Interesting opinion. According to everyone I have spoken with and read, OS X is far more secure than Windows by its very nature.

The "low numbers" argument doesn't hold water. OS X has been widely advertised as being far more secure than Windows. With so much in-your-face advertising and forum coverage in places like /., you can't tell me that not one of the virus writing scum didn't take the challenge of shutting up us Macintosh users. I don't buy it.

So. Prove me wrong write a virus for OS X. Let us see it run!

You sir, are an idiot.

I'm so tired of the "security through obscurity" argument.

OS X (and not "Macs" per se) are more resistant (note I do not say immune) to viruses (and worms and trojans, etc.) because the operating system is more secure by design.

Compare a default install of Windows, and a default install of OS X. Which has more open ports, more network-enabled services running? Here's a hint- it's not OS X.

Here's something else to consider: The default initial user account on an NT/2k/XP box is the "Administrator-" or "root-" user. OS X on the other hand, initially creates a user that, while privileged, cannot muck about with system files willy-nilly. This is why virii/trojans/worms and the like have a much easier time on Windows systems- not because of "low numbers" as you claim.

Why don't you head over to the CERT website [http://www.cert.org] when you're done trolling and do a little research. Maybe- just maybe- you'll learn to think before you type next time.

And what *any* of that has to do Dubya and Ashcroft is beyond pretty much all of us I think...

Hey, Joe, I don't even need to be a real programmer to kill your Mac, there's no lying going on.

I wouldn't do it, but there are ways into Macs, and you should really read the article this news post points to: ingnorance is no defence against viruses.

Do you want to pay me for my trouble, do you want to do my time in prison if I get caught?

Really, just shut up if you don't know what you're talking about. Do you want me to post the ways into a Mac here, in public, so the less knowledgeable "kiddies" have that info too?

You people are really pretty stupid.

Yes, you have to login on a Mac, or at least OSX (let's just leave it with the big stuff).

Do you need to authenticate every time you read/write/move a file? No, you don't.

Do you need to authenticate every time you launch an application, or an application already running launches another application? No, you don't.

Can an application be written to spew spam from your machine without you ever knowing about it? Yes it can.

Can an application be made to send DOS attacks from your machine without you ever knowing about it? Yes it can.

Can you launch one of these applications by your own actions, while sitting around wondering what's going on? Duh, YES, YOU, CAN.

Please, this is no troll, I'm a Mac user and only a Mac user - since 1988 - don't fall into the trap of believing that you're immune because you haven't yet been hit.

Look at the stupid peecee users, they get hit not because the OS is so bad, but because they have no idea what secure computing is.

http://theregister.co.uk/content/4/34554.html

now who's a bush loving ashcroft sucking arsehole?

You are correct in pointing out that the weakest link, the most insecure element of the equation, is the user.

But to argue "security through obscurity-" as you did in your inital post- is pure fallacy.

Do I need to authenticate every time I read/write/move a file? It depends on the file. =) I can't seem to overwrite system files [/Library, /System/Library, etc.] without explicitly telling the OS I wish to do so. How many viruses/trojans/worms overwrite explorer.exe or the like without verification?

And in response to your "Can an application ... without you knowing?" questions, yes, of course this is possible. But again, these scenarios would likely require more user interaction than a similar attack on a Windows machine.

It's not that Windows is a bigger target- just a much easier one. And that was my original assertion and response to your claim.

I'll post it again...


http://theregister.co.uk/content/4/34554.html

go do some homework

... just plan wrong. The FBI has very few Macs.

I'll leave it at that I can't say anymore.

I believe because The Register posted it?

Have you got another one? I might laugh.

There is security by obscurity, and low numbers for three reasons:

1: low numbers means any infection spreads slowly.

2: Obscurity: even most Mac users don't know what they have, and don't know how to hack a Mac, so how is someone who has never used one going to stand a chance

3: Mac users, by demographic, are hackers... let's keep it that way.

The user is the weakest link - same as a PC. Don't be lulled into believing that you have to actively take part in application interaction in order to infect your machine, or the machines of others.

The exploits are there, that you and others don't know how to use them is a good thing - but it's not fail safe.

All I'm saying is don't be complacent - you could be next.

>3: Mac users, by demographic, are hackers...
>let's keep it that way.

...are *not* hackers is what I meant.

not because the Register posted it but because it's written by a security expert, acknowledged the world over, go to his website. Where's your credentials that we should even give you the time of day over this guy? Post them. C'mon big shot. Post them.

You're a real loser if you think you're safe. I've no idea why that article is talking about Unix, the vulnerability is in the GUI, and, dude, that ain't Unix.

Do you really want to know the problems, do you want me to post them here?

Just say YES!

I'll start the code in BASIC.

10 INPUT $PASS "What is you admin password?"
20 INPUT $E1 "What is the email of someone else using a mac?"
30 INPUT $E2 "To be safe enter the email of someone else using mac."

and so on...

Sorry, all out of Troll Chow.

