Microsoft starts to warn for the end of support of Windows Vista

Posted 09 February 2017 14:49 CET by Jan Willem Aldershoff

Microsoft has started to warn Windows Vista users that support of the 10 year old operating system will end soon. Vista users with Microsoft Security Essentials installed receive the warning that their system is unprotected.

The software giant will end support of Vista on the 11th of April this year which means the OS will no longer receive security updates. Vista systems connected to the internet therefore risk to become vulnerable to all kinds of exploits that won’t be fixed.

Vista was released on the 30th of January 2007 as the successor to Windows XP. The OS never was a success, many users were annoyed by the User Account Control (UAC) feature of Vista that overwhelmed users with all kinds of alerts when they, or applications, made changes to the system.

The OS never gained a large user base unlike it’s predecessor XP and and successor Windows 7.  Currently the OS accounts for a worldwide market share of between 0.8% –  1.2% according to StatCounter and Net Applications. This means Vista is still running on millions of computers that become a security risk after the 11th of April this year.

It’s therefore heavily recommend for Vista users to upgrade to a newer Windows version. Users can easily migrate to Windows 7, newer Windows versions require more preparation as Windows 8.1 and Windows 10 require a clean install.

Vista users who don’t want to upgrade to a newer Windows versions are advised to no longer use Internet Explorer and switch to Firefox. They should also set UAC to the highest level, use the OS with a regular user account (not as administrator), remove unsupported applications and install security software that still supports Vista.

The best advice is probably to stay away from the internet as much as possible.



coolcolors
MyCE Resident
Posted on: 09 Feb 17 14:00
You know Microsoft needs to get a Life....
0 Agree

Mr.Bill
MyCE Senior Member
Posted on: 09 Feb 17 14:35
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolcolors
You know Microsoft needs to get a Life....
They do. They just need to start using it, goes to show how MS feels about the customer. With out us there will be no MS.
0 Agree

Gummigutta
MyCE Resident
Posted on: 09 Feb 17 15:20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Bill
They do. They just need to start using it, goes to show how MS feels about the customer. With out us there will be no MS.
They gave us Win 10 for free.
0 Agree

nidzo
New Member
Posted on: 09 Feb 17 15:30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gummigutta
They gave us Win 10 for free.
Yeah with free be spied on features too . The day that I "must" use Win10 I am going Linux exclusive.(Not flaming or anything).
2 Agree

coolcolors
MyCE Resident
Posted on: 10 Feb 17 00:35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gummigutta
They gave us Win 10 for free.
They sure did I and was one of them...
Quote:
Originally Posted by nidzo
Yeah with free be spied on features too . The day that I "must" use Win10 I am going Linux exclusive.(Not flaming or anything).
There such think as hosts edit that will insure telemetry is stopped...one just had to do some homework to see how it is done. You can't block everything otherwise just disconnect from the internet.
0 Agree

AaronZ26593
MyCE Rookie
Posted on: 10 Feb 17 22:13
Microsoft Windows XP was on my computer systems from 2002 until 2015 a total of 13 Years then I switched to Microsoft Windows 7 Pro and I love it never cared for Vista but it did look pretty.
1 Agree

Zod
MyCE Resident
Posted on: 11 Feb 17 16:37
To be honest, 10 year support for software seems like a really long time to me.   I can't think of many other software companies that support their old software that long.  I think MS did a good job supporting XP as long as it did.
2 Agree

coolcolors
MyCE Resident
Posted on: 11 Feb 17 17:27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zod
To be honest, 10 year support for software seems like a really long time to me. I can't think of many other software companies that support their old software that long. I think MS did a good job supporting XP as long as it did.
Problem is if you want Windows to continue you will have to buy MS products whether or not we like it. O/S lifespan is just that end of Lifespan usage-security and updates will need to change and so the O/S will have to change. If you want to use XP, Vista, or Win7 after their shelf life then be ready to disconnect from the internet or get malwared that is your choice.
0 Agree

aztekk
MyCE Junior Member
Posted on: 12 Feb 17 10:14
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolcolors
Problem is if you want Windows to continue you will have to buy MS products whether or not we like it. O/S lifespan is just that end of Lifespan usage-security and updates will need to change and so the O/S will have to change. If you want to use XP, Vista, or Win7 after their shelf life then be ready to disconnect from the internet or get malwared that is your choice.
At it again? Do you comprehend what you are actually saying here? "disconnect from the internet or get malwared". I object to this blatant piece of misinformation, you are doing a real disservice spreading lies such as this. That is unless you actually believe that you immediately get hacked and malware installed the minute you turn an XP computer online... that's completely false. If that's how you think then you need to educate yourself on the basics of a firewall first and foremost. But even without the firewall on you won't get hacked "immediately" or at all assuming you disable some high-target vulnerable network services (RDP server, otherwise with the latest service pack, XP is pretty solid). There is a handful of windows services that are actively being exploited through scanning IP ranges, they're all old and patched exploits when it comes to XP. That is the current situation regarding this particular OS in the cybersec scene. Again even with exploits being available, the only line of defense you need to have is either the most basic firewall blocking inbound connections or lacking that closing off all services that bind listening sockets.

