Posted on 06/13/2004 11:39:42 PM PDT by Swordmaker
. . . Mac is like a good neighborhood, where the streets are clean and the crime rate low. You don’t need bars on your windows in a good neighborhood. . .
. . . Mac is like a good neighborhood, where the streets are clean and the crime rate low. You don’t need bars on your windows in a good neighborhood. . .
Mac PING LIST . . . interesting take on the security issues between Windows and Macintosh.
If you want to be included in the Macintosh Ping list, or removed from the list, please Freepmail me.
Interestingly, this is also the basis for the Giuliani Doctrine that turned New York City from a hellhole into the safest, cleanest big city in America in only a few years' time. Zero tolerance for "quality-of-life" crimes.
I don't think Microsoft planned for the internet, never considered what would happen with all these "features" on worldwide internetworked computers when they made key decisions on Windows development.
The solution to the spam/worm/virus/hacking disparity between Mac and Windows can simply be solved by getting more people to use Mac. Why bother to write a great virus which will only affect a handful of people when you can reach billions attacking Windows? And I would bet that there are quite a high percentage of the malicious types who believe that Microsoft has it coming anyways so its a political as well as an evil act.
A neighborhood without neighbors....
-----------------------------
So Witty
Friday, 11 Jun 2004
A brief postscript to the recent security-oriented coverage:
I don’t think anyone would dispute that Windows’s overwhelming market share is a significant factor as to why Windows is also the target of an overwhelming majority of security exploits. The question I’m interested in — and wrote about in “Broken Windows” — is whether this also explains why security exploits against Mac OS X are practically non-existent.
The idea — which is widely-enough held that it probably qualifies as conventional wisdom — is that with regard to attracting security exploits, it is inherent that a monopoly platform will attract virtually all of the exploits. E.g., even if Windows has only 90 percent market share, it somehow makes sense that Windows would attract upwards of 99 percent of all security exploits. And that conversely, the Mac’s 4 percent market share should not translate into a 4 percent share of exploits. The conclusion here being that just because Windows has a disproportionate share of security exploits, does not mean that it has disproportionately more vulnerabilities.
I certainly think there’s some truth here. I can believe that even if all platforms were assumed to be equally vulnerable, the 90-percent-share monopoly platform would suffer more than 90 percent of the exploits. But I don’t believe that this explains the extraordinarily disproportionate share of security exploits that Windows suffers.
For one thing, it doesn’t explain why the Mac previously suffered a number of serious viruses. The Mac’s overall market share has never been all that much higher than it is now. (Apple once had 16+% market share, but that was back in the Apple II era; to my knowledge, the Mac has never had double-digit market share.)
For another, it doesn’t explain the fact that some security exploits are aimed at extremely specific targets, including subsets of the Windows population that are much smaller than the overall Mac population. For example, the Witty worm, released in March this year, was specifically targetted only at Windows machines running specific versions of firewall software from Internet Security Systems.
From Bruce Schneier’s Witty analysis in Computerworld:
Twelve thousand machines was the entire vulnerable and exposed population, and Witty infected them all — worldwide — in 45 minutes. It’s the first worm that quickly corrupted a small population.
(See also: “Reflections on Witty: Analyzing the Attacker” from the MITRE Institute and the International Computer Science Institute.)
My points here being:
> Despite the fact that Mac OS X is relatively secure, Mac OS X users should not grow complacent. Witty devastated a target population vastly smaller than the overall Mac OS X population.> There are factors other than market share that have led to the remarkable paucity of security exploits on Mac OS X. Maybe it’s superior engineering by Apple’s engineers; maybe it’s something along the lines of my “Broken Windows” theory; maybe it’s just dumb luck. My guess is it’s a combination of those three, more or less in that order. But it’s something.
Market Share at Google
Google’s Zeitgeist usually contains a chart listing the percentages of Google users broken down by OS. Their numbers for April 2004 show Windows with 92 percent market share; the Mac, 4 percent:
| % | |
|---|---|
| Windows XP | 49 |
| Windows 98 | 21 |
| Windows 2000 | 18 |
| Windows NT | 3 |
| Windows 95 | 1 |
| (Windows total) | 92 |
| Mac | 4 |
| Linux | 1 |
| Other | 3 |
| (Non-Windows total) | 8 |
But your house can suddenly crumple into rubble, without warning or apparent cause. I've had Macs destroy Zip disks, and I've seen a Mac crash so badly (for no reason) that the only way it was made functional again was by installing a new copy of the operating system. After that, the nice 2-button wheel mouse on that machine behaved like the idiot 1-button mouse that comes with Macs (its drivers wouldn't work any more).
You don’t need bars on your windows in a good neighborhood; you don’t need anti-virus software on the Mac.
