3 ms·

One question I don't see asked in the various threads covering this: why does windows freely offer such data? At least Intel does give you an opt out (should be

One question I don't see asked in the various threads covering this: why does windows freely offer such data? At least Intel does give you an opt out (should be opt in really), but other applications can freely collect this data without you knowing. Windows needs to have much better control maybe a "telemetry" setting to control each apps access to the data, but that would most likely require some serious reengineering. Just use an app like Simplewall and block outbound connections, you should be doing that anyway as windows sends so much data off to the NSA anyway.

api 3y ago
Even if it had better isolation a video driver is going to have system permissions.
Dalewyn 3y ago
A big part of what makes Windows so free and powerful is that it was architected during a time when security simply wasn't a concern. This is good because it enpowers users to use their computers as they see fit, but also bad because with great powers come great responsibilities that are often thrown to the wind. So to answer your question of why, the answer is simply that Windows doesn't care.
- AnonCoward42 3y ago
  > A big part of what makes Windows so free and powerful is that it was architected during a time when security simply wasn't a concern. Wouldn't that be true for BSD and Linux as well? Windows seems to be slow with implementing meaningful security/privacy features to the end user. Windows also has a good track record with backwards compatibility (compared to Linux at least), but that might also be the underlying problem here.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    > Wouldn't that be true for BSD and Linux as well? Depends on how it's done, I think. The security story in the unices is better than in Windows, but you can't lock down any system too tightly or it becomes unbearable for most to use. But if we're talking system-level drivers, they are in effect extensions of the kernel and largely have administrator rights, whether we're talking Windows or *nix.
SpaghettiCthulu 3y ago
Windows is architected such that any app running as a given user can spy on that user because operations like listing running processes and accessing other processes memory (when run as the same user) are completely unrestricted.

api 3y ago

Even if it had better isolation a video driver is going to have system permissions.

Dalewyn 3y ago

A big part of what makes Windows so free and powerful is that it was architected during a time when security simply wasn't a concern. This is good because it enpowers users to use their computers as they see fit, but also bad because with great powers come great responsibilities that are often thrown to the wind. So to answer your question of why, the answer is simply that Windows doesn't care.

AnonCoward42 3y ago
> A big part of what makes Windows so free and powerful is that it was architected during a time when security simply wasn't a concern. Wouldn't that be true for BSD and Linux as well? Windows seems to be slow with implementing meaningful security/privacy features to the end user. Windows also has a good track record with backwards compatibility (compared to Linux at least), but that might also be the underlying problem here.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > Wouldn't that be true for BSD and Linux as well? Depends on how it's done, I think. The security story in the unices is better than in Windows, but you can't lock down any system too tightly or it becomes unbearable for most to use. But if we're talking system-level drivers, they are in effect extensions of the kernel and largely have administrator rights, whether we're talking Windows or *nix.

SpaghettiCthulu 3y ago

Windows is architected such that any app running as a given user can spy on that user because operations like listing running processes and accessing other processes memory (when run as the same user) are completely unrestricted.