Does Vista need extra software for security?

Discussion in 'Windows Vista Security' started by Stan Kay, Jan 5, 2007.

  1. Stan Kay

    Stan Kay Guest

    Within a short while of adopting Windows XP Pro I experienced a series of
    security issues (viruses, Trojans etc) and so quickly searched for Security
    software. I eventually adopted Zone Alarm Security Suite and have used it
    without problems for a few years.

    Now to the point of this question. I moved to Windows Vista Ultimate on the
    30th November 2006 and, perhaps luckily, have encountered no problems. So,
    my question is:-

    1.. with the built in extra security do I really need other software such
    as Zone Alarm (current version does not work with Vista but a compatible
    version is promised soon.
    2.. If I do need extra security software can anyone please offer any
    experience based suggestions?
    Any help would be greatly appreciated.
    Stan Kay, Jan 5, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. Stan Kay

    Kerry Brown Guest

    The built in firewall in Vista is more than adequate. You do need antivirus
    software. You may need antispyware software.
    Kerry Brown, Jan 5, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. Stan Kay

    Jeff Guest


    Kerry is right-grab a good av thats Vista compatable;most are now.
    I use Avast-it's free, and never have had any issues-no bugs(so far)
    It's at
    if ya want it-
    The Home Edition is free

    Jeff, Jan 5, 2007
  4. The windows Vista firewall is more than adequate. Of course you do need anti
    virus cover and there are a few 'free' ones around, AVG anti virus
    ( is one Avast ( is another.
    Spyware/malware cover is catered for in Ultimate with the built in Windows
    defender software.

    John Barnett MVP
    Associate Expert
    Windows Shell/User


    The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
    kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
    reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for
    any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the
    use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this
    John Barnett MVP, Jan 5, 2007
  5. Stan Kay

    Jeremy Guest

    I started using Zone Alarm a number of years ago, and have since stopped
    using it. It actually modifies the stack, which I don't like. The built
    in firewall should be more than adequate especially if you are behind a
    router which I would recommend to anyone.
    Jeremy, Jan 6, 2007
  6. Stan Kay

    Stan Kay Guest

    Many thanks guys for very helpful feedback. It reinforces my own view that
    all I really need with Vista is antivirus software.
    Stan Kay, Jan 6, 2007
  7. Stan Kay

    FireWall2 Guest

    Hello Stan,

    Are you using Vista's BitLocker and Vista's Encrypted File System (EFS) ?

    Perhaps it's just me, because I practice very safe browing, but personally,
    I'm not convinced third party anti-virus applications are really needed or
    necessary while using BitLocker and EFS.

    What could a hacker or virus attack if they try attacking an 256 Encrypted
    Firewall? Maybe I'm over looking something, but don't think so.
    FireWall2, Jan 6, 2007
  8. Stan Kay

    Paul Adare Guest

    in the news group, =?
    Neither BitLocker nor EFS provide you with anything even
    approaching anti-virus protection. They are technologies that
    are designed for a completely different purpose.
    The firewall is not encrypted. You're really not understanding
    how either BDE or EFS work. If you open a document, or an email,
    or what have you that contains a virus and you're not running an
    anti-virus program you're going to get infected whether or not
    you're using both BDE and EFS.

    Your post is really, really bad advice.
    Paul Adare, Jan 6, 2007
  9. In another post you stated:
    "Factually, Vista’s BitLocker is indeed the newest most high tech Firewall"
    Does much of your incorrect information stem from this incorrect belief of
    BitLocker is not a firewall, and is not intended to replace a firewall.

    You really need to read up on the tools and their purposes.
    Jupiter Jones [MVP], Jan 6, 2007
  10. Stan Kay

    FireWall2 Guest

    Paul and Jupiter,

    Please understand that fully I'm aware that Vista's Firewall is -NOT-

    As you are fully aware, BitLocker fully Encrypts the OS. EFS fully encrypts
    user defined files and/or folders.

    As I previously shared, I practice very safe browsing and possibly only
    Charlie Russell and I are the only individuals absent a/v, and then maybe

    My previous Post was not ridged advice. Instead, merely sharing my views, in
    respect to a/v and Vista's incredible internal applications. Actually, too
    many others practice the equal application as mine.