Yeah, sure you don't. Where I used to work, EVERY computer had anti-virus software, whether it was Mac or PC. Anyone who surfs the Internet or uses multiple computers is taking a big chance if they don't use an anti-virus. Also, pop-up ads seem to be a problem on any computer, any browser. I don't know what this guy is using, if he's not being inundated with them.
This article seems to me more the opinion of a devout Mac user, rather than a presentation of facts. I've used both PC and Mac extensively, and still prefer PCs. JMHO.
Thanks for the additional information.
Even the Witty worm isn't a fair example as a fault of Windows. Witty worm attacked a third party's software not Windows. That third parties security hole was published making the it known to the attacker(s). It was then promptly exploited.
But your house can suddenly crumple into rubble, without warning or apparent cause. I've had Macs destroy Zip disks, and I've seen a Mac crash so badly (for no reason) that the only way it was made functional again was by installing a new copy of the operating system. After that, the nice 2-button wheel mouse on that machine behaved like the idiot 1-button mouse that comes with Macs (its drivers wouldn't work any more).
What you are describing is Mac OS 9 and lower. OS X has no need of installing seperate drivers for multibutton mouses, they are true plug and play. A "clean install" of the pre OS X operating system would provide exactly that: an installation of the Operating System exactly as released from Apple... sans any third party additions. Your experience is outdated.
Yeah, sure you don't. Where I used to work, EVERY computer had anti-virus software, whether it was Mac or PC. Anyone who surfs the Internet or uses multiple computers is taking a big chance if they don't use an anti-virus. Also, pop-up ads seem to be a problem on any computer, any browser. I don't know what this guy is using, if he's not being inundated with them.
Since there are currently NO OSX viruses, there is no need for an anti-virus software on an OS X system. While Symantec DOES sell a Mac Anti-virus package, it only detects and removes viruses that might be passed through in email to vulnerable Windows computers. Mac users who have it installed do so only as a courtesy to their Windows using friends.
Re: Pop-up Ads.
They are NOT a problem on Macintosh computers. I have not had a pop-up advertisement appear on my Mac since I installed OS X and began using Apple's provided browser, Safari. None, nada, zilch.
If I WANT to see them, I can uncheck the "Block Pop-up Windows" option in Safari and be just as inundated as Window's users. (Or I can use MIcrosoft Internet Explorer for Mac and be plagued with them as it doesn't offer the ability to turn them off!)
Might I suggest you try Mozzila, a Windows based browser that offers the same option? Also, Macintoshes are not as vulnerable to malware adware programs that can be installed on Windows computers without the knowledge of their users. If, however, a Mac user can be hoodwinked into downloading and running a ad-ware type program, we could be seeing similar problems. BUT getting rid of it is much simpler and straight forward and requires no "Spy/Adware" removal software to be certain all of it is removed.
I've used both PC and Mac extensively, and still prefer PCs. JMHO.,p> From your statements, I would say your "extensive" Mac experience was with the older Mac operating system. Give OS X a try.
%
Windows XP 49
Windows 98 21
Windows 2000 18
Windows NT 3
Windows 95 1
(Windows total) 92
LOL. Windows ME is down to 0%.
To a certain extent what you say is true... but when the Witty Worm got through the third party firewall it installed an self executing program on the Windows PC, assaulted the user's address book, and then sent copies of itself onward to infect other computers using the same firewall... each infected computer became a node of re-transmission of Witty and as a result hit EVERY ONE OF THE VULNERABLE COMPUTERS IN THE WORLD IN UNDER 45 MINUTES!
Without the flaws in Windows that allowed the exploit to utilize the computer AFTER penetration of the firewall, this could not have happened. Without those flaws, the WITTY exploit could only have been used for an active hacking into the vulnerable PC and done searches for known data in known locations or piecemeal destruction.... the automated process (which was actually pretty simple) would not have occurred.
Do you suppose it is because they finally self-destructed or the users tossed the computers out the window?
Actually, there are several web browsers that block pop-ups - including Apple's "Safari" browser.
This can only be by design. M$ must have all these wholes because they allow plausible deniability when other competing applications (such as those to their Office suite) are "sabotaged". !5 years from now, people will look back on this and say what a said waste of time it was. MicroSoft Windows is now where the Model T was in 1925. Enormously popular, and around for a long time afterwards, but the business model is becoming obsolete. Just my opinion.
ping
So sorry.
Relegated to a backwater of fanatics and graphics designers, who would bother to write viruses for it?
Windows does what I need it to. An operating sytstem that gets work done. Macs--and their software--were designed to impress interior decorators. The Queer Eye for the Computing Guy.
'Nuff said.
--Boris
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.