backtop

Print 210 comment(s) - last by DominionSeraph.. on Aug 6 at 10:40 PM

Mac security researcher Dino Zovi has found a major flaw in OS X that allows hackers to steal users credit card numbers and more. States Mr. Zovi, "Writing exploits for [Microsoft] Vista is hard work. Writing exploits for Mac is a lot of fun."  (Source: Flickr)
OS X continues to fall short of its security reputation

Many Mac owners live under the assumption that their computers will never be attacked.  While that statement may hold some truth -- most fail to understand why.  Rather than realizing that the relatively safety is afforded by Apple's still small market share, they believe that the security is somehow owing to an inherent security superiority in their operating system of choice, OS X, a sentiment echoed in Apple's sarcasm-laden "Get a Mac" commercials.

However, in reality Apple's security implementation, both on an OS and an application level is often lacking.  It took Apple a year to patch a glaring hole in its OS X Java implementation.  A major hole allowing SMS binary messages to execute code as root in the iPhone also went unpatched for over a month.  Apple's OS X-toting iPhone's encryption scheme was declared laughably useless by a security expert and even Apple seems to acknowledge that its security may be lacking, warning that its iPhone can easily be hacked and used as a terrorist weapon.

Now leading Mac researcher Dino Dai Zovi has unveiled a new attack at the chic Black Hat security conference in Las Vegas.  The new technique allows hackers to take control of OS X machines and steal data from them that is supposed to be encrypted. 

All the technique needs is access to the memory.  A few lines of code will give the attacker access to the root memory, which is then written to establish a TCP connection, allowing the hacker to download malicious files and control the computer remotely.  Mr. Zovi demonstrated how the attack can be used to hijack Apple's Safari browser, stealing encrypted data from a user's bank accounts.

He states, "There is no magic fairy dust protecting Macs.  Writing exploits for [Microsoft] Vista is hard work. Writing exploits for Mac is a lot of fun."

Security experts predict that the interest and the means are finally coming together that could make for the first serious malware attack on Mac computers.  With hackers cooking up a new wave of Apple-catering malware many predict that the attacks will catch the community of millions of Mac users in the U.S. unaware.  States Joel Yonts, another Mac security expert at the conference, "When the malware authors put out something that's really sophisticated we are going to have a whole population that is really vulnerable."

Apple has not released a comment about the flaw or announced any plans to patch it.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Laughable
By dtm4trix on 7/30/2009 11:08:08 AM , Rating: 5
Well I think it's time for Apple to change their commercials baggin on PC's.




RE: Laughable
By StevoLincolnite on 7/30/09, Rating: 0
RE: Laughable
By Complex Pants on 7/30/2009 11:52:59 AM , Rating: 2
You have the internets, take a stroll over to youtube. Some of them are quite laughable.


RE: Laughable
By omnicronx on 7/30/2009 2:17:40 PM , Rating: 5
I assume he was referring to Apple asking MS to change their commercials because they were no longer accurate. By the same account, saying the Mac's are more secure than PC's is becoming pretty much inaccurate.

I think as time goes on and people realize there is money to be made from high income users (such as exploits to retrieve CC information) no small amount of share is going to save Apple. Right now the only reason PC's are 'less secure' is because they have a larger share, and thus simply playing the numbers, 'hackers' are far more likely to find a target to exploit.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Laughable
By Iaiken on 7/30/2009 4:21:34 PM , Rating: 5
Wow... that commentary is totally worthy of a -6...

I wonder what colour that tab would be... hrm...


RE: Laughable
By ipay on 7/30/2009 5:30:03 PM , Rating: 5
Nah, DT just needs to implement logic like the following:

if (username == "Pirks")
delete_bullshit_comment();
else
post_coment();


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Laughable
By B3an on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Laughable
By lycium on 7/30/2009 8:28:21 PM , Rating: 3
pot calling kettle black


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Laughable
By Boze on 7/30/2009 9:03:16 PM , Rating: 5
I don't think you should kill yourself Pirks, but you could probably stand to gain a little bit of objectivity in your comments.

The reason you don't see mass infections like Conficker is because there is no mass to infect in the first place. The adoption rate for Mac OS X (I say Mac OS X because with the tremendous amount of Hackintosh setups becoming available (of which I am in the process of building and am very excited!) means you're no longer required to purchase extremely marked up Apple hardware) is still only around 8% or something ridiculously small like that? I don't count iPods or iPhones, although even with those, I don't think you'd break 11% penetration into the overall computing market.

My older brother is slowly converting me to the belief that I don't have to hate Apple (or Microsoft), and that I can coexist peaceably with an OS X-based machine and a Windows 7 rig in my house. Perhaps one of your siblings could do the same for you.


RE: Laughable
By headbox on 7/30/2009 9:26:32 PM , Rating: 1
no mass to infect?

So... tens of millions of computers, many used at Universities and major record and film studios aren't worth attacking, is not worth attacking? NOT EVEN ONCE?

Aside from one virus that was virtually harmless, and spread only through illegal downloads, there are no REAL WORLD examples of Macs being infected or taken over.

If hacking OS X is so easy, why doesn't some kid in China cripple Apple already?


RE: Laughable
By Boze on 7/30/2009 11:26:01 PM , Rating: 2
Tens of millions... (of which there isn't more than 100 million) versus hundreds of millions. I think if I were a duplicitous hacker I know where I'd rather spend my many hours of work...

Its a dragnet you're casting. You throw your virus out into the sea of the Internet. You get many bites, but some of those fish get away. Sometimes you catch a fish. What kind of fisherman throws their net into the smallest school?


RE: Laughable
By Aloonatic on 7/31/2009 4:03:55 AM , Rating: 2
I'm guessing there are two points that you are missing here. I'm no expert on "hacking" and "hackers" behaviour/motives but...

Point 1) The numbers are not important in themselves, the percentage of the market is. If you are going to focus your time and efforts then you are going to focus on the (much) bigger PC market.

Point 2) The people who make up the market are important too. I would imagine (again, I'm no hacker/hacking expert) but home users are probably the prime/soft target in comparison to the Apple professional (record/design studios, university etc) users. PCs make up the vast majority of the mom and pop "oh this pop-up says that I might have a virus, download this scanner to secure my PC, oh *clicks OK*" users base.

In essence, as with most "businesses", the easiest and largest number of hits with the highest likelihood of success is what compels hackers to choose the PC user base over Apple user base to attack.


RE: Laughable
By nilepez on 8/2/2009 12:31:58 AM , Rating: 2
Do they use Macs in China? Seriously, outside of the U.S., Apple's market-share is tiny. What's more, businesses tend to be better protected than home users, so targeting Film and Recording studios seems like a lot of effort for a very small pay day (and minimal chance of success).

However, as Windows becomes harder to attack and apples market-share increases, they may decide it's worth doing.


RE: Laughable
By justjc on 8/2/2009 2:32:38 AM , Rating: 2
How do we know this hasn't already happened?

If it did the hacker wouldn't announce it loudly, the record and film studios wouldn't want the publicity either and Apple would certainly do a lot for such a story not to be leaked to the press. Luckily for them most costumers contact Apple support first.

I would guess the few attacks on OS/X would be directed at a specific computer, not large scale, so less press. The few large scale attacks would most likely be to access data like credit card information, which can't be traced to the Mac.

If you want a look at how bad the security actually is I suggest looking up the name Charlie Miller, a security expert/hacker.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Laughable
By inighthawki on 7/31/2009 12:10:26 AM , Rating: 3
safety != security


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/31/09, Rating: -1
RE: Laughable
By inighthawki on 7/31/2009 12:19:31 PM , Rating: 3
No, no matter how small of a market share that does not by any means improve the security of the operating system. security is NOT the same as safety. I can disconnect my pre-windows XP SP2 pc with no updates from the network, making it safe, but that doesn't make the OS itself any more secure.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/31/2009 2:16:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
no matter how small of a market share that does not by any means improve the security of the operating system. security is NOT the same as safety
General tech illiterate public doesn't care, for them safety caused by tiny market share is still a safety and still worth a premium. Since Apple does not market its computers to techies and PC geeks who search for highest GHz/Gbyte per dollar - they can just ignore you geeks. If you don't buy their computers - the others will, and the others are a majority, so Apple's policy is pretty wise which is manifested by their insane cash assets eclipsing Microsoft's these days :P


RE: Laughable
By themaster08 on 7/31/2009 4:06:09 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
this changes nothing, Apple's ads about Mac safety still hold true.

But still holds true for all the wrong reasons. People have no idea about security through obscurity, and think that it's Apple's hard work that has made OSX secure.

quote:
Not like I hate Macs, I just don't know what to use one for.

Most people hold the same opinion believe it or not. This the entire point. Most people here have no use for a Mac, because their PC's do exactly what they want. The productivity factor just isn't there.

Yes, these machines have their benefits, albeit mainly aesthetical. But even those aren't enough to sway most people towards the hefty price tag.

