Reply to: Buy a Mac and say goodbye to patching Windows

[Spacecadet]

everytime i see this thread title i feel hungry

[mcquiggd]

Seems like it wasn't too difficult...

[Sysman]

Funny how the one article you didn't mention the 'publication date' for was... published yesterday....

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1...9285954,00.htm

4 more bugs fixed - found by the Month of Apple Bugs website.

But I gave you the address of the MOAB site in return

MOAB - Nice to see someone paying attention to the flaws in other OS / applications instead of smugly deriding Microsoft.

Some people obviously like a real challenge.

[Cowboy Bob]

If you go to the MOAB website you'll see that at least some of those bugs are actually in 3rd party applications - OmniWeb, VLC, APE, Flip4Mac (which is actually an MS product for Mac). Number 6 is even a "design flaw" in the current PDF specifiation.

[mcquiggd]

Funny how the one article you didn't mention the 'publication date' for was... published yesterday....

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1...9285954,00.htm

4 more bugs fixed - found by the Month of Apple Bugs website.


MOAB - Nice to see someone paying attention to the flaws in other OS / applications instead of smugly deriding Microsoft.

[Sysman]

http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/securit...9234678,00.htm

Date of publication: 25 January 2006

"The only thing which has kept Mac OS X relatively safe up until now is the fact that the market share is significantly lower than that of Microsoft Windows or the more common UNIX platforms.… If this situation was to change, in my opinion, things could be a lot worse on Mac OS X than they currently are on other operating systems, regarding security vulnerabilities," said Archibald.

Pure bollux. Windows comes with too many services enabled by default. With OS X you have to specifically enable them.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1...9285954,00.htm

Apple issued four security updates on Thursday to fix flaws in Mac OS X and iChat identified by the Month of Apple Bugs project.

Proof of concept flaws only. And fixed already.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4739432.stm

Experts have uncovered a serious security hole in the way Apple software handles downloaded files.
The flaw could give malicious attackers a back door into Mac computers if users visit carefully crafted websites and download booby-trapped files.

Publication date: Wednesday, 22 February 2006

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/secur...60_seco_1.html

"Hijacking a Macbook in 60 Seconds or Less"

Publication date: By Brian Krebs | August 2, 2006

I could go on, there seems to be hundreds of flaws. If it wasn't for the fact that no one uses Macs, I think you'd find it has more holes than a Swiss cheese.

Plenty of people have been trying: http://projects.info-pull.com/moab/

No doubt it's all Microsofts fault.

You said it

[mcquiggd]

I was just shooting down DPs argument that Windows has more exploits because it's more popular.

I think you were firing blanks....

[Cowboy Bob]

The statistic used to be there were more defaced sites run on Apache then IIS, however, this is due to the number of sites run on Apache/Linux, rather than the number of Apache/Linux boxes v IIS boxes.

Mind you, the statistic has probably changed since I last looked...

To be fair, defacing a site is usually more to do with directory permissions and an open CGI interface rather than an exploit in Apache (or IIS for that matter). 99% of the time it is down to administrator error than any bugs.

Unless of course you have PHP installed, but then that's one giant bug in itself...

[Cowboy Bob]

Apache of course! But I don't see that that proves all OSS is pure goodness and all proprietary software is buggy, insecure tulipe.

Never said it was. I was just shooting down DPs argument that Windows has more exploits because it's more popular.

[ratewhore]

The statistic used to be there were more defaced sites run on Apache then IIS, however, this is due to the number of sites run on Apache/Linux, rather than the number of Apache/Linux boxes v IIS boxes.

Mind you, the statistic has probably changed since I last looked...

[bogeyman]

which has a track history of being most secure, Apache or IIS?

Apache of course! But I don't see that that proves all OSS is pure goodness and all proprietary software is buggy, insecure tulipe.

I'm no fan of IIS, but unfortunately, I often have to work with it, as that's what's used on most corporate intranets.

Apache dominates on the Internet but not in the intranet environment where you need your webserver to interop reliably with SQL Server, Sharepoint, Exchange and all that other MS stuff.

[interested]

A security vulnerability is not the same as a virus.

How many actual (ie not 'concept') OSX viruses/spyware etc exist?

[Cowboy Bob]

First of all you quote this:-

The only thing which has kept Mac OS X relatively safe up until now is the fact that the market share is significantly lower than that of Microsoft Windows or the more common UNIX platforms

But since Apache has a much greater market share in terms of Internet facing servers (Intranets don't count in this case), how does the "it isn't cool" argument work?

Either people are targetting the most popular platform or they're not.

[DimPrawn]

It's not "cool" to attack open source.

99.99% of malicious hackers target Microsoft. If the hacking community turned on Apache or Linux, voila, another Swiss Cheese.

[Cowboy Bob]

Apart from the fact that anyone who is complacent enough to think that there are no security vulnerabilities right now in their chosen OS, whatever it is, is an idiot, that market share thing is something that can be proven wrong with just one example - which has a track history of being most secure, Apache or IIS?