    What works for others and my self, may not work for you... have faith and
    courage for respecting Microsoft's Technology. Only requires a very short
    time for reformatting and re-loading Vista.

    However, if a person is using many third party applications that alone
    increases the potential for intruders.

    Safe hex prevents hostile intruders, considering my email is auto a/v scanned.

    Thanks for your comments, might consider consulting with Guru Charlie.
    FireWall2, Jan 7, 2007
  11. Stan Kay

    FireWall2 Guest

    Hello Jupiter,

    Well, please just consider my previous statment; "Factually, Vista’s
    BitLocker is indeed the newest most high tech Firewall" a very accurate
    analogy and hyperbole.

    Moments ago, made a Post to Paul Adare that referenced you regarding the
    prevuios Post of discussion. Could be wrong but I don't think hackers can
    penetrate 256 encryption. What is your opinion?
    FireWall2, Jan 7, 2007
  12. Stan Kay

    Kerry Brown Guest

    I also run Vista without an AV program. I don't recommend it to anyone else.
    I'm specifically doing it as an experiment. I know what the consequences are
    and can deal with them. I am trying to find out how hard it is to infect
    Vista and then how hard it is to clean the infection. So far I haven't been
    infected, uac and the better security does work. I fully expect to be
    infected as Vista becomes more popular and is targeted. If you truly believe
    that Bitlocker and EFS have anything to do with a firewall or AV then your
    education has been lacking. The malware would attack just like an
    unencrypted system. The only difference would be the malware files would be
    encrypted on your hard drive. Booting from external media to clean the pc
    wouldn't be an option. If anything Bitlocker and EFS make it harder to clean
    an infected pc. I can't speak for Charlie but I'd be very surprised if he
    agrees with any of your statements.

    If your email is auto scanned then you are using an AV application. It is on
    the server rather than your pc and only protects against the currently most
    common method of infection.
    Kerry Brown, Jan 7, 2007
  13. Stan Kay

    FireWall2 Guest

    Hello Kerry,

    Approximately one-year ago, I too begin experimenting using Vista absent a/v
    - - also, initially I was -not- using BitLocker or EFS, and never did I
    intercept any type of virus or trojan. That experience left me more than
    impressed with Vista, yet I remained curious pondering if I would intercept
    not desired attacks.

    During the last month or two, I begin using BitLocker and EFS, learning
    those applications provides me ultimate online confidence, never concerned
    for intercepting any type of OS confrontation. Although, my machines use AMD
    Athlon x2 that enhances a/v protection, somewhat as DEP.

    Possibly, if I used several third party applications or "free ware" or third
    party applications abscent a valid certificate, and wildly browsed, maybe
    that might alter my judgment, maybe...

    Still I remain extremely confident that hackers can not penetrate 256
    cipher, period. Yet, remain most aware online criminal hackers void of morals
    will be working over time attempting to prostitute Vista's 256 cipher, and
    some may grow old attempting.

    My definition of an OS and files that's encrypted with Vista's 256 cipher is
    simply an encrypted Firewall !! yes, Firewall is used as an acronym.

    The email server a/v I have no control, although have no objection for its
    usage. Just as I practice safe browsing, never do I open not recognized

    Just occurred to me that I used XP x64 with Athlon x2 for approximately one
    year absent a/v and never encountered online attacks, other than a few
    trackers that were quickly controlled or identified.

    Progressively Windows Vista will revolutionize our World's computer usage.
    Those that seemingly disagree are living a life of self-delusion or simply
    spewing propaganda for self-promotion not fully aware of Vista's inherent

    It is my observation, from reading various Windows Newsgroups, the majority
    of genuine conflict complaints toward Vista are user induced attempting to
    rapidly install Vista just as we did with Windows 3.1.

    Thank you for your comments.
    FireWall2, Jan 7, 2007
  14. Stan Kay

    FireWall2 Guest

    Hello Kerry,

    Well, apparently the first time reading your Post, I read a little to fast
    and overlooked your "malware" discussion.

    Please share with me, is it possible for malware intruding Vista's 256
    cipher? If so, my conclusions might rapidly change.