The mark up that comes with the Mac is a waste of money to these people, when they'll be getting no more, or even less substance from the machine as they did from their Windows PC.

But this is the thing. Your post actually had some depth. We get to see your real outlook. The only gripe I have is that you can come up with an intuitive post like this and then the next minute you'll start bashing a PC owner because they believe that Macs are overpriced or they lack substance, which are also fair statements.

However, for the sake of DT, please don't change ;)


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/31/09, Rating: 0
RE: Laughable
By zsdersw on 7/31/2009 1:28:06 PM , Rating: 3
Apple didn't come up with that concept.. it inherited it from BSD/Unix/Linux.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/31/2009 2:20:17 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
it inherited it from BSD/Unix/Linux
The problem here is that MS was EIGHT FREAKIN YEARS SLOWER than Apple to inherit same Unix concepts.


RE: Laughable
By zsdersw on 7/31/2009 2:25:54 PM , Rating: 3
MS was not the problem; all of the applications written sloppily by 3rd parties that would've been broken was the problem. Look what happened when Vista appeared; Microsoft caught hell from the likes of Symantec for locking down the Vista kernel. Windows security is not a Microsoft problem, it's a user and 3rd-party application problem.

Don't forget.. there's a huge amount of legacy software in the Windows universe, and many users cling to it like it's their first-born child.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/31/09, Rating: 0
RE: Laughable
By zsdersw on 7/31/2009 4:47:56 PM , Rating: 2
Microsoft has no control over how 3rd party developers write their software. Microsoft provides tools and guidance, but it's up to the developers to use them and implement them correctly.

Why is it that many programs work just fine for users of a computer that are not in the Administrators group? Because the people who created those programs followed Microsoft's guidance and desired implementation.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/31/09, Rating: 0
RE: Laughable
By Alexstarfire on 7/31/2009 11:53:39 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know why they didn't start out that way, but it's obvious to why it stayed that way for such a long time. It can break applications. Believe it or not MS has to worry about what the vast majority of its users think. If they went and broke most of the existing applications you'd get what happened with Vista. Stupid either way. Of course if the user was smarter you wouldn't have a problem. Kinda like how if citizens were smarter they wouldn't need the government to interfere in everything.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 8/1/2009 1:15:21 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
I don't know why they didn't start out that way
I know. Because they are piece'o'excreta coders and designers, that's why. They lost the shape when whoever designed NT (Cutler?) left the company, after him it was long way down, right into Vista sh!thole.

Designing an OS that throttles network traffic when audio is playing? Falling MS profits are totally deserved thing, _totally_!


RE: Laughable
By Alexstarfire on 8/1/2009 2:43:41 AM , Rating: 2
Ummm, what? Got a source? Or have you resorted to making stuff up?


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 8/2/09, Rating: 0
RE: Laughable
By Alexstarfire on 8/2/2009 7:34:39 PM , Rating: 1
Interesting for sure, but almost 2 years old. I couldn't even test that out since I don't run Vista. That sure is some messed up stuff. Would like to know if it's fixed now. And if not I wonder if Win 7 has this problem. I suspect this didn't make headlines because it didn't affect most people. Internet speeds generally don't get that high. I wonder if you could prioritize the TCP/IP above the MMCSS to fix that problem.

BTW, in case this doesn't line up correctly in the posts I'm talking about the audio causing network slowdowns. And also, please leave out the insults, it only makes you look more like a fag. Heaven forbid I don't know all the ins and outs of a an OS I don't use. I asked for a reason.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 8/2/09, Rating: 0
RE: Laughable
By CrimsonFrost on 8/4/2009 2:17:22 PM , Rating: 1
God damn, could you be a bigger douche? You're being an ass with a person who is clearly trying to avoid that entire situation and be as tactful as he can with a corrosive little shit like yourself. You're like the stereotype that makes the geek look bad, you're like Tech Support that had a bad day. STFU and take some Midol, gawd!


RE: Laughable
By zsdersw on 8/1/2009 12:43:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Still, MS implemented UAC about 6 years after OS X did approximately the same, why is MS always so much behind? Why XP was creating admin accounts by default, not the limited user ones? They could have done it properly at least in late 90s but they were either too dumb or something worse, I don't understand it.


All Apple did was use the security model that BSD/Unix/Linux provided and put their name on it.

The transition from the Win9x/DOS world to the WinNT world required certain defaults to avoid, survey says, breaking applications . What part of that can't you understand?

In the end, though, it doesn't matter. Microsoft gets criticized either way. They get criticized for making everyone an administrator by default then, when Vista changes all of that and introduces UAC, they get criticized for making things "annoying" and "breaking applications".

I guarantee you, Apple would be in the same situation if they had Microsoft's user and hardware/software (both legacy and current) bases.. and if Apple's OS was as widespread as Windows.

I'd love to see it become that way, as close as realistically possible.. just to see how crow tastes to some very smug and very stupid Apple fanatics and cheerleaders.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 8/2/2009 3:09:03 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
They get criticized for making everyone an administrator by default then, when Vista changes all of that and introduces UAC, they get criticized for making things "annoying" and "breaking applications"
Exactly my point. MS should have introduced UAC-like/Unix-like security from the start, instead of breaking things one more time with Vista, which was idiotic. You build a nice building ONCE, not twice by breaking it and building it from scratch second time. Got it? Nobody builds stuff this way, be it an OS or a building or whatever else.


RE: Laughable
By zsdersw on 8/2/2009 8:35:23 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Exactly my point. MS should have introduced UAC-like/Unix-like security from the start, instead of breaking things one more time with Vista, which was idiotic. You build a nice building ONCE, not twice by breaking it and building it from scratch second time. Got it? Nobody builds stuff this way, be it an OS or a building or whatever else.


Oh, I see.. so you, with your obviously superior knowledge of the Windows universe, think Microsoft should've broken all of their applications a long time ago instead of with Vista? Get this through your thick and idiotic brain: it doesn't matter when they break applications with a new security model; there's going to be whining and complaining from everyone regardless of when they do it .


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 8/2/09, Rating: 0
RE: Laughable
By zsdersw on 8/2/2009 2:23:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Get this through your uberthick skull then: it DOES matter if they break their OS once or TWICE. They did it twice, second time with Vista, instead of breaking it once when they made W2K. They paid fair price for breaking it second time with Vista, and they will continue to pay for their stupidity. BUILD YOUR STUFF PROPERLY FROM THE BEGINNING, NOT THE SECOND TIME AFTER YOU BREAK EVERYTHING DOWN AGAIN. Got it?


They didn't break apps with W2K because there was no way that those that were "broken" would work with W2K anyway. Do you not understand the fundamental differences between Win9x and NT/2000/XP/Vista?

And besides, we're talking about everyone having administrator rights. That is something that was inherited from the Win9x days so most 3rd party apps wouldn't be broken . Vista is the first break from that.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 8/2/2009 5:24:43 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
They didn't break apps with W2K because there was no way that those that were "broken" would work with W2K anyway.
My point is that they should have broken them in W2K, not in Vista. Vista security overhaul was WAAAAAY to late. UAC should have appeared in 2000 the latest, with W2K, since W2K was a major overhaul of the NT architecture, the next one was in Vista, freakin SEVEN years later, when malware was on rampage!

You break apps once with W2K and then dust settles, and in 2005 you have slick safe OS, maybe without 3D GUI like in OS X but at least as secure as a decent Unix, not an admin-for-everyone piece-o-drap named XP.

Delaying security overhaul till 2007 when everyone else was safe/secure will cost MS billions more, todays profit shrink is just the beginning.


RE: Laughable
By sinful on 8/2/2009 6:29:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Exactly my point. MS should have introduced UAC-like/Unix-like security from the start, instead of breaking things one more time with Vista, which was idiotic. You build a nice building ONCE, not twice by breaking it and building it from scratch second time. Got it? Nobody builds stuff this way, be it an OS or a building or whatever else.


Apple should have followed your advice too.

If Apple had done OS9 right from the beginning, they wouldn't have had to break EVERYTHING when they switched over from OS9 to OSX.

Even MS didn't break EVERYTHING when they switched to Vista!

OSX is pretty much a testament to Apple's bad engineering with OS9; Such a mis-match of technologies slapped together that it was a train wreck of an OS (Security model? What's that!?)

Imagine if MS said "Sorry, Windows is such an engineering disaster we had no choice but to abandon it completely, we instead bought a Unix based OS and that's what we're going with. We're just going to emulate Win32 because there's no hope in saving it...".

That's PRECISELY what Apple did.
LOL

If anything, MS needs to take lessons and avoid what Apple is doing - it's just a matter of time before they butcher everything and make OSX insecure. Next thing you'll know you'll be hearing stories about how a txt message can root OSX.
OH WAIT THAT ALREADY HAPPENED, THANKS IPHONE.

