why because the store is flawed ? Steam , Origins , GOG were all flawed. New flaws come up all the time even on Steam.
Rikimaru
Veteran
Win8 is a inconceivable disaster. Win10 is half-baked. Beta version was sold on release date.
MS creates platforms and abandons it. Win7 phone. Win RT. Where is silverlight? It is still used on MS site but they ditched support long ago.
Soft is buggy. APIs buggy too and not very documented.
MS creates platforms and abandons it. Win7 phone. Win RT. Where is silverlight? It is still used on MS site but they ditched support long ago.
Soft is buggy. APIs buggy too and not very documented.
To be fair, I consider myself a power user. I didn't expect my favourite torrenting on app to have malware find its way inside its installer recently. iVe enjoyed a relatively safe time with Mac but it would appear that I now must take extra precaution even with well established software. Luckily I'm slow to update things.
UWP offers an extremely safe method of sand boxing apps so that they don't go out infecting the rest of your PC. It's hard for me to see that as a negative. Especially in this day in age where many PCs infected by malware are abused on a daily basis.
I am not sure how UWP will stop an accepted application modified with an integrated-embedded malware is going to stop your PC being infected, it is still being loaded into memory.
No-one can assume the store will always have safe applications, the Apple Store is a good example that they do get through.
An analysis needs to be done with a breakdown where most malware infections come from these days, probably browser sites/server adds-additional connections/hacked software/torrent apps rather than software purchased from a legitimate service (which means UWP is only provided marginal additional security then and possibly still has a potential for programs to be inserted onto their service with malware).
Cheers
I feel Durante (guy behind some of the most well known 3rd party mods-fixes) sums it up nicely at PCGamer:
Cheers
http://www.pcgamer.com/why-pc-games-should-never-become-universal-apps/#page-1
Cheers
And what, if I don't care about these possibilities?
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Because that application is limited to the sandbox. Look at recent case of Transmission on the Mac, had that app been sandboxed it wouldn't have been able to encrypt all your files because it wouldn't (or shouldn't) have had access to the entire file system.
While sandboxes aren't completely impenetrable, most malware is opportunistic and isn't breaking out of a sandbox. If source code infection is going to trend more, Microsoft's policy of sandboxing apps will stop some attacks. No security is ever absolute. We don't lock our doors because it makes the door impenetrable but to deter opportunist thieves.
I agree it's not a great selling point unless there is an identified threat but generally you want security before the threats emerge, not after. After can be too late.
DSOUP,
doesn't that only work if all the applications are controlled by UWP?
If an UWA is compromised (same way those that get onto Apple Store) it can still cause malicious behaviour on those outside the environment so applications not purchased through the UWP can be infected by a malicious UWA product?
I guess we will know more when the security analysts and developers dig into this more, I am yet to be convinced Microsoft can build a true/good sandbox environment that works 2-way.
Cheers
doesn't that only work if all the applications are controlled by UWP?
If an UWA is compromised (same way those that get onto Apple Store) it can still cause malicious behaviour on those outside the environment so applications not purchased through the UWP can be infected by a malicious UWA product?
I guess we will know more when the security analysts and developers dig into this more, I am yet to be convinced Microsoft can build a true/good sandbox environment that works 2-way.
Cheers
Well if your not bothered about VSYNC,SLI-Crossfire and how much control both AMD/NVIDIA can provide post processing then I guess you would buy from there if you really want to (advice from everywhere for now is to buy from somewhere else if at all possible unless it is exclusive), although his concerns go beyond modding to some aspects that are still vague such as a game removed from the list; this happens as we have historically seen games taken down from Steam - depends on the Microsoft EULA policy how this pans out for those who bought those games.
Lets also see how easy it is to patch games in that environment.
I guess another consideration is also GSYNC and FreeSync, but they are in the minority of gamers.
Cheers
Whats to stop devs bundling unwanted software in uwp even ms bundled the bing toolbar in direct x
Binx Returns
*shudder*
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Well while the sandbox is designed to isolate malicious code running within that sandbox, it will also protect good code running inside the sandbox from malicious code running outside. Chrome and Safari are taking sandboxing to the next level where each browser tab is running it's own sandbox. That prevents pad websites breaking out but also prevents bad code breaking in and grabbing passwords.
Modifying the win32 launcher to support sandboxing is a possibility but I don't think you could have that as the default behaviour, too much would just break - but perhaps in time. Sandboxing everything is difficult, diagnoses system needs access to the whole system, as do benchmarks and utilities for disk/data recovery tools and security tools. You can't just throw everything inside and have Windows work how you expect it too.