    The more I learn, the more I realize how ignorant I am. Sincerely, if
    Vista's 256 encryption can be compromized, very much would I appreciate you
    for sharing your knowledge with me, as soon as possible, please.
    FireWall2, Jan 7, 2007
  15. Stan Kay

    Kerry Brown Guest

    While you are running Vista the system accounts and your account have the
    keys to decrypt the files. The malware would run in the context of one of
    these accounts and thus have access to the files. Whatever you can do the
    malware can do. Encryption is to stop someone who cannot logon from
    accessing the files even if they have physical access to the computer. In
    other words if someone steals the computer or removes the hard drive they
    wouldn't be able to decrypt the files unless they had a password to get into
    Windows. There is a fundamental difference in what encryption is designed to
    do and what anti-malware programs do. They are not the same thing.
    Kerry Brown, Jan 7, 2007
  16. Stan Kay

    Paul Adare Guest

    in the news group, =?
    You don't understand how BDE or EFS work. Take two computers,
    and two users, neither of which are running any anti-virus
    software. One computer has BDE and EFS enabled, and one has
    neither. Both users inadvertently open an infected document
    which contains a virus. Guess what? Both of them are going to
    get infected exactly the same way. It should be patently obvious
    to you why the computer that isn't using BDE or EFS will get
    infected. Think about the other computer. The virus payload will
    be launched in the security context of the user who opened the
    infected document. In the case of EFS, that means that the
    process that the virus is running will have access to the same
    decryption key(s) that the user has so there is zero protection
    there. In the case of BDE, once the OS volume is unlocked, there
    is no protection at all. BDE, unlike EFS, is not user specific.
    Once the OS is up and running, if you can log on to the
    computer, the OS will happily decrypt any file that is encrypted
    via BDE.
    You are deluding yourself if you think that BDE or EFS give you
    any protection at all against getting infected with a virus.
    I know Charlie, and I know that he'd agree with me here. Since
    you seem to be in awe of him, go ask him for his opinion. Your
    statements have no merit.
    Paul Adare, Jan 7, 2007
  17. Stan Kay

    Kerry Brown Guest

    I agree with Paul's post. Go talk to Charlie again. You have misunderstood
    him. I've only met him a couple of times but his depth of knowledge was

    Kerry Brown
    Microsoft MVP - Shell/User
    Kerry Brown, Jan 7, 2007
  18. Stan Kay

    Kerry Brown Guest

    Many of us have answered your question already. You are missing an
    understanding of what encrypting files or a file system is designed to do.
    It's hard to put in simpler words than we've already done. Malware doesn't
    need to compromise the encryption. Malware installs while you are using the
    computer. Encryption of files is designed to protect the file from being
    accessed while you are not using the computer. If you don't unlock a volume
    then malware couldn't infect it but neither could you use it. While you are
    using it malware could infect it. I hardly see how this can be equated with
    malware protection as in an AV or firewall application. They are designed to
    protect you while you are using the volume.
    Kerry Brown, Jan 7, 2007
  19. Stan Kay

    Paul Adare Guest

    in the news group, =?
    You still don't understand how all of this works. No one is
    talking about comprising encryption here.
    Again, you just don't get it. The user doesn't unlock the
    volume. If you boot the OS, the volume is unlocked, it is as
    simple as that.
    Again, you're missing the point. I've explained this in my
    previous response. Perhaps you should do some reading and
    attempt to understand how the technology actually works before
    making wild claims about virus protection that simply cannot
    possibly be true.
    Paul Adare, Jan 7, 2007
  20. Stan Kay

    FireWall2 Guest


    Please accept my apology for not understanding your syntax regarding
    un-locking the volume.

    Since my continuing request is for one very elementary question:
    “Please understand the purpose for this continuing request is for additional
    confirmation that Vista's 256 cipher can or can not be compromised.â€

    Repeatedly, my request for your belief, in respect to, can Vista’s 256
    cipher be compromised, remains *not* answered by you.

    Why you refuse answering my repeated question by stating that *“no oneâ€* is
    talking about *compromising Vista’s 256 cipher* exceeds mysterious.

    Since you and I used the same syntax *â€compromising Vista’s 256 cipherâ€*
    quite obviously you and I are talking about *â€compromising Vista’s 256

    If it is a benefit for you, just consider this repeated request as a NEW
    Question: Can Vista’s 256 cipher be compromised, yes or no?

    Surely you understand that a simple question deservers a simple answer.

    Yes, I feel as if I'm waiting for the bus to arrive.
    FireWall2, Jan 8, 2007
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.