LOL


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 8/2/09, Rating: 0
RE: Laughable
By themaster08 on 8/3/2009 3:23:16 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Well, still MS has broken things twice, once with NT (W2K was also quite an architectural redesign) and second time with Vista, while Apple managed to break things only ONCE

What we have to consider is not necessarily the number of "breaks" as you put it, but the extent of damage these so-called "breaks" have caused.

The leap from 9x to NT was quite the architectural change as you've mentioned, but many many programs were still compatible. I personally don't recall any of my applications having incompatabilities when switching from 98 to XP, with the exception of a few of my DOS games and another game which ran fine in compatability mode.

From 9x to NT, I'd personally say the damage was fairly minor to say the least. Obviously I'm only looking at this from my own and friends' perspectives, and businesses would suffer more from incompatabilities, but we're not businesses, we're the general public, so I'll look at it from our perspective.

The leap from XP to Vista was probably more detrimental. I can recall a few of my older games and applications not functioning in Vista, and naturally, none of my DOS games worked. With that said though, most of my main applications were still compatible and many of my games functioned perfectly in compatability mode. Most of my software however, didn't even need compatability mode, it ran just fine.

Many people I know also had few incompatabilities. I remember one friend complaining about his version of Alcohol 120% not working in Vista, but if I'm being entirely honest, that was about all I can remember.

Now, with OSX we have to factor in hardware changes. The leap from OS9 to OSX was a massive architectural change, and probably the most detrimental of all as far as compatability is concerned.
Furthermore, the leap to Intel-based Macs rendered all OS9 applications unusable.

The release of Snow Leopard will also be a detriment to those with PowerPC-based systems that wish to run the latest operating system. More importantly, there will be no compatability for PowerPC based applications. Considering that Apple's last PowerPC-based computer was released in 2005, it's rightfully so that they phase out PowerPC, but if Microsoft phased out all but Cores Duo's, X2's, Core2 Quad's and Phenoms, there would be outrage.

This is also a massive detriment to those who still run PowerPC programs, through their PowerPC-based system or through their Intel-Based system using Universal Binaries.

Therefore I conclude that Apple's second "breaking change" is soon to happen, thus rendering your statement moot. I think I have also pointed out that the changes made by Apple have been more detrimental than those made by Microsoft, which leaves your entire point without stance.


RE: Laughable
By justjc on 8/2/2009 3:00:55 AM , Rating: 2
I would think the reason that Windows was behind for years was that Apple with OS/X realized they needed to make a OS for the future, and did a decent job.

Sadly the further development of OS/X hasn't been as revolutionary.

The small improvements, through the years, have not increased the advantage that first generation a OS/X had to the comparable Windows Operating Systems.

I would even say that Microsoft has done such a good job with Windows 7, that matches or does better than OS/X in all areas, that the only advantage to owning a Mac, when Win 7 is released, is the small collection of Mac exclusive software.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 8/2/2009 5:51:58 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I would even say that Microsoft has done such a good job with Windows 7, that matches or does better than OS/X in all areas
Not until Windows gets rid of DOS era technologies like disk drive letters and registry. OS based on museum crap that lost its meaning like 20 years ago is still crap no matter what visual fairy dust Redmond monkeys are trying to sprinkle all over it. No amount of fairy dust will save the core that is rotten.


RE: Laughable
By pattycake0147 on 8/3/2009 4:24:43 PM , Rating: 1
No we don't want any cyberbullying here. You never know what kind of mental state somebody is in.

http://www.dailytech.com/The+Call+For+Cyberbullyin...


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 8/4/2009 2:29:30 PM , Rating: 2
B3an is not a cyberbully, he's a cyberdildo (like chicko) - sticks his cyberend in every possible cyberhole he could find. Just ignore him.


RE: Laughable
By MrBlastman on 7/30/2009 12:00:38 PM , Rating: 5
*Apple mentality* Why should they? They already got Microsoft to bend over on their commercials.

The more I read about and listen to what Apple does, the more I realize how they are connected to everything that is wrong in our Country. They have the "we'll sue for everything we can get," ideal, the "we'll lie for everything we can get," ideal, and the "I don't like you making fun of me even though I can make fun of you," mentality.

Wait, I just defined a bully on the playground.

I wish Microsoft would have grown a pair of nuts over their commercials. :-| The ifools still won't care about this news, they've eaten so much tainted apple pie that the hydrogen cyanide in the seeds has begun to rot what tiny logic they had.


RE: Laughable
By raphd on 7/30/2009 12:55:05 PM , Rating: 5
lets wait for Pirks. He is the only one here that masterbates in front of his computer without the monitor being turned on.


RE: Laughable
By jimbojimbo on 7/30/2009 2:51:17 PM , Rating: 5
That's probably the funniest thing I've read here in a long time.


RE: Laughable
By dark matter on 7/30/2009 3:24:02 PM , Rating: 5
What is scary is that you're probably right.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Laughable
By klutzInMotion on 7/30/2009 1:36:03 PM , Rating: 5
*Apple Theme music starts*

Windows: "What's wrong, why do you look so down?"

Apple: "Apparently someone hacked into my bank account for the third time today and stole all my saving. What are you doing?"

Windows: "There's this kid that wrote this program for me and I can buy anything I want free."

Apple: "Really?"

Windows: "Yeap, about to buy a 399-dollar netbook right now too... There we go, done!"

Apple's MacBook: "You have just completed a 399-dollar transaction for a brand new netbook. Have a nice day"

Apple: "So you are the one! You are so going to pay for this!"

*Apple grabs his iPhone and called the police*

Windows: "Huh? what did I do?"

*Police rushes onto the screen*

Apple: "That's the guy that stol.."

Police: "Sir, I need you to calm down and put down you phone"

Apple: "What? But h.."

Police: "Tazer him!"

*Darts flew into Apple and he fells onto the floor shaking, unable to speak*

Police: "Damn terrorist."

*Police Officers dragged Apple face down out of screen, leaving a line of drool."

Police: "Ought to teach you not to hack our cell towers again."

*Windows looks in awe of what happened and shrugged*

Screen fades to black with the tag line. "Apple, the laughing stock of Black Hat convention." In the background Windows says: "Hey, there's my new netbook."


RE: Laughable
By ZachDontScare on 7/30/2009 2:38:16 PM , Rating: 2
Police: "Damn terrorist."

Nice link up with yesterday's story :-)


RE: Laughable
By achintya on 7/30/2009 7:10:15 PM , Rating: 2
Kristopher, this DESERVES a 6.. C'mon!


RE: Laughable
By augiem on 7/30/2009 2:12:07 PM , Rating: 5
I know it's evil, but I almost wish a group would get together and agree to write harmless malware for the Mac community JUST to teach them and their parent company a lesson. Designate some day as MacAttack day, wait for the infections to spread, and on all the mac screens appear a window "You've been lied to. Macs are JUST as vulerable as PC's and you'd better start thinking about security practices and software. Tell Apple to get their act together. Thank you. This message will self destruct." That would probably get on the news. As long as people are willing to believe the commercials rather than the hard data (ie: truth), Apple doesn't have to do a thing.

Several relatives are HARDCORE Macheads and have been for years -- they simply will never listen to reason and have for 15 years parroted whatever BS hype is coming out of corporate central at the time whatever the argument. (They are VERY smart people two, one is an MIT grad).

I don't hate Macs or MacHeads, I hate that a company is allowed to get away with making money by KNOWINGLY lying to the public (think mac ad where PC gets sick and Mac doesn't - this was LONG after Mac vulnerabilities came to light) and the public just eats it up.


RE: Laughable
By dark matter on 7/30/2009 3:26:17 PM , Rating: 5
Actually I hope someone writes a nasty little bit of malware that renders all apple computers useless.

*and a beautiful peace was bestowed upon the Internet*


RE: Laughable
By klutzInMotion on 7/30/2009 5:13:38 PM , Rating: 2
Let me know when it happens. I want to open a group therapy for people that had their apple dreams crushed. They will feel much better after they waste their money on something else.


RE: Laughable
By knutjb on 7/31/2009 12:21:46 AM , Rating: 2
Does that make them Apple sauced or Apple juiced?

When you go around bragging that you're so secure someone WILL take you to task.

The bigger question is how many Macs have been compromised? If Dino did it who else has...


RE: Laughable
By MonkeyPaw on 7/30/2009 5:34:26 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Designate some day as MacAttack day...


How about during WWDC?

"Oh, and there's one more thing..."


RE: Laughable
By adiposity on 7/30/2009 6:55:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I know it's evil, but I almost wish a group would get together and agree to write harmless malware for the Mac community JUST to teach them and their parent company a lesson. Designate some day as MacAttack day, wait for the infections to spread, and on all the mac screens appear a window "You've been lied to. Macs are JUST as vulerable as PC's and you'd better start thinking about security practices and software. Tell Apple to get their act together. Thank you. This message will self destruct."


