Air Force now using super-secure version of Windows XP

Windows 7 might be getting all the attention lately, but Windows XP is having a quiet little renaissance of its own -- not only have sales of the venerable OS been extended until 2010, Microsoft is selling an ultra-secure version to the Air Force. The custom build ships with over 600 settings bolted down, and a security patch turnaround of just 72 hours compared to the standard edition's 57 days -- all because Steve Ballmer personally stepped in and approved the project at the Air Force's request. The effort's to standardize and preconfigure the OS has paid off: 85 percent of previous known exploits have been blocked, support call volume has dropped 40 percent, and the USAF has saved some $100 million in costs. Nice -- but don't get your hopes up, since it doesn't seem like Microsoft has any intention of selling this version to the public.

[Via Slashdot]

[paul34 @ May 1st 2009 6:44PM]

Man does Ballmer look uncomfortable standing in that room.

[Joseph @ May 1st 2009 7:17PM]

wouldn't you be too, if you tried the mojave project on the airforce?
its....uh....xp, yeah...that's it!

[mos @ May 1st 2009 7:29PM]

You cannot blame him since the Air Force decides to trim down on cost on OS.

[Nacho PATA @ May 1st 2009 9:36PM]

I believe Steve is having a flashback of the South Park episode where Bill Gates shows off Windows to the military.

[Neary @ May 1st 2009 11:00PM]

...and the guy on the far right looks like Chief from BSG.

[Precurse @ May 2nd 2009 11:15AM]

@Paul

That's because there are no chairs around...

[Konstantin @ May 2nd 2009 2:50PM]

Not to mention the fashion faux par. The belt doesn't match the shoes and jacket looks out of place. Just terrible Steve, terrible!

[Mark Anderson @ May 3rd 2009 6:38AM]

@Neary

Good spot that man.

[z-man @ May 1st 2009 6:45PM]

That pic should be in an upcoming caption contest

[Ellianth @ May 1st 2009 9:33PM]

It kinda looks like the guy in the pinkish shirt is copping a feel on that other guy in the suit.

[SOOPERGOOMAN @ May 2nd 2009 12:00AM]

Yeah, with his mutant backwards facing hand that just happens to change color at the wrist.

[Richard Lai @ May 2nd 2009 4:06AM]

Officer on the left: "Sir, we actually ordered 98."

Ballmer: "Uh... How about ME?"

[DCheat @ May 1st 2009 6:46PM]

This might just the SECOND biggest mistake in the world...

[arcticpenguins @ May 1st 2009 7:01PM]

Why is everyone trying to be subtle in their failing these days?

Back in the god old days it was simple:

Person A: "FIRST!!!11!!!1"
Person B: Insert witty sarcastic comment becoming highly ranked here

.........*Sigh*

[DCheat @ May 1st 2009 7:05PM]

Lol so true... It must be the 2009'ers...
=/
God old days? What the duck?

[Orpheus @ May 2nd 2009 6:27AM]

Err...I assumed the original post was a Get Smart reference?

[SewerShark @ May 2nd 2009 1:51PM]

Its a Get Smart reference

[Josh Ladella @ May 2nd 2009 4:54PM]

"Nice -- but don't get your hopes up, since it doesn't seem like Microsoft has any intention of selling this version to the public."

Just watch, its going to be up on the torrents in a week.

[Utahcon @ May 1st 2009 6:49PM]

Sadly if you look at the numbers above, less calls, less flaws, happier customer... Microsoft could actually save money in the number of dumbass calls they get daily. could.

[paul34 @ May 1st 2009 6:52PM]

Well considering they charge you just to talk to them for support reasons, I doubt it.

[Wwhat @ May 3rd 2009 8:12AM]

Locked 600 settings and they get LESS calls? I guess their phone is just out of commission or they gave them the wrong number and they inadvertently assume the lack of calls is them being efficient.

[Bakersdozen @ May 1st 2009 6:48PM]

lol UAC ftw.

[untitled @ May 1st 2009 6:49PM]

In before "why not just use a Mac" comment /s

[Steveorevo @ May 1st 2009 10:17PM]

LOL, why? XP is sooo much better . Who needs a secure UNIX based OS with 'root' access to run any executable that can do anything... XP has no such feature to get in the way.

Any script or application can read/write ports below 1024 to do anything w/out, again, 'root' access. Who needs the speed of Interprocess Communication sockets when you have DDE and COM compontents that suck even more memory, open even more security holes. Why why why? When will they get it?

!!! Its about the software stupid !!!

[patriotsn1 @ May 2nd 2009 12:41AM]

I love how arrogant these Apple users are. The military chose something because they felt it was more secure, cost efficient and easy to work with, and STILL the Apple users can't just shut up. Seriously to think you are more intelligent than the United States military because you have a fruit on your computer is just ridiculous. Go edit a movie.

[beryl @ May 2nd 2009 1:06AM]

yea I don't necessarily see the military using iLife for flying a UAV.

but back to the linux issue - it seems that the air force goes with an operating system that is commercially supported for the purposes of reliability, and obviously in widespread, standardized use. Why not a commercially supported, secure linux distribution - Suse or RedHat?

[Steveorevo @ May 2nd 2009 4:59AM]

Yup, I agree. As a Windows developer I can say that too. Linux and UNIX are way more secure, cost effective, and well documented. Period.

BTW, where are all these UNIX OS X users anyways?

FAIL

[Mark Anderson @ May 2nd 2009 7:03AM]

@Steve

You're a developer in the same way that I'm the Pope.

