Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

More Headaches from Vista Security 240

Michael Cooney writes to tell us Windows Vista may have some serious headaches in store for corporate users with third-party authentication systems like VPNs. From the article: "ISVs say rewriting their code for the new architecture will produce headaches that will extend to their customers that have deployed strong authentication such as biometrics or tokens, enterprise single sign-on and a number of other systems integrated with the Windows authentication architecture."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

More Headaches from Vista Security

Comments Filter:
  • Somewhat redundant (Score:5, Interesting)

    by JediLow ( 831100 ) * on Monday May 08, 2006 @05:31PM (#15288534)
    Saying that Vista is going to cause 'headaches' because the old login software isn't compatiable with it is sort of redundant isn't it? Since Vista is a new architecture and is abandoning GINA for CTP why would anyone expect the programs written for GINA to work?

    The more interesting question (imho) is why Microsoft abandoning GINA since "the company had started talking about it at its Professional Developers Conference last September."

  • by l2718 ( 514756 ) on Monday May 08, 2006 @05:32PM (#15288543)
    This ain't a Microsoft problem. When Linus decided to change the driver model in the kernel, many hardware vendors had to rewrite their drivers. When Solaris 2.5 came out, all those SunOS 4.3 drivers became obsolete. Of course, if documentation of the upcoming Vista security model was hard to come by then these vendors would have a real beef, but no-one is saying that this is the case.
  • Interesting.. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by onion2k ( 203094 ) on Monday May 08, 2006 @05:33PM (#15288550) Homepage
    On the one hand I'm feeling that this sort of doomsaying article is merely an excuse for the producers of authentication systems to ramp up their prices in a "but this is an whole new version .. no upgrades possible .. you'll need to relicense!" scam.

    On the other hand it's true than the winlogon stuff in Vista Beta isn't entirely complete, and consequently I have to wonder what Microsoft mean by 'beta'? When I (and lots of other people) release a beta it's basically feature-complete and API-locked, but isn't entirely tested .. no major differences are likely between the beta and the final. If MSFT are releasing beta software than isn't complete then why are they calling it a beta instead of an alpha or preview?

    As for MS GINA being dropped .. I hope that VA release a version instead .. they could integrate it into sourceforge or something. *chuckle*
  • Re:Problem Solved (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Rosco P. Coltrane ( 209368 ) on Monday May 08, 2006 @05:39PM (#15288599)
    Dont use windows use Linux problem solved

    In other news, random Slashdot user creeves1982 blurts out the usual Slashdot banality about Linux.

    It's not so simple and you know it. You can use Linux. I can use Linux, but many MANY people can't use anything but Windows, because they're not computer-oriented, have been trained with Windows-XX and Word/Excel-YY and wouldn't conceive anything else exists, must less be able to use it.

    That's how the world is. Microsoft is still the biggest OS and software vendor in the world despite its many shortcomings and its outrageous economic practices because the Windows userbase is massively reluctant to change. The real challenge is to make Linux truly as user-friendly as Windows, and to get users to discover it and get used to it. Simply saying "use linux problem solved" is childish.
  • Re:Good! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by drsmithy ( 35869 ) <drsmithy@gmail. c o m> on Monday May 08, 2006 @06:33PM (#15288917)
    What I know is that people will be forced to use it, and that new Microsoft apps will require Vista features to work properly.

    And when you say "forced" you mean "go out and buy themselves". And when you say "new Microsoft apps" you mean "new Microsoft apps released 5+ years later".

  • by yagu ( 721525 ) * <yayaguNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Monday May 08, 2006 @07:07PM (#15289085) Journal
    Oh, please! Learn your OS history. NT/XP never sat on top of DOS, Win3.x or Win9x

    Never said it (they) did. Actually if you look at your direct quote from my post, I used the term "paradigm". So, in that context, let me expand a bit: the paradigm was very much an assumption, one machine/computer, one user, hence the bizarre logical drives, all accessible to all levels by all users (by default at least -- yes, that's now changing, welcome to century 21).

    As for intent, I was on the original NT Beta support team at Microsoft (there were 16 of us), and after walking in the door, I immediately began asking for information on setting up my machine with a multi-user configuration. The team treated me like I was some sort of nut case -- they emphasized multi-user meant multiple users could access services on one machine (file services, not new in NT though, etc.), not multiple users logged onto one machine.

    They were barely comfortable with the notion of more than one user ever using one machine, even one user at a time!

    As for all of this being a hack, you are absolutely right. I would actually probably be less adversarial with Microsoft if they were more candid about things like this, but to read their literature, they concede nothing, ever. (For example, the initial security access levels "rings" in the NT kernel were elegantly designed and promptly trampled to allow performance by granting direct video hardware access to non-privileged code -- go figure.)

    I joined Microsoft in 1992 excited about being a part of what I thought was a sea change in their OS direction. I left shortly after when behind closed doors I discovered it was a facade designed to show Microsoft was ready to play on the same court with the big boys (namely, Unix). Unfortunately, they weren't. Unfortunately, they got away with it. Unfortunately, even today, they don't stand up to hardened Unix systems (they're closer than ever, but still not there).

  • by xXenXx ( 973576 ) on Monday May 08, 2006 @08:14PM (#15289370)
    EXACTLY what I was thinking. Newer hardware gets cancelled out by newer software, making the whole upgrade cycle rather pointless. Stick with your current software and shell out your hard earned cash on new hardware that will [i]actually[/i] speed up your computer and increase productivity. There is a fine line where features become bloat...
  • by BCW2 ( 168187 ) on Monday May 08, 2006 @08:16PM (#15289385) Journal
    Everything about Vista is going to be a big headache. From the initial sale, think of the sales clerk trying to explain the differences between 6 or 7 versions, with minimal actual differences and major price differences. Add DRM, the usual raft of bugs, and even worse security problems than ever... it's going to be ugly folks. All white box stores need to stock up on XP or start the shift to Linux for all customers. Train them now and end this stupidity.

    It still seems like Me revisited.
  • Re:At this point... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by zcat_NZ ( 267672 ) <zcat@wired.net.nz> on Monday May 08, 2006 @08:18PM (#15289392) Homepage
    90 days? that's a tad optimistic.

    I seem to recall someone had written a prototype virus within 24 hours of the first beta being released, which caused Microsoft to drop the advanced scripting they had planned.

    I'd try and find a reference but I really can't be arsed. Vista won't be out until next year and by all accounts it's going to suck just as badly as any previous version of windows. Dapper Drake will be out next month and it's going to rock! I've been running it since flight4, it was awesome even back then and it just keeps getting better.

Everybody likes a kidder, but nobody lends him money. -- Arthur Miller

Working...