Kind of pathetic, when the only way a Mac user can seem to get a virus is for a PC owner to make a point that the Mac owner isn't safe. Oh wait, and that's theoretical?

Seriously, we all know Macs are not inherently better designed (although they definitely have a better security model than XP did, due to XP users all using admin access). The fact is, they are safer FOR NOW because no one cares enough to write viruses. So your statement that they are just as "vulnerable" is true, but they aren't in nearly as much danger.

-Dan


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Laughable
By PhoenixKnight on 7/30/2009 8:30:55 PM , Rating: 2
They're safer for now, but not necessarily more secure as the ads imply.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Laughable
By Boze on 7/30/2009 9:11:41 PM , Rating: 3
Safety through ignorance is not real safety though Pirks.

That's analogous to walking into a room full of serial killers, not knowing any of them are serial killers, and then proclaiming that the room is 'safe'.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Laughable
By Alexstarfire on 7/30/2009 11:59:12 PM , Rating: 2
Nobody = these PC geeks you talk of. Of which mac users are not.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/31/09, Rating: 0
RE: Laughable
By themaster08 on 7/31/2009 4:21:08 AM , Rating: 2
It's those PC geeks that face fatcs, it's everyone else who tries to avoid it, or who are oblivious to it. We care because it angers us how mislead people can become.

Most people aren't aware of security through obscurity.

I've had people who have never even seen a Mac in their lives, come to me saying "I've heard those Macs are faster than PC's" or "I've heard those Macs never get viruses", and it just makes me wince how credible Apple's marketing is to these people.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/31/2009 12:45:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
it just makes me wince how credible Apple's marketing is to these people
It just makes me wince how stupid MS marketing is that they allow Apple to rule this world. What are they being paid for? For those "funny" Seinfield ads? See for yourself.


RE: Laughable
By Alexstarfire on 7/31/2009 1:37:10 PM , Rating: 2
What marketing? Only thing MS has done is say that PCs are cheaper than Macs. And only a fool like you would think otherwise.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/31/2009 2:26:19 PM , Rating: 2
Only a fool like you would think cheaper equals better. Fockin' free cheese lovers, duh


RE: Laughable
By themaster08 on 7/31/2009 6:40:35 PM , Rating: 2
And only a fool like you would think more expensive always equals better.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/31/2009 10:14:07 PM , Rating: 2
MS follows the policy that cheaper is better and its profits are falling, Apple follows the policy that more expensive is better and its profits are unreachable by other PC OEMs and its cash reserve now eclipses Microsoft's. There you go, the market just pwned you free cheese lovers, once more, yet again and again and again. Keep penny pinching, whatever... it's interesting to watch how Apple slowly sqeezes MS out of high profit markets down to cheapo netbooks with museum-ancient ultra-cheap XP on them. MS dug this hole all by itself with Vista, Apple is just pushing it the right direction, heheh


RE: Laughable
By Alexstarfire on 7/31/2009 11:57:48 PM , Rating: 2
Any source to back that claim up....... I'll wait right here so take all the time you need.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 8/1/2009 12:09:41 AM , Rating: 2
Are you backing all your claims up too by sources? Haven't seen any :P


RE: Laughable
By Alexstarfire on 8/1/2009 2:40:23 AM , Rating: 2
What claims? Common knowledge, logic, and opinions don't need sources.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 8/2/2009 3:37:53 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Common knowledge don't need sources
Then why are you asking? Go google or bing financial reports from the recent analyst calls, it's all common knowledge man, everything is a publicly accessible info.


RE: Laughable
By Alexstarfire on 8/2/2009 4:02:39 AM , Rating: 2
Wow, are you seriously that stupid? Public knowledge does not equal common knowledge. Common knowledge is something like "grass is green." Public knowledge would be something along the lines of "grass is green because of chlorophyll." You can freely find the information, but it's not necessarily easy to do so and most people don't know it.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 8/2/2009 2:16:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You can freely find the information, but it's not necessarily easy to do so and most people don't know it
Well, you ignored my post with a link to Russinovich's blog. You expect me to post something for you again? Haha. Keep waiting, blog-avoiding coward :) Afraid to see the truth in this blog, huh? I bet you don't even know who Russinovich is. Forget it, tech illiterate one.


RE: Laughable
By Alexstarfire on 8/2/2009 7:40:01 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, I had somehow overlooked that 1 post. I think multiple new posts caused me to miss it. Either way I have posted a reply about it. And no, I don't know who Russinovich is, though the name sounds oddly familiar. Would you care to enlighten me ohh glorious master of all knowledge?


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 8/2/09, Rating: 0
RE: Laughable
By DominionSeraph on 8/6/2009 10:40:08 PM , Rating: 2
Pirks, due to price reductions, even with slightly higher sales numbers, profits from Macintoshes are down. Apple is making up for it with iPod and iPhone sales.
If you compare Apple's profits to the total of every PC, MP3 player, and cellular phone maker, their $1.21 billion net profit is a fart in a windstorm. Same if you compare just PC profits to Mac ones.


RE: Laughable
By adiposity on 7/31/2009 1:14:12 PM , Rating: 2
Yes.


RE: Laughable
By Donkeyshins on 7/31/2009 1:43:15 PM , Rating: 3
Actually, it makes them safer for now compared to computers running a > 8 year old Windows OS.

Vista is safer. Win7 is safer.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/31/2009 2:31:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
computers running a > 8 year old Windows OS
On all netbooks, AKA bestsellers in today's cheapo PC market.
quote:
Vista is safer. Win7 is safer
Not sold with those bestsellers :P

MS f#cked itself very hard with something very big and sharp and no vaseline, when they made Vista, the famous OS that can't run on the next gen portables AKA netbooks. Clear lack of vision and loss of coding quality. Falling MS profits are totally deserved by these idiots, were they smarter and had they made Vista not a hog like now - they'd seen higher profits I'm sure. Idiots led by Ballmer. So sad.


RE: Laughable
By themaster08 on 7/31/2009 6:48:33 PM , Rating: 2
Say, Pirks, you'd better calm down with that Kool-Aid now that you're missing a liver.

How's the recovery going?


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 7/31/2009 9:59:13 PM , Rating: 2
Judging by falling MS profits your brain didn't help Ballmer at all. Besides it's making clunky noises in his shiny head. Must be too loose in there.

Wanna take it back from Ballmer? This may help to boost your posts quality. Even if the boost is going to be as tiny as your brain.


RE: Laughable
By Alexstarfire on 8/1/2009 12:01:52 AM , Rating: 2
What a totally incoherent and incomprehensible post. BTW, I can't believe how much of a hypocrite you are.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 8/1/2009 12:44:51 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
What a totally incoherent and incomprehensible post
Still not as bad as themaster08's one above :P
quote:
I can't believe how much of a hypocrite you are
themaster08 is a real hypocricy gate keeper here, I'm just his humble servant trying to grow up to his master level ya know


RE: Laughable
By Alexstarfire on 8/1/2009 2:49:08 AM , Rating: 2
No, his was perfectly legible and comprehensible. Not relevant or mature though.

And how is he a hypocrite? Does he praise how awesome Apple products are and own none? Does he bash Apple while owning all their products and using them daily? Neither you say, that's what I thought.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 8/2/2009 2:01:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Not relevant or mature though
Yea, gotta agree with you on that at least, themaster08 is not very mature person, to put it mildly :)


RE: Laughable
By themaster08 on 8/1/2009 4:42:13 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Judging by falling MS profits your brain didn't help Ballmer at all.

With 90% of the market share, in a recession, it's even harder for profits and market share to grow, when their previous products function just fine and are still fully supported.

An awful lot of companies have not adopted Vista in their businesses. In this recession companies are trying to save as much as possible. A large portion of Microsoft's profits come from business adoption of their operating systems. No adoption = no profit.

You can milk the Microsoft profits decline as you are, but just for now. Microsoft has some fantastic products on the way, they are listening to their userbase and people highly respect them for that. Many people's next Microsoft purchase will more than likely be Windows 7. People are just waiting it out, thus Microsoft is making no money from us until then.
In turn with the release of Windows 7, my opinion is their profits will increase somewhat.

I don't think I need to reprise that it's Vista's bad reputation that is what steered it into the abyss. Windows 7 will have an extremely good reputation, of which those who believe and base their purchases on hearsay will catch on, further increasing sales. This ultimately leaves you with one less thing to nit pick about.

Although It's plain obvious that Apple will grow in a recession, depression or whatever. Their cult following will buy anything Apple set out, regardless of the economic climate or their bank balance. The iPhone has helped them greatly, and their so-called market strategic reputation has probably had some benefit. Finally, and probably the most influential to Apple's increasing profits, is the mark-up on their products. Therefore they can sell less and still make more than it's competitors.


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 8/2/2009 5:40:56 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
the high mark-up on Apple products, therefore they can sell less and still make more than their competitors
Ever wondered why others can't charge same high markup as Apple?