And I've been running XP, win2k and many other older windows OS's almost 24/7 after 2014 and 2010 (respective "EOL's", though XP PoS has support till 2019) and for years before that without the latest security updates. I don't use any Windows versions above XP x64 (NT 5.2), and don't ever plan to. And I have "randomly" got hacked only once which happened when I forgot to re-enable windows firewall AND had server daemons running that shouldn't be (of course I was able to disinfect the system easily through registry). In a general sense, you do not get an XP system infected unless you do dumb things on the web.

The "lifespan" of a product means nothing, it is a marketing instrument used by the sales department to coerce users into buying the new product that is supposedly gonna save them. The fact is that newer windows OS's are malware by themselves, with their nonexistent privacy protections worse than being part of any botnet as stated by parts of their own license agreement quoted here. If in this day and age you think using a new, up-to-date OS guarantees or improves your security you've got another thing coming.

EDIT: It's your choice if you want to use new OS's but what I object to is going around telling people it's gonna be some kind of an "armageddon" if you use older OS's online. It's so distant from reality that I can't help but have to defend against such statements.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nidzo
Yeah with free be spied on features too . The day that I "must" use Win10 I am going Linux exclusive.(Not flaming or anything).
Who is telling you that you "must" use anything? It's completely your choice what OS you use and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. The efforts these people take to try to scare, ridicule and intimidate others makes me think they are working for the Microsoft sales department lol. Or maybe it's just part of the way younger generations act ie. they have an opinion and if anyone disagrees it violates their "safe zone" and they have to aggressively and pre-emptively crusade against those who differ with them. And I am most in favor of letting the consumer choose what is best for him/her - that is my only philosophy. That and fighting false information
2 Agree

nidzo
New Member
Posted on: 12 Feb 17 14:31
Quote:
Originally Posted by aztekk
At it again? Do you comprehend what you are actually saying here? "disconnect from the internet or get malwared"...
I couldn't have said it better myself. All these scare tactics are not going to work with the older more mature users who lived thru the digital age since Comodore 64 . My problem is more how to say it empirical/theoretical. Because all of these "new" users /coming generations are forcing even others who are not that easily scared to buy hardware that is "Windows 10 compatible/locked". And yeah closing opened ports/services on Windows is more of value then any patches MS or any other company can provide.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aztekk
Who is telling you that you "must" use anything?
No one is there to tell me what to use. However not being satisfied with Win3.11 (and its capabilites to freeze after being left idle for few hours) I was already in 1994 or 95 testing something that was called OS2/Warp as well as Red Hat 5.2(Maybe few years later I really don't remember.) . I used the word "must" because I was being lazy to type too much . And by that I mean in order to be able to achieve any of the jobs or run any of the games on my PC that I want to run.
2 Agree

aztekk
MyCE Junior Member
Posted on: 12 Feb 17 15:27
Quote:
Originally Posted by nidzo
I couldn't have said it better myself. All these scare tactics are not going to work with the older more mature users who lived thru the digital age since Comodore 64 . My problem is more how to say it empirical/theoretical. Because all of these "new" users /coming generations are forcing even others who are not that easily scared to buy hardware that is "Windows 10 compatible/locked". And yeah closing opened ports/services on Windows is more of value then any patches MS or any other company can provide.

No one is there to tell me what to use. However not being satisfied with Win3.11 (and its capabilites to freeze after being left idle for few hours) I was already in 1994 or 95 testing something that was called OS2/Warp as well as Red Hat 5.2(Maybe few years later I really don't remember.) . I used the word "must" because I was being lazy to type too much . And by that I mean in order to be able to achieve any of the jobs or run any of the games on my PC that I want to run.
Well I certainly understand that part of the problem, I bought a $300 graphics card a couple years ago to supposedly play games but then I realized the modern games are starting to drop support for XP/DX9 altogether... well I was messing around with dual-booting for a while but eventually I decided I ain't gonna play a game if I have to start my PC all over just to get it running... so I'm now playing 1990's 2D games on that high-end GPU
Well it did solve an issue I had with my old Nvidia card in Urban Assault where I couldn't play with 32-bit graphics or something... ATi drivers work fine. Now that's my excuse to justify the cost lol

