XP SP2 : List of programs that need "tweaking" to work.

[directhex]

so an IE vulnerability allowing you to execute code remotely, and a firewall vulnerability which is only affected by executed code are COMPLETELY unrelated?

[Paul Adams]

As far as the OS and service pack are concerned, the IE security enchancements, Windows firewall, data execution prevention, etc. are distinct.

The priority for security is to protect against intrusion originating from the outside world - there is an almost limitless number of possible exploits for any system, given the user's access level, if we assume that they have to perform some action in order to affect their system.

If you can have code executed on a system through some user action (running an email attachment, running a malicious script, being told to type in a command at a CLI prompt) then potentially any application on that system is "vulnerable".

You could equally say that your MP3 collection can be rendered useless with a simple "ren [path]\*.mp3 *.omg" command, if you get the user to type it, for example.

[directhex]

so it's secure? you say on your own website that spyware can be installed into IE without any user interaction - either it's secure or it isn't.

[Paul Adams]

so it's secure? you say on your own website that spyware can be installed into IE without any user interaction - either it's secure or it isn't.

"It"?
I was questioning the assertion that the firewall in SP2 is "full of holes" out of professional interest as I thought myself aware of all the known issues with the networking aspects of SP2 (so IE security is outside of my area of expertise).

Given the number of versions of IE out there, on different OSs, I don't think it is possible to make a sweeping statement about it.
Is something secure if only in its default state it is hardened? That question would likely generate opposing points of view depending on who you asked.

The principle of SP2 has been to chiefly increase the base level of security for the the majority of XP users that install it and accept the defaults, it cannot impact on the default operation of the OS too radically or it would break the majority of PCs beyond the users' ability to figure out and fix it.
(See the list of applications "affected" or "broken" by SP2 and imagine what that might be if it, say, blocked outbound traffic by default as some people have claimed it should.)

Is any OS or application "totally secure"? Nope.

Would a widespread application of XP SP2 decrease the probability of users getting hit by malware? I would say certainly.


That particular part of my site was written pre-SP2, but is not specifically XP-only so is still relevant to some - I need to review and update it, thanks