I've been waiting for a certain consultant to come on this thread with the same 4-5 links that have nothing to do with the actual security issues at hand.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Safari gets pwned in a five-line Python Script
- Thread starter Stella
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I've been waiting for a certain consultant to come on this thread with the same 4-5 links that have nothing to do with the actual security issues at hand.
A bit deceptive but you're right. Not sure I'd like Apple to do that, though. And the Mac malware that exists today require a user to enter their password. So at least we can blame the stupids.
On a related note, it wouldn't surprise me if Apple copies the repository model distributions like Ubuntu use for added security. If you're gettin' your software directly from Apple, you certainly lower the risk of inadvertently installing a trojan. apt-get iTunes anyone?
Clearly they're advertising how secure the OS is
Yes, but as LTD was saying, that doesn't mean they've said they are the most secure, just that they are secure. If you infer something from that, it isn't apples problem.
I don't think anyone is saying that. My point is that apple seems to take a head in the sand philosophy to security. Their tight lipped approach only hinders it as well.
Thy do market OSX as a more secure OS and given that safari is part that, you can infer that safari is just as safe. While it probably doesn't matter in the realm of things that apple typically is the first to fail in these hacker contests, the bottom line is they failed. While windows has its security issues, MS is pretty open about dealing with them and couple that with some decent software and you get a pretty safe system.
As the another poster mentioned, its not too cool to visit a sight on your iphone that contains a little bit of malware code and it will dump your sms database.
How do you propose Apple further secure OS X from Windows malware?
There has been nothing to really protect against for nine years. Apple's pace of security development and patch implementation has been quite adequate for the threat level to OS X, which is currently almost nil. Given the security-via-obscurity argument, that threat level will not increase anytime soon for OS X as we currently know it on Macs, if ever.
The problem you're trying to describe doesn't actually exist. Nor, by the general logic employed by Windows users that hang out around here, will it ever exist.
You absolutely can infer that, since 99.9999% of malware out there is for Windows. OS X is very secure against Windows malware. You can download all the .exe files you want while using Safari on OS X. You'll be fine.
They failed every single year (if I recall correctly.) But it doesn't actually matter. Mac users are no more at risk now than the very first year of the competition.
Aside from Unix's security features - which we won't discuss since I'm inclined to let the Windows-majority's security-via-obscurity argument see some action, Apple's market-share - given their decision to own the Premium end and lock OS X to Apple hardware only, has given them a very comfortable position from which to "cheat" when it comes to security. Funny thing is, they can continue to do so without too much worry.
Notwithstanding Unix's security features, OS X simply is not a target, nor will it ever be, so long as Microsoft maintains its majority market share. Given that Apple deals only in the $1000+ end, Apple's current pace with security is perfectly fine. Nor, it seems, will they ever need to change it.
No matter what security argument you throw against OS X, Apple still emerges correct, and Mac users will continually emerge safe.
Even at the best of times Mac OS X market share has never really gone above what, 10%? 10.5% US? Nor does it need to. This is typical for the Premium end in any industry.
Apropos, I'm not really sure what the point is in MS gloating (or rather, their fans) about 90% share, when they're locked out of the Premium end. The people with money, the most well-heeled users aren't choosing Windows. That's not cool. When a company loses their Platinum-brand status to a competitor, it's nothing to brag about. Wal-Mart has cornered the market in plastic lawn chairs, but Ethan Allen sells the most desirable, beautifully-crafted gazebo and patio furniture.
Offhand, I don't know. Probably similar to what's in Windows. Then again, Windows 7 was also hacked.
Some resources are here:
http://www.macintouch.com/specialreports/snowleopard/tech.html
http://db.tidbits.com/article/10509
I never got a pwnie . . .
Neither of the above links refer to specific Unix or Unix-like mechanisms. Unix architecture has little to nothing to do with the class of exploits associated with pwn2own.
Furthermore, as it turns out, the ASLR that we were waiting for in SL turned out to be a weak implementation.
D:
Fedora is the shiz man!
---
Apple is usually targeted first in hacking contests. Theres nothing wrong with that, its just how the media spins it. They could hack Ubuntu first using the well known debian flaws and have the Linux world up in arms... while RedHat has a party... University style. They could hack windows first, but then there would be no internet drama.
D:
Fedora is the shiz man!
True, it's actually a good distro as Linux distros go. Not really meant for everyone, but I remember enjoying it during my Linux days. A decent mix of user-friendliness and bleeding-edge. It's what Linus uses, apparently.
That being said, if I ever had to go back to Linux for whatever reason (the sky fell, or something), I'd still choose Ubuntu, for obvious reasons. But I'd keep Fedora around to play with as a big-boy distro.
True, it's actually a good distro as Linux distros go. Not really meant for everyone, but I remember enjoying it during my Linux days. A decent mix of user-friendliness and bleeding-edge. It's what Linus uses, apparently.
That being said, if I ever had to go back to Linux for whatever reason (the sky fell, or something), I'd still choose Ubuntu, for obvious reasons. But I'd keep Fedora around to play with as a big-boy distro.
Well at the rate the tech world is going the sky could fall, and still find a way to blame Apple or Linux.