RE: Laughable
By themaster08 on 8/2/2009 6:59:17 AM , Rating: 2
Because they don't have this plastered on them?

http://pcmacsmackdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/...


RE: Laughable
By Pirks on 8/2/2009 2:07:00 PM , Rating: 2
You gotta ask yourself why Apple competitors can't produce logos that warrant same high markup as Apple's, heheh :P


RE: Laughable
By Boze on 7/30/2009 9:16:05 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Designate some day as MacAttack day


According to this article, that's every day.


RE: Laughable
By sebmel on 7/30/2009 2:58:39 PM , Rating: 2
May I offer an analogy?

There are guns in the USA.
There are guns in Switzerland.

You can be shot in the USA.
You can be shot in Switzerland.

Is Switzerland safer than the USA?

That's all there is to the claim: what IS, not what MIGHT be.


RE: Laughable
By Murloc on 7/30/2009 6:27:07 PM , Rating: 2
in switzerland we don't have that many weapons and gun freaks, and less criminal zones.

I would say yes.


RE: Laughable
By Boze on 7/30/2009 9:14:48 PM , Rating: 2
Switzerland has an estimated population of around 7.7 million. I'd rather see percentages of gun-related violent crimes instead of using the "we have less of" argument.


RE: Laughable
By foolsgambit11 on 7/30/2009 11:50:57 PM , Rating: 2
From The Wall Street Journal Europe, June 4, 1999. I know, old data. But it gives you some comparison. The US Numbers are from 1994, the Swiss numbers are from 1997.
quote:
In the United States, the homicide rate was 9.0 (70% involving firearms) ... per 100,000.
quote:
The Swiss Federal Police Office reports that in 1997 there were 87 intentional homicides and 102 attempted homicides in the entire country. Some 91 of these 189 murders and attempts involved firearms. With its population of seven million (including 1.2 million foreigners), Switzerland had a homicide rate of 1.2 per 100,000.
So to compare, the risk of being a victim of murder or attempted murder by gun in the US in any given year is 0.0049%, and in Switzerland, it is 0.00058% - between 1/8 and 1/9 of the risk.

On the other hand, per capita gun ownership is probably roughly equal, if not higher in Switzerland. Switzerland issues an assault rifle and 24 rounds to all military-aged male citizens in the country.


RE: Laughable
By MScrip on 7/30/2009 5:43:04 PM , Rating: 2
Don't Macs make you put in your admin password before ANYTHING can modify the system? You have to put in that password for something as simple as a system update. And you're forced to create that admin password when you first turn on a new Mac. That would keep most viruses and spyware from wreaking havoc on the system.

In contrast, when you buy most retail Windows computers, the default user is "Owner" and it's an administrator account.

If 90% of computers are running Windows... almost all of them are running as an administrator with no password. Spyware is allowed to run free.


RE: Laughable
By nitrous9200 on 7/30/2009 9:33:56 PM , Rating: 2
There's this new-fangled operating system called Windows Vista with a widely-hated feature called User Account Control? Ever heard of it?

...yeah. Of course Microsoft is the devil and Apple is the savior of the world, so you can guess which one gets blamed for having the annoying operating system. I have found OSX's password prompts more annoying than Vista's and AFAIK they can't be turned off in OSX.


RE: Laughable
By MScrip on 7/30/2009 10:04:31 PM , Rating: 1
Yes... but if you HAD to type in a password before some shitty spyware attempted to install some crap that you DIDN'T ask for... wouldn't that be a lot better?

I'm just saying that Windows gets a lot of spyware installed without the user knowing it because their machines are left wide open. Administer privileges for grandma? Please...

Vista UAC isn't really a deterrent either because you can just click OK anyway. UAC might have been designed to be the answer to everyone's problems... but there were 8 years of XP with no "protection" like that at all.

I know... because I've been cleaning spyware and viruses out of people's computers for the better part of a decade. I wish that shit couldn't get installed in the first place.

I use Windows XP... BTW...


RE: Laughable
By adiposity on 7/31/2009 1:28:27 PM , Rating: 2
Amen, I've cleaned spyware from probably 100+ computers, as a favor to various people I know. Forget what I've done as a sysadmin...

And yeah, I used XP (now on Windows7).

-Dan


RE: Laughable
By nilepez on 8/2/2009 12:53:04 AM , Rating: 2
A password won't do sh!t. People click OK....people will type "password" Hell, users don't want stronger security, they want weaker security, thus MS has apparently made the default UAC settings in 7 weaker than those in Vista.

Let's say that Toyota makes the safest cars in the world. If you run through red lights, your car will eventually be totaled and you may not live through it.

Unix is generally a safe OS. If I put it in the hands of the average Windows user and give them information on how to install programs, they will eventually have a vulnerable system. People do stupid things.

I had a friend who had a computer with a broadband connection and no firewall. He didn't apply windows security patches and apparently never met an attachment that he didn't download and run.

When Macs are finally attacked, it will be a terrible day for mac owners, because virtually none of them have any sort of security software and most are not technically savvy.

I used to think that it'd require a bigger move to OS X to entice the hackers, but it could turn out that a much smaller change (10% instead of 20% marketshare) will do it, simply because the Vista/7 are so much harder to successfully hack that they'll do mac attacks as a diversion of sorts.


RE: Laughable
By MScrip on 8/3/2009 5:42:09 AM , Rating: 1
Have you ever been to someone's house, and their computer is so full of spyware that the computer barely works? That's the stuff I'm talking about! They didn't install that stuff... it happened on its own!

All I'm saying is that shit gets installed without people knowing. That's the problem with spyware. And the OS just lets anything get installed without user intervention. There has to be a better way.

Passwords could help in this way:

"SuperCoolToolbar is attempting to modify your browser... Please type in your administrator password to continue... or click cancel to stop this."

I'm just suggesting to make the user stop and think about what is happening. How often do "average" people install software? Not very often. So if they get a box that pops up to install something while they are on a website... especially something they didn't ask for... they should take notice.

Programs shouldn't be allowed to install themselves from a website... which is the whole problem with spyware.


RE: Laughable
By themaster08 on 8/3/2009 11:54:33 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Have you ever been to someone's house, and their computer is so full of spyware that the computer barely works? That's the stuff I'm talking about! They didn't install that stuff... it happened on its own!

I'm sorry but I disagree. It doesn't happen on it's own. At least not for the vast majority.

I have been to many peoples' house in the scenario you mentioned, but the spyware had infested their computer as a result of downloading via P2P programs and "oooh I've gotta have me those smileys" to name two culprits.

The spyware obviously worsens over time as they're downloading more crap and the spyware infests.

The main reason for malware infestation - user idiocy.


RE: Laughable
By MScrip on 8/3/2009 5:09:15 PM , Rating: 1
I've cleaned spyware out of computers that belong to adults who don't use P2P... and don't need smileys.

Do they get tricked into click OK on a fake Windows dialog box? Maybe. But the fact still remains that it's so easy for shit to get installed.

All I was suggesting is to make you put in a password to confirm that you really want something to be installed.

Normally... people have no reason to install software. So if something pops up and asks to be installed... they should take notice.


RE: Laughable
By bytemehard on 7/31/2009 9:34:30 PM , Rating: 2
Get a clue people:
quote:
Cracked open ... the new hack applies to Macs already attacked by pirate software / Reuters

Once again a "security analyst" has to resort to faking a vulnerability by pre-installing malware on a Mac! Meanwhile, millions of Windows PCs are sending out spam at this very moment.


RE: Laughable
By MrPoletski on 8/4/2009 9:12:30 AM , Rating: 2
Seriously, do Apple even have the capability to make their OS as secure as Winbloze™? A major malware attack from hackers could seriously, seriously harm them I think.

M$ can deal with it because they have loads of money and a huge security department with lots of security experience. Apples venture into providing security on their OS's and phones looks, I'm sorry to say, like a bit of an after thought.


Article quality suffers due to misinformation
By Alphaman on 7/30/2009 1:30:11 PM , Rating: 1
I've several issues with this article. First and foremost, let me preface this by saying that I do not believe Macs to be "invulnerable" -- that's an absurd claim. I run AV software on my Mac (although most of the time it does nothing but update itself).

"It took Apple a year to patch a glaring hole in its OS X Java implementation."

I think the author is confusing this with the recent Microsoft ActiveX flaw that was out for a year without patching. The Apple Java flaw, otoh, was "only" unpatched for 6 months. An egregious amount of time, yes. But not a year.

"The new technique allows hackers to take control of OS X machines and steal data from them that is supposed to be encrypted."

It only allows access to encrypted data if you've already compromised the machine. This is like saying that you have access to a safe that's in a house, but only if you're somehow allowed into the house. Is it possible to do? Yes. Is this responsible journalism to cry wolf at the first sign of fur? No.

