The USER determines 'security'
Tuesday, December 26, 2006 at 7:05 am
Windows 98 Annoyances Discussion Forum
Posted by DNA
(551 messages posted)
The Win9x systems, in terms of Operating System design, have little to no security.
It's mostly true that virus writers concentrate on NT (and XP specifically) today.
In that sense, even Windows 2000 is more 'secure' than Windows XP.
You can't say that an OS is more 'secure' just because viruses target a 'later' OS.
There are still Win9x viruses
floating around on the Internet.
The real problem nowadays is malware, (adware, spyware, keyloggers, etc.),
and the older that Internet Explorer is, the more susceptible it is to malware. The
most 'secure' IE (if you even can call any version of IE 'secure'!) is IE7, which
only runs on XP SP2 and Vista.
Not to state that Firefox is 'perfect' or 'secure', but it's more secure than any
version of IE. Especially in respect to how quickly security patches are released.
Many known security flaws in IE6 and earlier remain unpatched.
The 'number one security component' is the computer user, but you can say that a
Windows 98 or 2000 computer browsing with Firefox is more 'secure' than an XP SP2/Vista
computer browsing with IE7, and FAR more secure than any computer browsing
with IE6!
Businesses use IE because it's already installed on the operating system...period!
Businesses may not install Firefox due to perceived additional I.T. expenses (deployment,
'retraining',etc.),
but some smart businesses have switched because Firefox may end up saving them I.T.
expenses in the long run (if their end users have to have Internet access). The lack
of IE7 for Windows 2000 means that Firefox is a worthy 'security update' for the
millions of Win2K systems still serving businesses.
A valid reason why businesses weren't using Firefox is because Firefox 1.x didn't
have Automatic Updates. Firefox 2.x has this facility.
A good I.T. infrastructure will have the end users as Limited Users, and restrictions
on network traffic. This
will limit the damage that I.E. would otherwise inflict.
Even you, the home user, can create a Limited User account (you'd need System
Policy Editor to do this in Win9x) and use it for Internet surfing. This will give
you more security, regardless of the browser used.
Vista's User Account Control (UAC) makes Windows more like a Unix/Linux system, where
even "Administrators" run as Limited users, and you have to elevate your privileges
(ex: enter your password) to install programs.
This is a genuine step forward for security in Windows, at least until someone cracks
UAC (which I've heard has happened already!). We know M$ will be very busy
patching UAC cracks....
Athlon 1.1 - 512 MB RAM = 98SE & XP Home
Athlon 3000+ 64 - 1024 MB RAM = 98SE (@768 MB RAM) & XP Pro
IBM ThinkPad PIII 900 - 384 MB RAM = 98SE & XP Pro SP2
Windows 2000 Server in the basement
| 