At the end of the day no one can stop us from running the OS of our choice at home. You won't be able to play the latest games perhaps but to me that is a compromise I'm willing to accept - I don't really like many of the new games anyway. If you have a job where your company uses software that requires new OS's then I guess you have no choice but to dual-boot, run them in a VM or attempt to port them to your OS yourself. The latter is a thing I am personally engaged in to an extent, anything open source is pretty easy of course but if all you have is a binary then it gets a little tricky. You can create API wrappers for older OS's, that allow the software to access functions found in newer system .dll files. Example projects in the past have been the very successful KernelEx which allows NT binaries to run under win9x. That particular project has been fairly successful in that it even allowed Firefox to run all the way until version 13 (2 is the latest supported for win98). And there have been similar projects by people like blackwingcat who specializes in porting new API functions into Windows 2000. XP has a significantly bigger and more loyal userbase than Win9x/2000 combined so I think there will be plenty of people (me included) who will continue to provide unofficial support for using that OS one way or another.

I never really got into Windows until the W95/NT4 era. I just didn't have Windows PC's around me, but I did experience with UnixWare and Solaris then. I really liked proprietary Unix, it had a proper, professional software base and support, which subsequent open source *nix's have been lacking. Or maybe I just got used to Windows NT. I also remember OS/2 Warp 4. It felt like a pretty solid OS but by the time I had experience with it (late 90s) Windows had already taken over everything except for ATM's and servers.

By the way, welcome (back) to the forum! Hope to see you around here in the future!
0 Agree

coolcolors
MyCE Resident
Posted on: 12 Feb 17 16:34
Quote:
Originally Posted by aztekk
At it again? Do you comprehend what you are actually saying here? "disconnect from the internet or get malwared". I object to this blatant piece of misinformation, you are doing a real disservice spreading lies such as this.
Here we go again people thinking they are smarter then the malware people of which your not. They already got those O/S and got malware ready for those outdated O/S to log onto the internet to get infected and to think otherwise is a fool leading the fool. Actually you should post your support information to fix those whom get malware because their O/S no longer protects them if you think your outdated O/S will stop malware infections. A/V work only as good as the O/S can detect outdated Updates and once the user fails to see the problem the malware will take over it's simple they look for those thinking their outdated software will not be target is so far from the truth it will be to late when they find out.
0 Agree

AaronZ26593
MyCE Rookie
Posted on: 12 Feb 17 23:06
aztekk, Haha you made a lot of valid points.
0 Agree

aztekk
MyCE Junior Member
Posted on: 13 Feb 17 16:33
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolcolors
Here we go again people thinking they are smarter then the malware people of which your not. They already got those O/S and got malware ready for those outdated O/S to log onto the internet to get infected and to think otherwise is a fool leading the fool. Actually you should post your support information to fix those whom get malware because their O/S no longer protects them if you think your outdated O/S will stop malware infections. A/V work only as good as the O/S can detect outdated Updates and once the user fails to see the problem the malware will take over it's simple they look for those thinking their outdated software will not be target is so far from the truth it will be to late when they find out.
You're confused so let me explain to you how an antivirus works. The first thing an antivirus software does is it periodically downloads data from the servers of its respective developer, this data contains signatures of known malware that is circulating around. This data allows the AV to identify whether a particular piece of assembly should be considered malicious. And there are 2 main methods how the AV compares these signatures to actual files on the system, the first being it scans files as user action or in some cases automatically and if there is a match at this stage then the AV alerts the user and takes appropriate action against this file. The second mode of operation in cases when there were no detections at scantime, is that the AV creates system-wide hooks to certain API's which allows them to monitor what an executable/binary does when it is being run (its 10 times easier for malware creators to encrypt their .exe to pass scantime detections than runtime). Again if there is a match during this time then the exe is killed and user alerted. There is a 3rd method used more rarely which is some AV's actually sandbox all new .exe's (run them in a VM) which allows more control of that program than simply API hooks would otherwise, but all of these methods can still be bypassed by malware authors (by creating a PE encrypted environment) and therefore considered ineffective which is the reason that AV's in a classical sense are completely dead. That we have already talked about and is backed up by such industry figures like Brian Dye, the CEO of Symantec/Norton and most other respectable cybersec figures.

