecure, i.e., default admin. If you take the time to read up on it, you'll find that you can lock down the system pretty well using the features of the OS.

 

What do you think about PatchGuard? Should it be optional?

 

To be honest I don't lose any sleep over KPP since I don't have any x64 OSs running at the moment. Even if I did, it wouldn't matter to me because I don't use any of these security apps.

Whether it should be optional or not is a moot point because the odds of Microsoft doing this are a gazillion to one. Officially MS has never supported patching the kernel. On x86 it is possible, which still doesn't mean they approve of it. Basically, according to MS, KPP is just enforcing something that they've never supported. The advantages would seem to outweigh the disadvantages. Again, this is just my point of view.