Boycott Microsoft Windows Vista

Anti competition laws in Europe don't just apply to American companies, there's been plenty European companies who have had similar judgements against them. Microsofts decision to lock out third party vendors isn't in the best interests of consumers, never has been and never will be.
If you had the choice of a locked down Vista OS or one that was open to third party vendors, which would you choose?

 

This "observation" could be debated forever, given the actual statistics, but ...

... this is not the real issue here, despite it being what certain people would like it to be. What we have here is one single third-party vendor attempting to whip up support for what is really a false issue. There will be no boycott (at least none of even the slightest significance).

Third party security vendors live off what they joyfully publicise as security deficiencies in other's products (in this case Microsoft). Then, when they find themselves facing the plugging of the very holes they live off, they complain. Instead, these people could approach matters with some inventiveness (like most of their competitors will do), and work to find ways they can continue their market or, heaven forbid, recognise that change happens, and work to capitalise on it and forge new markets. The static, inertial, negative ones will perish. That is the way of things.

It is amazing to see how many people follow along like sheep, fuelled by their own conspiracy theories and inability to accept the success of others.

The software industry is probably the only one which ever reacts like certain people demonstrate in this thread. For goodness' sake, if architects and builders improved the security of dwellings in such a way that would make intruder alarms less of a necessity, how many people would mourn the death of one or two alarm vendors?

It's not a question of choice, it's not a question of systems being deliberately 'closed' to third parties.

 

Isnt the problem here that 3rd party vendors will get sued trying to take care of eventual holes Vista might have? Or will Vista be impossible to crack? The malware makers dont care about getting sued, they will explore Vista´s code to find those holes, and if Vista is not impossible to crack, they will. What I have seen of Vista´s security features this far, it is working as a quite simple HIPS, and even HIPS can be circumvented. So what is wrong having many choices to choose from?

 

No. The problem here is that one single vendor is unhappy about having one of their technical hooks being closed to them.

Of course not. *NO* O/S is impossible to crack. In this sense, the only real question (for those so inclined) is "is it worthwhile cracking"?

Absolutely nothing. Who suggested otherwise?

 

Sales of Vista maybe slow at first, but a full blown boycott. Not going to happen my fellow friendly Wilders Creatures.

As for the EU and the MS fines and all that stuff. I am still attempting to figure out why in the world GE and Honeywell were not allowed to merge. And that is all I have to say about that or I will not stay on topic.

 

How "crackable" an OS is depends on many things, not the least of which is the amount of code it contains. The more code, the more opportunity for mistakes or weaknesses. Vista is huge. There's a lot of code to look for flaws in. As to whether it's worthwhile, consider the following. They're locking security-ware out of the kernel, lessening their ability to defend the system. Boycott or not, it will likely be the common operating system sometime in the near future and contains some very tempting targets, like the DRM. M$ has never been able to secure anything. Even their security patches need patching regularly. Give me one reason why Vista will be any different.
By claiming to have secured the kernel and preventing security software from legitimately securing it, they've made Vista a very tempting and worthwhile target. Vista may enjoy a period of calm while crackers find the flaws, but in the long run, they'll rip it apart. IMO, Vista will be a security disaster. I won't own it. I won't service it for others for the simple reason that I won't be responsible for what happens on an OS that I can't control.
Rick

 

To bad for Microsoft that I've already switched to Linux a while back. Open source software is good for me and good for you.

 

There has been a ruling fairly recently that says car manufacturers must not insist that car owners have to use their service departments under pain of loss of warranty if they do not. This was rightly seen as protectionism and meant that third party services were squeezed out of a very large market. A similar ruling was made regarding buying cars anywhere in Europe to get the best price. Car manufacturers used to have this stitched up.
Microsoft is doing something similar. There's no real evidence that Microsoft can/will produce a secure OS. Imagine two years down the line and every third party security company has gone out of business and an enterprising hacker/virus writer finds a hole in Microsofts system we are then left with only Microsoft to plug it.

 

Then wouldn't security companies have something to do? They will have to then develop security software to prevent that hole from working.

I believe "the market is self correcting" would be how an economist would put it. :T

 

A very conflicting situation I should say. Somehow, this is a great opportunity for MS to improve themselves, but at a certain price.

With all this, they can make Vista more harder to crack than ever. A little more effort put in and it would be near 90%, no, 98% I think.
The saying that MS is doing this to force total reliance on them only seems flawed. We people have been complaining umpteen times:
MS!!! Why so many holes in IE?
Why so many updates, exploits!?
Windows SUX!!!
I'll switch to another OS!!!