For games I think they need a middle ground but Microsoft (and no security professional) would want to engineer the sandbox to allow some code (mods/cheats) to work. Once you open that door, you can't close it. It's tricky. Maybe some kind of Steam-like Workshop with signed code but who wants to curate that and you're back to Microsoft taking a cut if you want to sell that mod.
I was quite keen on the idea of sandboxing apps when Apple did it, now having got used to it you see the problems. It's nothing earth shattering but there are considerations that aren't always apparent up front. Of course Apple really only expend effort on the iOS Store because that's where the money is, if they directed the same amount go effort to the Mac store it might be better. Microsoft could probably do a much better job in this regard.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Not a problem, you don't buy it in the UWP store.
Just buy the W32 version like you currently do. However, you lose access to potentially running it on smartphones and consoles as well as opening it up to potential malware. If those don't matter, then just stick with the tradtional Win32 versions.
Those aren't going anywhere. Likely ever. Corporations that buy Windows and pay massive sums of money for Microsoft Support require the ability to run programs over a decade old. Microsoft is not going to break that functionality for the foreseeable future.
No matter how many internet Chicken Littles keep crying about how the "Sky is falling!" UWP will always operate in parallel with traditional Win32.
The only way that changes is if Microsoft abandons Windows as a common platform and go back to the WinNT/Win9x days of a seperate codebase for Corporate versus Consumer Windows. And that isn't going to happen.
Regards,
SB
Yeah but unfortunately even Chrome has been circumvented and I agree it is one of the better sandbox solutions out there; it has had some pretty major security patch releases.
And we do not know all aspects of the win 10/uwp environment-architecture yet unfortunatly.
Cheers
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I don't want to misrepresent you but your position seems to be if one person can break a security measure, it's pointless. By that measure nobody should lock their street doors because all locks can be picked by a very skilled few.
Most security features exist not as impenetrable layers but because they reduce the vectors of attack. No anti-virus or anti-malware layer is foolproof should we disable these? Of course not, because they catch far more than they miss. Should people stop wearing body armour because you can still get shot in the face?
If you're looking for absolute security, don't take your product out of the box it came in. Assuming you want to use it the way it was intended, you accept that like everything in life, there are risks and there are things you can do to reduce the risks if bad things happening.
I really don't know what more I can say but sand boxing will get more resilient and on the whole it's got better potential for stopping initial infections if new threats than anti-malware algorithms trying to profile and second guess what running code is trying to do. New malware can be disguised to work differently and slip by detection but if it's running inside a solid sandbox, it can't do anything malicious to other programs or data.
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
And then MS suddenly decides that the home version isn't allowed to install software outside the store anymore because its "dangerous". What are you going to do? Windows updates are now forced so you can't decided not to update. Well, you can but not in a way the average user is going to understand. Pretty sure this won't require separate codebases at all.
Another thing people seem to forget is the amount of money that, talking about games, users invest into the windows platform compared to ios or android. In a decade or so of owning android phones I haven't even spent 50 bucks on apps. I'm sure there are people who've spend a more significant amount of money but most likely a 20 ~ 30 game windows game library is going to be much more valuable than the same amount of games on ios or android.
There is another risk in that. You might say win32 and UWP will co-exist but what if like I said at the start of my post MS decides you're not allowed to run win32 apps anymore. You might be able to block windows updates but then MS will simply not allow you access to the store and your software anymore until you update. They could come up with any number of excuses why this is necessary. So you will have to choice. Loose all the software you bought in other stores or loose the software in the MS store you bought?
The whole problem is that with UWP MS gains an awful lot of control over what you can do with your device and the software you bought. Steam, origin and other stores come with their own risks as well but they cannot prevent you from using other stores nor from running a game on whatever OS you like as long as the game supports it. MS can and its really not too far fetched they might move towards that at some point.
I really dont think that MS will lock anything as you seem think ( or can even do it in any legal way ) ... Sometimes it is good to stop with the "IF".
Last edited:
Not to mention that huge companies using windows will not be happy.
This is all just chicken little crap. What if sony only allowed you to play first party games on the ps4 but what if !??! What if Apple decided you could use Apple developed apps and shut down the app store for any third parties !?!?! What if Google decided you can only use your phone if you let it drive your car !?!?!
Similar threads
- Locked
