On mySimon: Where The Wild Things Are Plush
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 21 of 25:
Next »
« Previous
That's just not true.
See my message "It takes more than that" above.

Or, do a query at the Microsoft Knowledge Base on just how many Windows vulnerabilities involve programs being able to grant themselves administrative permissions even when launched from a non-administrative account, usually through buffer and stack overflow exploits (XP SP2 does help a lot here, especially when used in conjuction with a CPU supporting ED [Execute Disable, in the latest Intel Xeons] or NX [No eXecute, used in all Athlon64s and Opterons] status bits).

The problem is that Windows is simply fatally flawed at the foundation and plumbing level. It will take a complete rewrite (Longhorn?) to thoroughly fix it.

Case in point: Intel CPUs since the 386 (and even before, when used with an Intel Paged Memory Management Unit [80285 PMMU used with an 80286 CPU and optional 80287 FPU, for instance]) implement four nested "Rings" of privilege. Each code module runs in a specific Ring.

Ring 0 is the most highly privileged, powerful level, with no protections at all. Ring 0 code can do ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING: access hardware directly, read and write anywhere in memory, etc.

Ring 1 adds some very basic protections, but is otherwise still very powerful and with limited protection.

Ring 2 adds still more protections and thus has more reduced privileges.

Ring 3 is the most protected, least privileged level. User-level application code runs in Ring 3.

A properly-designed OS would use all four of those Rings, with each code module running only in the highest-numbered Ring that gives it the privileges that it absolutely needs. If a module needed to do something that Ring 3 couldn't do but Ring 2 could, it would run in Ring 2, NOT Ring 1 or 0.

Windows DOES NOT USE Rings 1 and 2, AT ALL, PERIOD! Everything is either Ring 0 or Ring 3! Microsoft calls Ring 0 "Kernel Mode" and Ring 3 "User Mode." If a part of the OS needs to do something that cannot be done in User Mode / Ring 3, it runs it all the way down into Kernel Mode / Ring 0, with WIDE-OPEN privileges and ABSOLUTELY NO PROTECTIONS AT ALL!

Since Windows NT 4.0, even your VIDEO CARD DISPLAY DRIVER runs in Ring 0 (Kernel Mode) -- in NT 3.x, it ran in Ring 3 (User Mode). This was done for SPEED purposes, to gain a few percentage points in screen redraws! And yet it opens up MAJOR security problems -- if a worm can find an expoitable vulnerability (say, a buffer overflow) in some third-party display driver, BOOYAH!! It has FULL ACCESS to RING 0 and can do ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING, **EVEN IF THE USER IS NOT AN ADMINISTRATOR!!**

Call up Windows Task Manager under any NT version of Windows (NT, 2k, XP, or 2003 Server to date). Click on the "Performance" tab. You should now see a green bar on the left showing CPU non-idle usage real-time current level, and a large line chart with a green line showing CPU non-idle usage recent history to the right of that.

Now click on the "View" menu and select "Show Kernel Times" (if it isn't already checked). You should now see a RED bar (line) in the bottom of both charts. This represents the portion of the non-idle CPU usage that is spent in Kernel Mode, which as you now know is Ring 0. The green part of the bar, or the space between the red and green lines of the line chart, represents the portion spent in User Mode, Ring 3. Notice that there are no colors representing time spent in Rings 1 and 2. Windows doesn't USE them.
Posted by: Joel R   Posted on: 01/28/05 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Extra! Extra!!!!  Yagotta B. Kidding | 01/27/05
no ****  linuxoverwindows | 01/27/05
Think Before You Click  TreeWalker | 01/27/05
Yup  IT Scion | 01/27/05
Stop making excuses  Bill R | 01/27/05
What is the technical flaw that Bagle uses?  NonZealot | 01/27/05
Ok Stop making conclusions.  IT Scion | 01/27/05
It needs a bit more than that.  Joel R | 01/28/05
100 Times Less than Windoz!  sbarringer@... | 02/14/05
Hmmm. Looks like Apple will have to ramp up Mac Mini  Laff | 01/27/05
Not new to say linux beats win32  saphil@... | 01/27/05
It's not about who is on top. It's about how much on top.  MacGeek2121 | 01/27/05
Windows is NOT the #1 OS!  Joel R | 01/28/05
Great info!  sbarringer@... | 02/14/05
They're already 4 weeks backed up and getting further behind.  MacGeek2121 | 01/27/05
Viruses and antiviruses  tqmiso@... | 01/27/05
Its sad how easy this is to prevent  NonZealot | 01/27/05
here here  htotten | 01/27/05
Sadder to see  IT Scion | 01/27/05
However an average consumer wants their computer  Laff | 01/28/05
That's just not true.  Joel R | 01/28/05
Seems to me  M.Fridholm | 01/27/05
Will Technology ever catch up?  keyesdw | 01/28/05
You lead into the age old debate of  IT Scion | 01/28/05
VIRUS WRITERS and MALWARE  ZORRO00 | 01/29/05

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

Meet Doc

  • Here to help you with your Document Management Needs
  • Doc is an enigma. Born to a Russian ballerina and a German electrical engineer, he grew up in various locations in the United States. He’s seen the insides of more brands, versions, and generations of printer and printer-related hardware than almost anyone.
  • To learn more about this mysterious figure check out his blog on ZDNet and his Workspace on TechRepublic. You’ll be glad you did.
  • Produced by
    ZDNet and