So, this is THEIR ( Microsoft) response to all our pleas. What more do we possibly expect of them?
As a matter of fact, are YOU going to RELY ON 3RD-Party products FOREVER? I mean for security only, not other aspects.
3rd-party security vendors are more of a backup for MS. When MS Windows fails, the third party guys jump into action first.
Why worry about losing jobs or going $ less? The industry is so big today, lots of jobs available.
Instead of being so pessimistic, the security vendors can surely use their creativity in more ways than one, right? If you are scared that you'll go bust when Vista comes knocking on the door, how're you going to survive till the next day?

If MS learns from all the 3rd-party sec. vendors, they can succeed. All you need in security is an open mind.
The general public should've saw this coming already.

 

Rick,

Arguably you don't have full control of any MS OS anyway, even if you run SSM.

 

I guess that depends on what you call "full control". On the DOS based systems I choose to run, you can get quite close, within the limits of the OSs ability to function. "Control" may not be the right word for what I was trying to say. For me, the ability to access, monitor, and control if necessary whatever I may choose to is the issue. On the DOS based systems I can access (not necessarily read) or delete any file I choose. I don't have to worry about hidden processes and files, unwanted services opening ports, OS components calling home, etc. These things are easy to control on the DOS based systems. On the NT systems, XP in particular, it's more difficult (and there's a lot more of it to do) but still do-able. You can still deny a hook or block a process.
If I've read correctly, with Vista there will areas of the file system that can't be accessed. Hooks can't be blocked. The entire idea of DRM is based on a distrust of the user. How do you stop it from calling home? For me, it comes down to one simple question. Why should I trust an operating system that is designed to distrust the user? The whole concept behind Vista is unacceptable, especially when their stated reasons for locking the kernel don't hold up.
Rick

 

Sorry, but you don't understand the topic. The point is that if you allow MS kill 3-rd party vendors there will be no 3-rd party firewalls, no 3-rd party HIPS for Vista. There will be no choice for you as rely at MS security ONLY!

BTW, you've just confirmed my article's point- people who rely on MS don't need 3-rd party security solutions... But there are a lot of people who need choice!

Yes, and don't warry for me- I'll find something for myself in the industry, I'm professional. I will survive.

 

Ilya, this is a gross overstatement. MS are not "killing 3rd party vendors", they are plugging security weaknesses. Third party vendors who are able to adapt and innovate will survive and continue to flourish with Vista. Making fruitless calls for people to boycott Vista is not the way forward for you, I suggest.

 

I agree with spm's previous post. Anyone that thinks Microsoft's attempt at locking down the kernel will be the demise of all third party security software companies is, as spm put it, grossly overstating, in my opinion. Some companies that fail to adapt to the new landscape will, of course, suffer the consequences. However, in business isn’t often the case that companies that fail to change also fail to stay in existence?

Also, as someone that is not particularly fond of Microsoft, I hear differing points of view and I feel that Microsoft is going to be criticized one way or another. If they do not improve security, they get criticized for being insecure. Now that they are taking steps to improve security, they are getting criticized for the manner in which they are doing it.

The moral of the story is that Microsoft will never make everyone happy. Until someone develops a superior alternative that appeals to the masses, we will continue to follow Microsoft in the direction they decide to head.

 

I kind of think it's more the demise of many computers, not third party companies. What you've written is dead on - "attempt". It's already been bypassed. Several different ways, some just in theory thus far. Now if that is the only Kernel level protection allowed, then I will stick with XP - or simply move onto something else.

 

I agree with toadbee. MS will be providing APIs for 3rd party vendors, but there is still a major problem with PatchGuard. Think about how rootkits work, they patch the kernel so that none of the standard APIs can see it - the integrity of the system has been violated. To get around this, 3rd party vendors use kernel level drivers to add more functionality, so they don't have to rely on the integrity of the kernel (after all, that's the point). You can bet that rootkit authors will still be patching the kernel in Vista (they're already there), which leaves 3rd party vendors two choices: use documented APIs, which have been evaded by the rootkit, or force in a kernel mode driver and get sued.

Third party vendors may have the solutions, but could get sued if they try to use them. That is, unless Microsoft can come to some compromise. Hopefully that will happen and we can all be the better for it.

Considering that Vista will have so much more protection for user-space, I would predict that rootkits will be the biggest problem with Vista. If security software can pretty much only detect user-mode stuff, this could end up being a big step backwards for security, in the end. Both will be more advanced, in many ways, but the malware will have the advantage simply by the fact that they have no concern for the rules.

Note: Again, just my views, not representative of the views of my employer or anyone else.

 

There might not even be a launch of vista in Europe, for a while anyway, if they don't comply to the antitrust laws.