And since I was never a member of the Nazi party that means I'm not.

[billy bob thorton @ May 2nd 2009 10:41AM]

@patriotsn1

I don't why I would even try to argue with you since you are probably 12 or 13, but someone has to say it. you're an idiot.

The military has no business using a mainstream OS. Maybe I've just grownup on too many 80s movies with Unix mainframes. 85% secure is not secure.

The more proprietary their OS and build, the harder it is for Russian and Chinese hackers to interfere and disrupt things. I've used windows most of my life, not because it's secure, it's cheaper and more convenient.

[MioTheGreat @ May 2nd 2009 10:49AM]

Sorry Steve, but you're a pretty shitty developer if you think that a "UNIX foundation" means anything.

OSX has consistently had a pretty crappy exploit record compared to Vista, and can't even properly randomize libraries (Which is why it went down first in the pwn2own contest)

And if you knew *anything* about the structure of NT, you'd know that it as at least 'as good' as a modern UNIX base. The foundation of the OS is not a problem for anything these days. The problems lie in three things: The users, the default security setup (Which is NOT a problem for businesses and military, because they don't let their users run as admin), and applications.

[Hortnon @ May 3rd 2009 9:11AM]

@billy

Too bad social engineering is the biggest problem they face these days, something every OS is susceptible to.

[Steveorevo @ May 2nd 2009 12:40PM]

The great? LOL, more like mio the dumbsss. You are obviously not a developer much less a user. There is reason why M$ is considered an orange class OS and your fanboyism will never change that, too bad. :(

[Wwhat @ May 3rd 2009 1:04PM]

Meanwhile adobe's PS installs the apple communication service in windows, that opens ports for apps to chat left and right.

[VanillaSpice @ May 4th 2009 10:08PM]

@billy bob - right claim, wrong reason. patriotsn1 *is* an idiot, not because of any OS argument, but because -

1) they say Mac users can't shut up, but it was actually the troll-bait original comment that started this thread, not a fanboy, and the original troll-bait was the usual straw-man crap ("hey, if I keep implying that all Apple fans are fanboys who can't shut up, then the dills in the Engadget comments section will eventually believe that all Apple fans are fanboys who can't shut up" ... they've been doing that for more than six months and SURPRISE all the dills in here now believe this piece of received wisdom).

2) Just because one person takes the troll-bait and responds, does not make all Apple users arrogant. How would you like to be judged by the absolute worst of the MS trolls or the linux fanboys?

If you want to challenge Steveorevo's comment and disparage them, that's fine - the problem is you asserting that Steveorevo somehow speaks for all Apple fans, and attacking all of us on the basis of one person's comment alone.

I am not arrogant because of what Steveorevo says, in the same way that you are not an uninformed troll just because of what some random MS fanboy says.

[darkmax @ May 1st 2009 6:48PM]

When are the heckers going to have a go at this?

Mr Balmer looks like he is in a court-martial.....

[Joseph @ May 1st 2009 7:12PM]

Thes marks like the 5th typo in the top 4 comments. Had to get my own in there too. ;-)

[wyatt @ May 1st 2009 7:52PM]

they must've been inspired by the _effort's_ of the article. nilay, apostrophes are not for plurals, they are for possessive.

[crsh @ May 1st 2009 6:49PM]

A "super secure" version of XP is nowhere secure enough.

[Joseph @ May 1st 2009 7:14PM]

Mythical Creatures - Volume 2

[graham @ May 1st 2009 7:35PM]

It uses a black screen of death with black text on a black background. Super secure.

For added security it also makes use of write only memory. Write Once Read Never (WORN) memory is the ultimate in security.

[boolean22 @ May 2nd 2009 1:40AM]

Ain't that title an Oxymoron?

[AVG @ May 1st 2009 6:49PM]

Why not sell this to the public sans 72 hour response time...?

[MioTheGreat @ May 1st 2009 7:00PM]

They just locked down some security settings. They didn't modify the OS.

The upshot is that now, as their PCs are more consistently configured, they don't have to spend weeks testing security/OS updates before deployment. They can distribute them within a few days.

[Joseph @ May 1st 2009 7:15PM]

because a hacker could buy it and find the exploit that exists. Atleast w/ the crapware public version, the hacker has to guess at what backdoor is open for the airforce.

[Good_Bytes @ May 1st 2009 7:18PM]

All it means is that the military will upgrade from Windows 2000 to Windows XP for some office building. Probably.
But I think in reality is that it comes down use what is old because all the flaws are known. Let's say they get Win7, instead of XP. Ok that is all nice, but what are the flaws? No one knows yet.

[Anonylicious @ May 1st 2009 6:50PM]

So that means they left 15% of the exploits unblocked? o.O

[Col. Readily Apparent Upon Cursory Inspection @ May 1st 2009 7:00PM]

No, I think the 15% left require physical access and in a lot of cases access to the BIOS. You would have to get through a few Security Forces checkpoints and a number of passkey locks to get to anything sensitive enough for that to be a problem. Just try strolling onto Barksdale for no good reason and see how far you get.

[JohnTitor @ May 1st 2009 6:50PM]

super-secure version of Windows aka Ubuntu 9.04 with Bliss background

[ethana2 @ May 1st 2009 6:57PM]

At this point, the stability is probably on par :p
Stick to 8.10 for a while. Maybe wait for 9.04

If you're really impatient, an OS X capable machine, while expensive, may be a good idea.

[ethana2 @ May 1st 2009 6:58PM]

Maybe wait for 9.10**