Udostępnij za pośrednictwem


Vista Vulnerability report published for Year 1

Folks,
I thought you might be interested in this report that has just been issued compiling the first year's worth of security vulnerability's found in Windows Vista, and comparing Windows  XP and non-Microsoft OS's first year vulnerabilities.

The report can be found here but here are a few highlights:-

Metric

Windows Vista (year 1)

Windows XP (year 1)

Vulnerabilities fixed

36

65

Security Updates

17

30

Patch Events

9

26

Weeks with at least 1 Patch Event

9

25

These figures may be merely interesting until you consider the cost saving implications of reduced patches. A customer told me recently that each patch event costs them £30K, so this yr 1 reduction in patches would have delivered a direct  £480,000 per annum saving  to them running Vista over Windows XP!! Then there's the incalculable reduction in corporate risk from this reduction in vulnerabilities.

I won't comment but it's interesting to note the comparison to non-Microsoft operating systems. It certainly does fly in the face of some of the IT press reports that have surrounded Vista since it's launch.

Metric

Windows Vista (year 1)

Windows XP (year 1)

Red Hat rhel4ws reduced (year 1)

Ubuntu 6.06 LTS reduced (year 1)

Mac OS X 10.4 (year 1)

Vulnerabilities fixed

36

65

360

224

116

Security Updates

17

30

125

80

17

Patch Events

9

26

64

65

17

Weeks with at least 1 Patch Event

9

25

44

39

15

Technorati Tags: Vista,Security,TCO

Comments

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    PingBack from http://mintywhite.com/tech/news/vista-vulnerability-report-published-for-year-1/

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    This isn't something that I would normally bother blogging on - and from the lack of recent posts you

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    Diferença grande se comparado com o XP. Metric Windows Vista (1 year) Windows XP (1 year) Vulnerabilities

  • Anonymous
    April 16, 2008
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    April 17, 2008
    The comment has been removed