From Arstechnica;
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060908-7697.html

Lamehand

 

All I know for sure is that if it comes down to me trusting M$ for my pc's security or 3rd party programs, the choice is obvious for me.
I won't ever rely on M$ for security!
This sounds a lot like an old on-line article exposing a program called Palladium for the next(at that time un-named) version after XP.
Palladium was basically an idea that M$ would control the security for pc users.
This isn't the article,but it is similar and from approximately the same time.

http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/article.php/1378731

Vista with DRM?No thanks!

 

http://tinyurl.com/ou4v2

Microsoft has engaged in a fresh war of words with the European Commission over the launch of its new Windows Vista operating system in Europe.

The software giant suggested Brussels' vigorous attempts to force it to comply with anti-trust rulings could lead to delays in Vista's European launch.

Brussels said the firm's comments were "misleading" and that it was its duty to comply with competition laws.

The already delayed software program is due to be launched in January.

Microsoft has been locked in a bitter struggle with the European Commission over its business practices for years. (Just comply with the law)

It was fined $640m for anti-competitive behaviour in 2004 and was hit with a $357.5m penalty earlier this year for failing to meet Commission demands for it to share technical information with other firms.


It is misleading to imply that the Commission could be the cause of delays in launching Vista in Europe-European Commission spokesman.

Vista is not under formal scrutiny but competition commissioner Neelie Kroes wrote to Microsoft earlier this year outlining potential concerns about features of the system.

Functions highlighted included its integrated internet search facility and software capable of creating fixed-document formats.

Microsoft said Brussels had not answered a request for guidance on what it needed to do to ensure Vista did not fall foul of regulatory problems.

In response, the Commission said it sent detailed information to Microsoft in July and the US firm had only replied last week.

Microsoft said it was too early to tell whether Brussels was "seeking additional product design changes (to Vista) that would result in delay in Europe".

Microsoft and its boss Steve Ballmer is seeking more information.

But Brussels said it had given Microsoft specific competition guidance on many occasions and was continuing to do so.

"It is not up to the Commission to give Microsoft a definitive 'green light' before Vista is put on the market," said a Commission spokesman.

"It is therefore misleading to imply that the Commission could be the cause of delays in launching Vista in Europe."

Microsoft hoped to release Vista - the first major update to its operating system since Windows XP was introduced five years ago - in the second half of 2006 but the launch date was put back.

There has been recent speculation that Vista could be further delayed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Microsoft should realise that if they want to operate in the European Union then they, like every single other company, must comply with the rules. This for me highlights Microsofts style of management where they think they can do as they please.

 

Frankly, the person who is asking people to boycott Windows Vista is just obviously wasting his/her time. You don't think everybody, yeah, I mean, EVERYBODY would boycott Vista do you?

I don't know much about all the business/corporate stuff. I'm just an ordinary secondary school student. But what I do know is that Windows Vista is not going to be like any ordinary product that's going to be sold like between 10 to 20 bucks. It's NOT like your everyday necessity type of product found at the good ol' provision store/mart, those are way cheaper than Vista.

Asking people to boycott a product, ANY product, I mean, c'mon man, you ain't the jugde or lawyer in the legal system or any court of law, you ain't the government and you CAN'T control the marketing and shipment of a product which IS NOT OWNED OR CREATED BY YOU, unless you're a person with some sort of governmental authority or power, or the creator of the product, then only can you dictate the fate of the product. WHO ARE YOU!? Microsoft? Or the government? Why should people listen to you?

The general public should be wise enough to make their own decisions as to whether they want Vista or not. Windows Vista is a MAJOR product and if you're just an ordinary person working for an ordinary company and you want to get the general public to boycott a MAJOR product of a MAJOR company, is something like wow, you know the story in the bible, david vs goliath, its something like that. But I don't think the end result would be the same in this vastly different landscape and situation.

If you are just an ordinary person and you are doing something like asking people to boycott a major product such as Windows Vista, in my own hokkien ( if you know hokkien then you will understand what i am saying) it is something like: wah lau eh, sway jia eh bang kia ai pah dua dua jia eh bang kia, eh sai meh? Yi eh dua dua jia eh bang kia xing ka li pa lo khi ah!

Saying all this does NOT mean I disrespect any person here in any way, don't misunderstand me and start flaming me like a guest on this forum did a long time ago.

