Well, if we take into account the amount of malware on a daily swell the already bloated list of viruses and malware designed to attack computers running Windows, at least we can say that it is not so bad as to stop the naked eye can Apparently.

Windows Vista has really made a breakthrough in defending against attacks and viruses are concerned, and quite a significant step further.

Windows Vista incorporates technology DEP (and incorporating the XP and Server 2003 versions), which limits a part of the memory operations only data, which in practice means that any code that resides in that area can not run (see the tutorial Bit Disable Data Execution. What it is and what it does).

DEP works really well when it can be implemented by hardware (which allows the vast majority of current processors, both AMD and Intel), but processors that do not support it can also be run by software.

But more important than this (which in itself is important) we have the User Account Control (UAC), which can be viewed in more detail in the tutorial .

UAC is based on something he is quite familiar to Linux users, and that is that a user, but works with an administrator account, generally works with a limited account, which does not allow you to access any vital Windows without permission.

This includes installation of programs such as those involving enforcement of any modification or access to parts such as the System32 directory or the Windows registry. In principle, this is going to warn that any attempt to access any of these vital sites in our system.

These two systems should add the Windows Firewall (which is very good, by the way) and Windows Defender (which although not the best anti-malware market it works quite well).

If we add to this the use of a good antivirus, security can be achieved is quite high, greatly reducing the chances that your computer is infected with a virus or malware.

In fact, in tests made of attacks on systems, Windows Vista has fallen short of the safest in theory, Linux or Mac OS.

Oh, good, great, super safe ... then where is the problem?

The big problem of security in Windows Vista (eye, and on any operating system), and I do not tire of repeating, is not the OS itself, but in the use of which has made the majority of users and in the use we make of these tools (or better, in most cases, the non-use).

To begin, DEP is enabled by default for system programs, but not for other programs. It costs very little work once the programs that we use, turn on DEP for all programs (as has been seen in the tutorial that is mentioned in the beginning).

Your use is made of UAC is also quite poor in many cases. As annoying as it just turns off and it is less of a nuisance, or at best, chaos, when we notice that a program is trying to access it, simply accept without more, often with not even see what is the program you are trying to access, if we really have been that we have activated your facility or if you really know that this program will access the system and we have the assurance that it is an insurance program (forgive the repetition).

Something similar happens with the Firewall. We do not bother to notices of intent to access the system, just disable these warnings, or better still, accept the connection request to us anyway.

And what about some behaviors related to antivirus. I have come to review all infected computers (yes, with an antivirus installed. When asked (of course after denying it all, as if it were to charge them less or they would fall) tell me very happy is that they'' The other day I could install a program that had fallen off of the Internet and rioja.''

Well, well. If when the antivirus performs its mission (which is precisely that, to tell when a file is infected and, if possible, do not allow installation) rioja why we disable an antivirus installed?

This is in addition to the custom of many hours of surfing the Internet to accept all that we offer (wonderful gifts, for our computer programs miraculous, incredible awards, hours of fun).

Another source of problems are the warnings that our computer is in danger. Let's see, if the notice is not a program you have installed and have not requested a scan of it in search of malware comes out where do the disclaimer?

Repeat the risks of having installed a modified version of Windows or not legal at this point I think it is not necessary, but I believe it is the custom of not updating Windows (for Microsoft is that they do not know, what we will charge for updates) ... Well, among other things are charged for it to load the patches against the latest vulnerabilities discovered, which ultimately will make our system more secure. Gentlemen, these patches and updates are not an exclusive Windows. Virtually all operating systems issued patches to correct newly discovered vulnerabilities and potential small (or large) updates to improve performance or the performance or is it that when Microsoft makes is a fudge and others when they do is simply an exercise in responsibility?

Another source of problems are the file-sharing programs (P2P). Please, but if there are those who fall in these programs until the latest updates ... Free software, available in a completely safe and free at the web developer.

I even get to see through one of these programs, the ISO of Ubuntu (this is fast and secure downloading this ISO from the Ubuntu web site).

Spread is also to install an antivirus''pirate''. Let's see, a virus must be provided with your original license, and if we do not want to spend the money, install a free, which is pretty good. But that does not end the matter here is that sometimes I have seen above that the antivirus installed ... is a version two years ago, which is not even designed for Windows Vista. But really think that this virus is going to help anything? Do we believe that antivirus developers (whether commercial or free) version change approximately every three months for pleasure?

These cases and others (and I assure you that my invention is any) can see in the tutorial.
Could it be that there is someone who thinks that these behaviors may have some use operating system safe? One thing we can be sure in these cases, that even using the safest in the world, for which no virus had developed (which does not exist to begin with), with only one virus has developed and outstanding .. . that we are going to take us, and we have already seen what I think on this in a tutorial Without a minimum of care and responsibility does not exist or there is a secure operating system.

Seen all this, and by personal experience not only mine but of many more, we can consider that Windows Vista is a fairly secure operating system, bypassing many of Microsoft, and the level of most operating systems that are in the today. Another thing is that we do with our behavior as vulnerable, but that is something we can achieve ... with any operating system.

As I said, consider that, unlike other OS, Windows has to endure daily attacks from thousands of viruses and malware, attack in which the vast majority of cases goes pretty well if we stopped help even minimally. If we help these viruses do not let your own fault for Windows, the better we look in a mirror.