So why am I bringing it up again? Well notice that in no part of AV's operation does it require, check or in any other way interact with any windows updates of any sort whatsoever. There is no cooperation between these two entities at all, at any part of the procedure. Because there is no need to. They deal with entirely different parts of your computer/OS. And imagine if it were otherwise, if AV's somehow required certain updates to be present... imagine how enormous mess that would be! You'd have an antivirus that is literally compatible with just one particular OS and only with the latest updates, no more support of XP, Vista, Win7, Win8 and 10 for one AV. It would support just one of those. That would be incredibly stupid from many perspectives not least of which is the AV company would make no profit. So next time you make a statement why don't you first think think think of what you're suggesting in your head, and then think again if that makes sense before you post it...

Moving on to the accusations of being smarter than the malware authors or being a "fool". Well I don't consider other malware authors to be of particularly higher or lower intellect than someone who is in the exact same occupation, with 10+ years of experience with honors, albeit on the other side of the fence. Blackhat hackers and whitehat hackers like myself both have a deep understanding of the actual byte-level methods and functions that a piece of malware does and therefore excuse me if that somehow grinds your gears but I think it's a reasonable assumption that people of that kind know how to work with and also around malware. That's all I'm gonna saying on that topic.

And I would respectfully venture to say that the moniker "fool" in the debate of this caliber is more rightfully reserved for the person who is disregarding facts, not backing anything of his own with factual evidence, while having no proper expertise on the subject considers his largely mainstream media driven views superior to those of extremely well known and respected figures in the profession like Brian Dye and in general is being narrow-minded rather than open for real discussion. I'm disappointed with your post. I was honestly expecting a little more evidence based argumentation (even a smither of?) and less character assassination. Can you engage in a civil debate?

As for the invitation to post security patches to what I assume you meant XP and win2k, well I appreciate your interest but I feel I should remind you that Microsoft officially provides those for XP until 2019 (some sources say it'll extend to 2021) and unofficially for Windows 2000 (they dropped "EOL" in 2010 but have continued to provide them to partners and they've leaked online). However despite that there have been efforts by the win2k community to fix certain issues themselves, projects like this is one example. But these efforts are unnecessary if we are strictly referring to the scare tactic you were spreading that is the notion that "you get hacked when you log on online". There is a very simple solution which is a firewall, of which anyone who understands even the basics of, knows is adequate in preventing remote attacks sufficiently, if not completely. To be brutally honest the effectiveness of blocking remote attacks (ie. "hacking") by having a firewall block inbound traffic or having no theoretically exploitable daemons binding listening ports is 100%. So we can sit here all day and discuss exploits and what is the most vulnerable type of OS (the answer is "the most used" - ie. has highest amount of manpower trying to break it which right now according to marketshare is Windows 7) but the fact of the matter is that will not make your statements any less false and frankly it's a waste of time. I just wish you did some research into the things we are discussing so we'd be on an even table to discuss the topics but right now all I can do is disvalidate your statements, which are provably false.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronZ26593
aztekk, Haha you made a lot of valid points.
Thanks for the support. I'm just trying to prevent this particular type of misinformation from spreading any further than it already has. Sometimes to achieve that you gotta break some bones
1 Agree

coolcolors
MyCE Resident
Posted on: 14 Feb 17 15:56
Put this way A/V works to protect the O/S and with Defender it is integrated into Windows itself and updates and scans. The long speech is just that long speech that does less to convey information then to obscure a reasonable response.
0 Agree

aztekk
MyCE Junior Member
Posted on: 14 Feb 17 16:37
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolcolors
Put this way A/V works to protect the O/S and with Defender it is integrated into Windows itself and updates and scans. The long speech is just that long speech that does less to convey information then to obscure a reasonable response.
I gave you a proper, in-depth explanation of how an AV works. I guess it was a bit above your head so let's use your terms then. You have presented 3 entities:

A) a third-party antivirus
B) Windows Defender (itself an antivirus)
C) Windows updates

All of these 3 entities work separately and none of them collaborate with each other in any direct way. Even Windows Defender works entirely separate from windows updates in its anti-virus function.

End of story.
0 Agree

Reactions closed

Comments are currently disabled as we've changed forum software and comments were posted through this system. It might take up to 1-2 days before they are enabled again.

Myce.com settings

Several settings at Myce.com can be changed, they are stored in cookies, which means they will be reset if you clear Myce.com cookies

Background

Change the background to a plain color or trianglified image (similar to the default image)

No tracking features

At Myce most social media feature are done server side and impose no privacy risk to the visitor when not used. Several features use Javascript with you can turn off here

Layout

Switch to the List layout for an index with chronologycally listed news items or Grid layout for a block based layout. To see the change you need to reload the page

×