Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

64-Bit Vista Kernel Will Be a "Black Box"

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the abandon-all-hope-ye-who-ener-here dept.

ryanskev writes with news from RSA Europe, where a Microsoft VP spoke bluntly about the lock-down that will apply to 64-bit Vista. From the article: "Microsoft will operate 64-bit versions of Windows Vista as a tabernacle, with the kernel as the holy of holies, where only its own high priests of security may venture." While Microsoft has seemed to be making some concessions to the likes of Symantec and McAfee, considerable doubt remains as to their ultimate future.

2 of 402 comments (clear)

  1. Sounds like the right plan by Zeinfeld · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Sounds like the right approach to me. We will soon find out whether Symantec and McAfee are helping or hindering security.

    --
    Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
    Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
  2. Why is Microsoft even bothering.. by flummoxd · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ..to release a 32-bit version of Vista?

    Every week, I hear about a new thing that will "only be in 64-bit Vista". First it was HDTV content only on 64-bit for DRM reasons. Now, we're hearing the reasoning that Windows will be more secure if we don't let third parties in the kernel. Fine, whatever. If we were to assume that makes it more secure, then so be it.

    But why bother to release an inferior 32-bit version? Under the presumption that closing the 64-bit kernel off will make things better, why not use the same strict security policies in 32-bit? Surely, there can't be any technical reason for all of this. It's all marketing, right? ("Microsoft recommends a 64-bit PC.")

    Or is there some real reason why it feels like 32-bit Vista and 64-bit Vista are two entirely different operating systems?