And to all the BSD UNIX, uh, excuse me, "Mac OS X" haters, I'd like to remind them that this kind of article comes around about once every quarter. This is nothing new. A new vuln is found. A new virus or trojan is discovered. One or two a quarter. There are currently just over 100 active trojans and viruses (I say active, when in fact most of the viruses have only been observed in a lab setting) in the list of malware for Macs (see the lists for ClamXAV, or iAntiVirus if you don't believe me). Please keep that in mind when you contrast it with the 20,000+ pieces of malware that are discovered for Windows machines every day.

And this has been going on for the 8 years that OS X has been out. Every quarter, a new vuln or trojan, and the pundits come out crying "Ha! See! Told you Macs were vulnerable! Now that they're popular, they'll get theirs!!" And it still goes on.

If Windows vulnerabilities and viruses and trojans were reported in the same way that the alarmists report about Mac vulns, we would never get any work done because of the flood of information.

Keep these kinds of articles real, keep them rational, and report the facts. Crying wolf doesn't help anyone.




By ZachDontScare on 7/30/2009 2:46:22 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
I run AV software on my Mac (although most of the time it does nothing but update itself).

Same on my Windows PCs. Other than as attachements in incoming emails, it never finds a virus. I dont even run with virus scanning active - just periodic checks.

quote:
If Windows vulnerabilities and viruses and trojans were reported in the same way that the alarmists report about Mac vulns, we would never get any work done because of the flood of information.

This is what makes a fanboy a fanboy. If you dont think MS has been bashed in the media incessantly over every vulnerability that gets found, you're clearly looking at the world through colored glasses.


RE: Article quality suffers due to misinformation
By MonkeyPaw on 7/30/2009 5:38:37 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, MS already went through all this in the middle of XPs lifespan, and Vista was aimed at shoring up a lot of this. All this time, Apple acted like their "approach" to security actually worked, when it appears that OSX isn't much better than an unpatched version of XP. Welcome to 2001!


By Sazar on 7/30/2009 5:47:10 PM , Rating: 2
As everyone is saying, it is a matter of perception, both actual and perceived through advertising and reputation.

XP had holes but was relatively secure if shored up the right way.

I actually have run Win 7 and Vista for extended periods of time with no AV programs and, when I finally got around to installing for a periodic check, no viruses. Microsoft has done an excellent job in heeding the vulnerabilities and fixing it to the best of their ability, while still appeasing AV makers like Symantec, who want to have a market for their wares.


By jimbojimbo on 7/30/2009 3:04:31 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
although most of the time it does nothing but update itself
If anybody's AV software does a lot, you're either an idiot or you're in trouble. Don't try make your computer sound safer with crap like that.


By dark matter on 7/30/2009 3:42:18 PM , Rating: 2
But, but, but, Jobsie claimed it was only PC's that get malware. So why you running an AV program?

Saying MS is worse becuase it took twice as long to fix a vulnerability is kind of missing the point.

The deck of cards is falling down around you, and pretty soon you are going to feel just like that emperor who finally realised that he wasn't wearing the most amazing new clothes like all the marketing people told him, but he was in fact completely and utterly naked. A bit like security on a Mac.


RE: Article quality suffers due to misinformation
By knutjb on 7/31/2009 12:36:11 AM , Rating: 2
Agree, all computers, except those powered off, are vulnerable. Sure MS is more vulnerable due to it being the largest base, but Apple is playing with fire and has far less ability to deal with it than does MS. Piss off a hacker and...


RE: Article quality suffers due to misinformation
By zsdersw on 7/31/2009 8:52:43 AM , Rating: 2
No, the safest computer is one that's not connected to the Internet or to any network.


By themaster08 on 8/1/2009 4:56:44 AM , Rating: 2
The safest computer would be one that is turned off, as mentioned.

Malware can still be spread through digital media, such as CD's/DVD's, external hard drives or flash drives.


RE: Article quality suffers due to misinformation
By zsdersw on 8/1/2009 12:32:46 PM , Rating: 2
Computers can be remotely turned on. Heard of Wake on LAN?

A Windows NT/2000/2003/XP/Vista computer that is not connected to any network, turned on, at the Ctrl-Alt-Del screen, and that requires a password to log in.. is the safest computer. Period.

If you can log in to the computer, only then do digital media and peripherals become a risk.


By themaster08 on 8/2/2009 5:26:36 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Computers can be remotely turned on. Heard of Wake on LAN?

Can they be turned on via WOL when the plug is removed from the socket? Or when the PSU switch at the back is turned off? Nope

That is when the computer would be most secure. Period.


By zsdersw on 8/2/2009 8:40:06 AM , Rating: 2
By all means, please try to use the computer with it unplugged from power.

When it is unplugged from power it ceases to be a computer and becomes many other things; paperweight, table, conversation piece.

Practical security matters; absolute security is worthless.


By zsdersw on 8/2/2009 8:43:14 AM , Rating: 2
The most secure usable computer is one that is not connected to any data network.


Its not a suprise
By brybir on 7/30/2009 11:23:33 AM , Rating: 4
The blackhat types have shown for years that if they put their mind to it hacking a mac is no harder than hacking any other pc system out there.

As Mac penetration grows (yay competition) it will become profitable for the large scale hackers/botnet operators that primary target unsecured PC's.

Its not magic, or even as much about technological ability, its whether taking the time and effort to infect large numbers of macs with exploits is profitable.




RE: Its not a suprise
By rudy on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Its not a suprise
By tastyratz on 7/30/2009 11:55:58 AM , Rating: 5
No that's social engineering utilized to get an exploit. Hacking doesn't always have to involve getting users to do anything... sometimes the machine just has to be on.
Things CAN be done to prevent trojans too, such as sandboxing/virtualization/etc. It's cat and mouse. Newer more creative ways are found in security, and newer exploits follow.


RE: Its not a suprise
By EasyC on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Its not a suprise
By augiem on 7/30/2009 1:59:14 PM , Rating: 2
Have you ever gotten a trojan from simply visiting a webite? I have, several people I know have, and I've seen them stopped several times by antivirus progs. I've seen them in BANNER AD code for crying out loud. And before you start, no, they're not porno sites. There was one on a MAIL.COM banner ad for crying out loud. I believe this came down to holes in JRE, so I uninstalled the damn thing on all my comps.

Not all hacks have to have any action from the user whatsoever and could happen by the computer simply being turned on (and connected to the web) Why else would there be port sniffing bots running all over the place?


RE: Its not a suprise
By EasyC on 7/30/2009 2:09:24 PM , Rating: 2
I think you misunderstood my point. I wasn't saying you can't get a trojan. I was saying there has to be a medium to execute the code. You willingly went to mail.com...in doing so you unknowingly executed the malicious code in whatever banner you were talking about. That my friends...is misrepresentation. The banner presented something harmless, yet wasn't...even if you never clicked on the banner itself.


RE: Its not a suprise
By tastyratz on 7/30/2009 2:24:58 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly.
Heres a perfect example:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin...
Thats a security bulletin for all current versions of windows.
Translation? If you have port 80 open on your firewall someone can remotely exploit your system... The user does not have to click anything, the system does not have to have any special programs installed or access anything.
Requirement for the exploit? Its a windows machine, its turned on, and your firewall permits port 80 traffic incoming (if you have one)

Granted many people now run firewalls, but that's proof of concept. Inherent in design any machine connected to the internet is susceptible to hacks like that - just by being on and connected. Being a smart user will only save you from dumb user trickery.


RE: Its not a suprise
By EasyC on 7/30/2009 2:52:04 PM , Rating: 2
I fail to see how this applies at all to my original argument.

No where in my argument did I state anything about computers CONNECTED TO THE INTERNET were unhackable when left alone and just powered on.

BTW, WebDav applies to people who use online folders. Anyone using this feature should understand they leave there computer open to this risk since it creates a two way path between a client and host.


RE: Its not a suprise
By tastyratz on 7/30/2009 3:18:37 PM , Rating: 2
It doesn't, it applies to my original argument . Reinforcement through example in response to a similarly themed post (wasn't to yours).

Saying that about webdav is fairly broad, and saying anyone should understand the security risks is placing FAR too much confidence in users.

Any computer connected to any network by any means is susceptible to that many more security breaches. Any time you create a path something can traverse it... Whether its webdav, l2tp, or any other network related function. Hell just connecting to the internet technically creates a 2 way path between client and any willing host.


RE: Its not a suprise
By tmouse on 7/31/2009 8:10:50 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry but your definition of social engineering is not correct. That is only one aspect. A proper definition would be the act of manipulating people into performing actions or divulging confidential information. The social part could be vocal or written communication, the engineering part is to get something be it information or to get the user to perform an action like opening an e-mail or clicking a button or visiting a web site. In and of itself it is not an evil thing, most ad campaigns are forms of social engineering (ok; maybe ads are evil) .