Rather telling that people can read this article and dismiss it because it appears in The Register. Because they've now dismissed any validity of the article they can now proceed to post the "truth" regarding the matter, ignoring that it's written by a renowned security expert. It was published in the register for crying out loud!
So, in response to your invitation, YES! Of course anyone can post on these boards so you will have to post some credentials otherwise you're simply full of it and nobody will believe a word you say anyway.
Right then, first credentials and, after we've established that you might know what you're talking about, lead us down the path to exploitation on OS X.

maybe if the laptops were cheaper AND had less quality control problems, like white spots, logic board failures, uneven illumination in LCD screens, USB issues when put to sleep, feet coming off laptops, case warping on AL machines etc. al, then maybe they will get some.

well now, i have a 7 month old dell laptop (i need both unfortunately) that has had a motherboard failure, has never read any usb device correctly, multiple crashes that required reinstall, spots on the screens... shall i go on? you think apple is the only one with quality control issues? and dealing with dell has been a bloody nightmare from the start. my ibook has never had a single issue. there's always stories from both sides.

To the idiots that think they can send me a Mac virus by e-mail that will suddenly wreak havoc without any interaction on my part. You're morons and you know absolutely nothing that's worth even a steaming pile of s***. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR A MAC VIRUS SENT BY E-MAIL TO INFECT MINE OR ANYONE ELSE'S COMPUTER IN ANY WAY WITHOUT ME _INTERACTING_ FIRST TO LAUNCH THE ATTACHED VIRUS APPLICATION. Windoze, on the other hand, has this Visual Basic integrated scripting c*** that makes viruses extremely easy to write and disguise. MORONS.

With all the spam out there, I'd say to the OSX naysayers to "bring it on". Go head, get a spamming program and send everyone here a virus. Here's one to get you started: rj45_2003@yahoo.com

I'm waiting....

You people are stupid, someone just wrote three lines of RB, doesn't that give you a clue?

You have to interact with it? Wrong.

There's no way I'm going to send viruses to anyone. No credentials, except I know better than you.

Oh, you're getting warm there... you just don't know how close it really is.

This isn't an anti-OSX thing, this is a "use your head Dude" thing.

My God... if there's a better value than the iBook I'd sure like to see it. Once again a major agency is making buying decisions based on a completely ignorant claim (that Apple laptops are too expensive). They clearly have not done the research and have fallen for the BS.

Hello! OS X is UNIX based. Its just as vulnerable to the millions of UNIX / LINUX boxes that are out there. Someone just has to write a unix virus and OS X is just as affected. So as unix goes the numbers are not small.....

Hello! Unix variants have many differences between them. A binary that runs on a Linux box, for instance, wouldn't run for s*** on a PPC-based OSX machine.

Saying "a virus for unix" doesn't really mean anything.

So let's have it then. What's the big exploit?

I love this s***, keep it up. I gettying some popcorn.

I'd be surprised if the FBI didn't have every type of hardware/OS that is in use. They may need to deal with any of these machines and need to be proficient in all of them.

Is anyone surprised they would have macs?

> You people are stupid, someone just
> wrote three lines of RB, doesn't that
> give you a clue?

Yup, that only the clueless would fall for such a
scam. I know some OSX programs ask for such a password,
but guess what? I've got programs like Little Snitch
to tell me when an application decides to open a network port. Also, these amateur-hour RealBasic attempts require user action. That's nothing like Windows viruses that spread simply by having your computer on the network.

And one more thing --- we've got the entire Mac Web community keeping an eye out for companies that would pull such a scam. It's the next best thing to Open Source goodness.

Firewall up! Mac geek poseurs sighted! kill -9!

"Do you want me to post the ways into a Mac here, in public, so the less knowledgeable "kiddies" have that info too?"

Yes. Please do post it here. We would all like to know.

'Saying "a virus for unix" doesn't really mean anything.'

Unix operating systems are more inclined to be attacked by a worm than a virus.

Worms can be a lot more processor and platform independant.

OS X is still less vulnerable than Windows though.

Sorry, but repeating "you people are morons" and "you're idiots if you believe this" doesn't really pass as credentials. So unless you can prove that you have some sort of expertise in the matter, I'm believing the guy that does post his credentials. You might as well go bugger off now.

The plural of 'virus' is 'viruses'. When will you people ever learn?

What he said. Word baby!

http://www.perl.com/language/misc/virus.html

And to be further anal about this, it's "pendant"
not "pedant" :-)

Pedant:
1. One who pays undue attention to book learning and formal rules.
2. One who exhibits one's learning or scholarship ostentatiously.
Pendant:
1. Something suspended from something else, especially an ornament or piece of jewelry attached to a necklace or bracelet.
2. A hanging lamp or chandelier.
3. A sculptured ornament suspended from a vaulted Gothic roof or ceiling.
4. One of a matched pair; a companion piece.

HOMELAND SECURITY uses MICROSOFT WINDOWS 2000. That is a brilliant idea! Windows 2000 is so secure by default! When you share a folder on a Win2k Server it is Read Write Execute and Modify by EVERYONE. THAT IS BRILLIANT!!!

the point of all of this is that at this point in time, OS X is more secure than Windows XP and 2000. That is just a fact. The API's and file structure of Win XP and 2000 are designed in such a way that there are obvious backdoors into the system (DirectX, Internet Explorer, etc..) We all know that Mac OS X isn't perfect, but it was designed without the idea of having the OS and the applications locked into one another like MS has with XP and 2000. That lock-in and intermingling of OS and app parts makes for an unsecure, design flaw in Windows. There will be a virus or worm for Mac OS X one day, but it is going to be much harder to script than the relatively simple worms and viruses that plague Windows.