http://192.168.2.20/blogs/doverton/archive/2006/10/09/Vista-and-security-_2D00_-are-Microsoft-doing-the-right-thing_3F00_.aspxThis is something I have thought long and hard about and as such I have to caveat things by saying this is my opinion and that I am no more informed than any other member of the public or IT community. Having said that, I have done my time as a WindowsenCommunityServer 2008.5 SP2 (Build: 40407.4157)http://192.168.2.20/blogs/doverton/archive/2006/10/09/Vista-and-security-_2D00_-are-Microsoft-doing-the-right-thing_3F00_.aspx#2305Sun, 15 Oct 2006 01:38:54 GMT72050d9c-4f41-4a16-9f70-ebbf2c98a2c7:2305Tim Long<p>I'm totally behind Microsoft locking down the kernel. The kernel is responsible for managing system resources and keeping everything secure. Once you start letting in third party stuff, no matter how well-intentioned, you can't guarantee to do that any more. I never came accross a mainframe operating system that allowed third parties to modify the kernel willy-nilly. Windows never should have allowed third parties to put files in any of the system folders, in my opinion. System File Checker was a good step but I think it is far better to completely lock down the kernel.</p> <p>I'm more concerned about some OEM builds out there that come bundled with third party security suites pre-installed and make it really easy for users to turn off the standard Windows Firewall without really knowing what they've done. Then they have the cheek to tell you that the built in Windows Firewall is &quot;redundant&quot;. Way too aggressive.</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://192.168.2.20/aggbug.aspx?PostID=2305" width="1" height="1">