I mean, the point is, if you are just an ordinary person and you are doing something like this, I guess it just goes to show that you do not know where your limits are. Yeah sure, people will listen to what you are saying, but I'm god-damn sure they will not buy such a request. Look at the late Steve Irwin. He is just an ordinary bloke, an ordinary guy, who does all his wildlife conservation, protection and rehabilitation work humbly. Does he ever go around and tell people what they can or cannot do to animals? I don't think so. He earns quite a lot from his Australia Zoo, but he still remains as an ordinary and well-loved guy. He contributed so much to his nation and the world and gained so much from it all, but even till the end when he died a untimely and tragic death, his humbleness was immeasurable. Yeah sure he's a wildlife conservationist expert, but does he go around telling people what they can or cannot do? No. He knows where his limits are and he just sticks with it and carries out his work normally without telling others what to do.

The moral of the whole story here is NOT learning and deciding to boycott Windows Vista. People KNOW what to do with Windows Vista when it comes out, Vista is good or bad they will find it out themselves and make the appropriate decision. Why should they listen to just one man's opinion only? And those who buy the story of just this lone one man alone and decide to boycott Vista based on just 1 person's remarks are obviously just nuts.

What's Vista like at this stage? It's not even released yet and here you are making a premature accusation and asking people to boycott a product that has not even been fully perfected and developed. Immature. And you don't know where your limits are. What Singaporeans say: Mouth say very easy, its just say only what huh, but when come to do? No action!

So instead of coming to WSF and asking people to boycott a developing product, which IMHO is very immature, you might as well go and play some sudoku. Microsoft, just like every other thing on this planet, is imperfect. There can never be a wholesomely perfect product to suit everybody's needs. So instead of having our dear 3rd-party sec. vendors whining out loud and going to the extent of telling people directly in the face to boycott Vista, I'm sure everyone would be very appreciative if they could stop talking and start doing ( something better ).

Goody Singapura Night to you all.

 

Hello,
It's not a one-man's opinion. I know of at least 15 people, some of whom are my friends who share this idea, plus numerous developers around the world.
There's a difference between a perfect product and ... an immoral one. It's not about Vista being good or bad - it's about eliminating competition and preventing others from putting up a fair fight.
Mrk

 

Actually,i would say that AMD dual cores for socket 939 (won't be in commerce anymore after Xmas i think),are TPM (trusted platform module) free.TPM can (and i am certain it WILL) be used for DRM enforcement together with Vista (which is TPM 1.2 compatible).

AMD's new CPUs (socket AM2),do contain TPM (Presidio technology) and i think the same for Intel dual Core 2 or codename "Conroe" (LaGrande technology).

That's why i just bought an AMD Athlon 64x2 3800+ dual core socket 939 ,plus i ll soon assemble another rig with my "old" Athlon64 3200+.I strongly reccomend ANY AMD socket 939 over ANY Pentium 4,they consume and heat MUCH less and perform better (things now changed with Conroe).Practically with Cool 'n' quiet enabled,you have your Athlon running at 1000Mhz and reduced voltage,and goes up in frequency and voltage automatically when needed (like a laptop).Great temperatures and consumption.And there are motherboards out there very cheap for AMD 939 (AsRocks with ULI chipset-i have 3 of them- at about 60 Euros and very good performance) and one can really stay with such a rig for a loooong time unless he is a gamer.

And i certainly won't buy Vista.I ve had enough with MS policies,from the activation hassle with the phone calls to the TPM thing and now this that Ilya says (which of course won't pass in the EU as a postee already said,but is irritating anyway).

 

MS doesn't use the name Palladium anymore.Maybe because it spreaded quite quickly and got a bad reputation.Later it was called NGBSC

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/archive/security/news/ngscb.mspx?mfr=true

To be changed again in TPM (Trusted Platform Module) in Vista.It's always the same thing.MS says that Vista will ship with only the "first implementation" of the project(Secure start) and the rest will be implemented with methods and time to be determined (service pack?).

They plan to dilute the "pill" in a wide time frame,so not to have the people protesting.My guess is that from the Windows after Vista,TPM will be standard,fully implemented and no longer possible to disable (theoretically,in the new motherboards,you can disable it in BIOS).Once it becomes standard and software comes out to run as trusted (and who will certify a software as trusted and how?Certainly not the user) or DRM-TPM appears,it will be too late for people to revert to TPM-free PCs or OS or find "free" software.This is their plans for out future.Make "trusted" programs:

In May 2004, following criticism from software makers, Microsoft said it was retooling NGSCB so some of the benefits would be available without the need to recode applications.
http://news.com.com/Microsofts lean...curity/2100-7355_3-5843808.html?tag=nefd.lede

And it will be served as a "security feature".People do and allow many things that normally they wouldn't ,when someone evoked their "protection" and "security"...

 

That's about the size of it Mrkvonic. Microsoft will get away with it in many parts of the world but not in the European Union-thankfully.