Hello LoneWolf,

Free speech is just one portion within theses Forums.
**********************************************
A Post from a MVP, containing *wrong* information can tarnish the integrity
and reputation of Microsoft.
**********************************************

The below is a small excerpt extracted from Microsoft, courtesy Jim Allchin.

Although, the true purpose for my Post was for deterring how many people are
aware of the inherent Security provided by Vista; and the factual differences
between 32-bit and 64-bit Vista.

Specifically learning how many, if any, MVPs are fully aware of Vista’s
inherent Security. Seems as if my curiosity has been somewhat addressed,
also, guessed at, for the characteristic differences between 32-bit Vista and
64-bit Vista.

Much more specific Vista technology easily could have been included within
this Post, respecting time and space, for now, this should be adequate.
Apologize for the loaded (Post) question. My reason, too many people within
this Forum display a great lack of understanding regarding Vista's inherent
Ultimate Security.

Te below is selected text (the gist) for how 64-bit Vista provides the
highest level of Protections (online or off-line) compared to 32-bit Vista.

Below, Microsoft's (Jim Allchin) Response:
Kernel Patch Protection also makes PCs more secure by helping protect
against potentially malicious software known as rootkits, which modify the
kernel in an attempt to hide from detection.

Kernel Patch Protection is not new. Last year it was built into the 64-bit
versions of Windows XP and Windows Server 2003. With Windows Vista, Kernel
Patch Protection will likewise be incorporated into **64-bit versions only.**
(emphasis added)

We have been exploring ways to implement Kernel Patch Protection on 32-bit
Windows systems, but have not done this yet, although some customers have
requested it, because of limitations of the 32-bit architecture and because
it will cause compatibility issues for some applications and devices that are
already in use. In adapting applications and devices to take advantage of
64-bit Windows, on the other hand, developers have an opportunity to resolve
these compatibility issues.

Some security vendors have asked Microsoft to provide instructions on how to
disable Kernel Patch Protection in 64-bit versions of Windows, because their
products include some features that modify the Windows kernel in undocumented
and unsupported ways. Making exceptions and allowing some vendors special
access to modify the Windows Vista kernel is unworkable. It opens the door
wide for malicious software.

For example, rootkits could be designed to present themselves to the
operating system in the guise of a legitimate application that was given
special access. Also, making exceptions will prolong the reliability problems
that are caused by unsupported kernel modification, such as when multiple
applications compete to patch the same kernel interfaces.

In the case of security solutions, unsupported kernel modifications also
limit your choices, by making it extremely difficult or impossible for
multiple security solutions to co-exist reliably on a system. We want to work
with security providers to make common extensions available, so that any
security vendors can use them, and so that security software does not itself
put your security and reliability at risk from malicious kernel modifications.

Here is what we are doing to maintain the integrity and security of 64-bit
Windows, while still addressing the needs of our security partners:

• Contrary to some media reports, **Microsoft will not weaken the security
of 64-bit Windows by enabling some applications to modify the kernel of the
operating system.** (emphasis added)

• We have applied our no-exceptions policy against kernel patching to
Microsoft applications as well as third party applications,

*** No application can bypass or weaken Kernel Patch Protection ***—this is
essential to improving security and reliability for you. Note that many
third-party security companies provide highly competitive products without
modifying the Windows kernel in unsupported ways. (above emphasis added)



--
Firewall

Disclaimer:
Accept Vista as it is, or, Abandon Vista


"LoneWolf" wrote:

> FireWall2:
>
> The best place to get your answer is "Vista Help &
> Support". You have told us that so many times, it
> must be so !
>
> In the mean-time, get ride of that 'Disclaimer'. It
> has absolutely no legal standing, and since you
> are in the 'legal profession', you should be able to
> come up with something better than that.
>
> regards
>
> LoneWolf
> B.Bus; LLB; M.Bus
>
> '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
>
> "FireWall2" wrote:
>
> > Which Version of Vista provides the highest level for online security, 32-bit
> > or 64-bit ?
> >
> > Or, is each Version, 32-bit and 64-bit Vista equal with providing online
> > security ?
> >
> > --
> > Firewall
> >
> > Disclaimer:
> > Accept Vista as it is, or, Abandon Vista