Apple Sauce anyone?
By TheEinstein on 7/30/2009 11:07:36 AM , Rating: 3
Looks like this apple is going bad, and the only good thing for bad apples I know of is apple sauce...

That or target practice for a 30/30 Winchester...




RE: Apple Sauce anyone?
By dr4gon on 7/30/2009 11:15:28 AM , Rating: 3
mmm apple sauce!


RE: Apple Sauce anyone?
By TheEinstein on 7/30/2009 6:23:26 PM , Rating: 2
Ok quick question, how do I drop down from 1st post to like 100th post?

Is the page location based upon post #, Username, the solar cycle, or something else I am missing?


RE: Apple Sauce anyone?
By foolsgambit11 on 7/30/2009 11:59:31 PM , Rating: 3
The first three sort criteria are:

1. Rating of initial post
2. Number of posts in thread
3. Timestamp on initial post

At least, that's what I've observed.


RE: Apple Sauce anyone?
By foolsgambit11 on 7/31/2009 12:00:52 AM , Rating: 2
The first two criteria may be in the wrong order. Or there may be some weighting? I don't know.


huh
By AnimeRomeo on 7/30/2009 11:11:22 AM , Rating: 1
What's a Mac?




RE: huh
By Boze on 7/30/2009 11:26:24 AM , Rating: 5
Apparently its a terribly insecure computing platform that you should think twice about before purchasing if you plan to connect to the Internet and use any personal data.


RE: huh
By Donkeyshins on 7/31/2009 2:23:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Apparently its a terribly insecure computing platform


So insecure, in fact, that it needs to constantly reinforce its sense of self worth through television commercials.


RE: huh
By dark matter on 7/30/2009 3:35:36 PM , Rating: 3
A tool used by terrorists, and peadophiles...


Reverse Onus
By ltcommanderdata on 7/30/2009 12:16:12 PM , Rating: 2
I don't doubt that much of OS X's safety comes from it's smaller market share. However, what I find most interesting when the tech community reports on OS X security flaws that make the news from time to time is the reverse onus that OS X has in terms of security. Whereas for Windows, it's the general common view that Windows is insecure and it's up to Microsoft to prove it is secure, for OS X, every time a security flaw pops up, everyone is all excited to try to prove that OS X is insecure. If nothing else, it's noteworthy that Apple has managed to position OS X so well in people's default view.




RE: Reverse Onus
By just4U on 7/30/2009 1:24:58 PM , Rating: 3
I don't think any OS will ever be bulletproof against exploits. There's always going to be loopholes that some one finds. That being said, I have alot more confidence in Microsoft to address them then I do with Apple.

A OSX user exclaiming how safe and secure their OS is needs to understand that it's a false sense of security based upon a lack of interest in finding every possible means to gain access to their system. (fruits of ones labor and all that) Apple needs to step up in this area.. especially as their user base grows. Right now, if you ask me most would consider Apple to be big time slackers in this regard and that leaves all their users vulnerable.

But the sad thing is.. many of their users don't realize it and claim to the high heavens how secure they are. Frustrating when it's pretty damn obvious that that is NOT the case.


RE: Reverse Onus
By jimbojimbo on 7/30/2009 3:00:30 PM , Rating: 2
It's not that people are eager to point out Apple's faults, it's that Apple used its supposed higher security as a selling point. If they only made ads about how pretty their computers were nobody would give a rat crap but when you make a series of commercials bashing your competition about how insecure they are, it's pure poetic justice.

Maybe Microsoft should make a commercial with a guy representing Windows7 and a nymphomaniac daytime hooker as the Mac. Slogan, "It's easy to get into an Apple."


Quote & Comment
By WoWCow on 7/30/2009 11:25:23 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
"There is no magic fairy dust protecting Macs. Writing exploits for [Microsoft] Vista is hard work. Writing exploits for Mac is a lot of fun."


That has to go on here at the bottom quotes!

Anyway, perhaps its also time for Apple to realize that with the publicity, popularity, and larger user base they have now they ought to realize their responsibilities too.

Which means playing on the same field and same terms as big boy Micro$oft with monthly updates to their OS, disputing fines with government(s), and selling less BS advertising with overpriced products.

Better hope the fruit company is up for it Apple fanboys, otherwise you'll start seeing some blemishes on your flawless macs.




RE: Quote & Comment
By cabjf on 7/30/2009 1:53:59 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Anyway, perhaps its also time for Apple to realize that with the publicity, popularity, and larger user base they have now they ought to realize their responsibilities too.


You mean by hiring people like this guy? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Krsti%C4%87

I think they are realizing that as they grow their market share they can't rely on "security through obscurity" combined with whatever security advantages may (or may not) come from using a Unix base.


pwn3d
By mfed3 on 7/30/2009 11:29:56 AM , Rating: 5
apple pwn3d again, windows ftw.




Wake up!
By raabscuttle on 7/30/09, Rating: 0
RE: Wake up!
By themaster08 on 7/30/2009 12:28:46 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
When are people going to wake up and realize that Apple and Micro$oft are kissing cousins

The day that Linux has 90% of the market share.


RE: Wake up!
By jmurbank on 8/1/2009 4:14:36 AM , Rating: 2
Using Ubuntu, the over rated Linux distribution for stupid (Oops, I mean novice computer) users, will not fix the issue. Since Mac OS X is a Unix like OS and Ubuntu is a flavor of Linux which is a Unix like OS, both have the same problems. Using harden patched kernels, AIDE, SELinux, grsecurity, and memory security patches will make Linux more secure. Rarely I see Linux distributions like Ubuntu using these patches and services. The real problem is 80x86 processors and their bugs. Yes processors have bugs and hackers tends to use these bugs as their tools to gain entrance. There are microcode patches to help fix or work around the bugs that the processor has, but it up to the programmer to always include a thought of security during the start of writing a program. However, us humans writes poor code that has a lot of security holes.

I use Gentoo and I have a choice to use a kernel with a harden patch, grsecurity, AIDE, SELinux, and memory protection patches to secure my install, but I choose not to do this. It is not good to be paranoid of the level of security. Creating an OS with security to an utmost perfection can not be done. This means any OS has a security threat.

Dah, Apple and Microsoft are cousins. Ever watched the movie Silicon Valley.


Impossible!
By MrBlastman on 7/30/2009 11:09:49 AM , Rating: 3
Macs can not get viruses nor can they be hacked! They are the ultimate secure platform.

- A. iFool




Requires memory access
By EarthsDM on 7/30/2009 11:23:15 AM , Rating: 2
This is a potentially dangerous hack, but it still requires that the target machine already be compromised. The Reuter's article stated that the attack requires a "victimized" machine, but didn't offer other details. It seems that the attack is more about reading encrypted information that OS X hides from user programs than compromising a machine.

I don't think this is as dangerous as the Java exploit that was just patched.




RE: Requires memory access
By tayhimself on 7/30/2009 12:17:16 PM , Rating: 1
Yes this has to be on an already victimized machine. If you download various shit and run it, no matter what OS you use you're gonna get pwnt. It didn't used to happen on mac because no-one cared.
I think the Java exploit was far worse and shame on Apple for not fixing it sooner.


Ho Hum more Apple bashing
By DOOA on 7/30/2009 3:19:17 PM , Rating: 2
but WAIT - did someone actually cast Apple as the bully in Microsoft's playground. Now that is funny.




Malware is software....
By Scudroe on 7/31/2009 5:52:03 AM , Rating: 2
My *guess* is that what is protecting Apple right now is:

1. Low market share. Probably the most important factor.
2. *BUGS* in viruses and malware which cause them to not spread as efficiently as possible.

Bugs in the malware is a big one.
If you combine the effects of the bugs with the low market share it can stop a virus / trojan / worm in it's tracks.

Better written malware (with fewer bugs) and / or a combination of increased market share will (I would guess) expose Apple soon.




Story Photo
By delphinus100 on 8/1/2009 10:22:31 PM , Rating: 2
A worm in an Apple. Guess we should've seen that imagery coming...




By SiliconAddict on 8/2/2009 12:06:05 PM , Rating: 2
Not only will it make Mac users shut the hell up, but it will teach many of them that you can't just sit back and assume your system is secure. Security comes in various forms: hardware, software, and wetware. Something that many...not all, Mac users do not get. I welcome this lesson someday, and someday will occur. It may take another 5 years, but it will happen.




Question...
By agprimed on 8/5/2009 3:46:20 PM , Rating: 2
I have never used a Mac in my life, so I have no knowledge about the OS whatsoever. I realize this, for the most part, has been a "OSX vs Windows" war of words in these postings, but my question is this (for anyone): If the Apple computers are "so much better than Windows based pc's," then why did Apple move to Intel processors? Why do I see sales papers with Macs that have ATI and Nvidia videocards? Aren't Intel, ATI, Nvidia the staple products for Windows based pc's? If I have a box with an Intel processor and either an ATI or Nvidia videocard but the only difference is OSX, what is the real difference from that box and a box that runs Windows with the same hardware? Duh, obviously the operating system, but in essence, isn't the Apple box a pc with a different operating system?




Holy Crap Pirks is here !!!!
By chick0n on 7/30/09, Rating: 0
RE: Holy Crap Pirks is here !!!!
By Pirks on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Holy Crap Pirks is here !!!!
By chick0n on 7/30/09, Rating: 0
RE: Holy Crap Pirks is here !!!!
By Pirks on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Holy Crap Pirks is here !!!!
By chick0n on 8/6/09, Rating: 0
RE: Holy Crap Pirks is here !!!!
By eldardude on 7/30/2009 6:52:02 PM , Rating: 2
Damn you, was just about to write the very same thing.


RE: Holy Crap Pirks is here !!!!
By Pirks on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Holy Crap Pirks is here !!!!
By eldardude on 7/31/2009 3:03:22 AM , Rating: 1
Nah, nothing like that. You see, I drive a Lexus.


RE: Holy Crap Pirks is here !!!!
By Pirks on 7/31/09, Rating: 0
Another nobody
By hiscross on 7/30/09, Rating: 0
Meanwhile in the real world....
By Tony Swash on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Meanwhile in the real world....
By INeedCache on 7/30/2009 7:57:27 PM , Rating: 4
Go to nearly any Mac forum online and you'll find that Mac users are suffering blue screens of death. As for the rest of your drivel, good luck in your closed little Apple world.


RE: Meanwhile in the real world....
By Tony Swash on 7/31/09, Rating: -1
RE: Meanwhile in the real world....
By tmouse on 7/31/2009 8:31:48 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
Whether its because of the robust Unix based security systems in MacOSX or because only smart people use Macs who cares.


Do you check every shiny surface you pass by to see if your hair is in place? We had a faculty member who was a fanboy like you, he actually said the exact same thing you just said. He insisted on buying a Mac for his administrative assistant (who never used a Mac). Surprise: her productivity went down the toilet, was she not as "smart" as he was? No she was just used to using a PC, there was ABSOULTY NO NEED to get her a Mac. So what was Dr. brilliant's solution? He put Vm ware on her machine so now she has a Mac running 100% of the time in a Vm window. It's an overpriced Pc burdened down by Mac OS overhead that is NEVER used. The same Guru bought a 8 foot server rack and put a 1u Mac server in it and nothing else (I suppose the large rack had some phallic symbolism for him). After 5 years he had to put the server on a desk because the room was needed. So yes smarter people use Macs. Most of the Mac users I have to deal with fall into the "cannot use a mouse with more than 1 button" category.


RE: Meanwhile in the real world....
By Tony Swash on 7/31/2009 2:03:50 PM , Rating: 2
I don't have to wait for a shiny surface - macs have glossy screens.

Its wonderful to watch the Apple long term strategy, masterminded by Steve Jobs, pan out so beautifully.

On the one hand steal the overwhelming bulk of the high value added high profitability end of the declining desktop market - thus forcing the windows/PC market to self destructively compete on ever lower prices (that's even the theme of the Microsoft adverts - the poor suckers) so that the price MS can charge for window licenses gets forced down and down (hence their recent disastrous financial results).

On the other hand take control and dominate, through unparalleled innovation, advanced design and software hardware integration, the new and emerging mobile markets that will dominate the next decade of computing (iPod, iTunes, iPhone and whatever is coming next and soon).

So when someone says "macs are over priced, netbook PCs are so cheap" Apple just laugh their way to the bank and continue to build their domination of the next phase.

Its such fun.


RE: Meanwhile in the real world....
By Alexstarfire on 8/1/2009 12:14:08 AM , Rating: 2
That's ok, I'll laugh all the way to my bank with all the money I saved over you.

Ohh, and I wonder what's going to happen once your beloved Steve Jobs dies. It's bound to happen sooner, as in next few years, rather than later, as in decades later, given his current and past health issues.


RE: Meanwhile in the real world....
By Tony Swash on 8/1/2009 6:08:21 AM , Rating: 1
As Keynes said "in the long run we are all dead" and eventually Steve Jobs will die and Apple will fade but in the meantime I just get such pleasure from watching an Apple strategy that makes Microsoft look like road kill frozen in the glare of an on rushing headlight and at the same time keeps giving me such wonderful toys to play with.

Its so easy to save money if you buy crap but life is so short (trust me on that I can remember the sixties and that seems like yesterday) so stop counting your money and have some fun :)


RE: Meanwhile in the real world....
By Alexstarfire on 8/1/2009 12:07:47 PM , Rating: 3
I don't have that luxury, yet, since I'm still in college. Of course I can do more with my "crap" than with your Apple products, so have fun. I don't look to Microsoft for all my needs either. They happen to provide an OS that suits my needs. I can't think of much else, apart from a couple of games, I want from Microsoft. Microsoft isn't my messiah. They tend to not do so well outside of it's OS division. Not always crap, but not the best in my eyes.


RE: Meanwhile in the real world....
By Tony Swash on 8/1/2009 7:07:24 PM , Rating: 2
Heck I don't have a problem with people buying cheap stuff if they are strapped for cash - I have been there and done that. In fact I recently bought myself a Mini 9 netbook and hacked it to run MacOsX so I could have a cheap and relatively expendable laptop for when I travel in wilder places and running the the mac OS makes it a sweet, but limited, little machine. But please don't turn necessity into virtue, cheap stuff is cheap stuff and it always shows. And please don't pretend that windows is more productive than the mac os, that's just laughable.

Its interesting to note that in Steve Balmers recent speech responding to Microsoft's recent financial woes and declining margins he explicitly said that Microsoft's new strategy was to push up the price of netbooks (so he can charge a higher price for windows and try to reclaim some of their lost earnings.) So the penny has finally dropped for Balmer and true to form its after the boat has sailed.


RE: Meanwhile in the real world....
By Alexstarfire on 8/1/2009 10:04:57 PM , Rating: 2
I think you've had too much Kool-Aid my friend. A writing program on the Mac is going to be just as productive as on a PC, only difference is the PC costs less. BTW, I talking about the netbook. Unless you happened to have that copy of Mac OS laying around you just spent money to get a familiar UI.

And if Mac OS is SOOOO much more productive than Windows you'd see all the business people using it, but you don't. It might be useful in some areas, but don't go thinking it's the greatest thing since sliced bread.


RE: Meanwhile in the real world....
By Tony Swash on 8/2/2009 9:16:25 AM , Rating: 2
You are right - if all you doing on a computer is a very basic writing exercise then the Mac and PC are probably equal (although as I said in my first post in the real world its PCs that get infected with all sorts of nasty stuff and not macs so you have to factor that in) although if your writing needs are that simple maybe a pencil and paper is cheaper still.

In reality many, many computer users today use their computers to do all sort of relatively complicated and interrelated stuff, they categorize and enhance photos, organise and listen to music, they catalogue and edit videos, etc, etc. And people often want to connect all these activities, bring photos and music into videos etc. For all this the average mac is simply better than the average pc.

Just look at the professionals in all these fields and see what they use. The next time you see a bunch of photoshop experts presenting with their laptops in front of them note what they are using (90% plus are using macbooks of course), when you see a bunch of journalists at news events typing away on their laptops note the make they are using (macs very often - even Steve Blamer at the recent big MS financial results press event noted how many journalists there were using macbooks), when you see a film editor digitally editing a film note the system they are using (almost always macs with Final Cut Studio).

Its true that big business organisations are still dominated by the PC/Office/Exchange nexus but the mac can and does slot right into such systems where it can. But the important thing to remember about this market, a market that Microsoft has been so successful at targeting and one which is central to their fortunes as a company, is that Apple took the decision not to to chase that market a long time ago. It didn't have to as it can and has built a tremendously profitable and growing business by bypassing that market. Apple understood that in the long term the pressure from large businesses for ever cheaper enterprise IT solutions was going to continually push down prices and margins in that sector and that eventually the attractions of cloud based solutions for most businesses was going to be almost irresistible. Microsoft, because it wants to do everything and thus does most things poorly or at least second best, tried to copy the MacOSX feature set in Vista and actually produced a system deeply unattractive to its business clients where XP could still do what they wanted with no need for hardware upgrades and transitional costs.

The old paradigm of a Windows/Office/Exchange dominated IT world that allowed Microsoft to charge monopoly prices is fading fast and in the new world of connections and mobile solutions it has fared very badly and Apple have triumphed. I don't know what will happen next but it sure is fun to watch, plus as I said Apple keep dropping wonderful toys into my lap to keep me amused.


RE: Meanwhile in the real world....
By Pirks on 8/2/2009 1:40:08 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, that was exemplary pwning of a WinPC zealot. Keep it up Tony, I think you should consider writing for DT. Your posts quality can only be rivaled by masher. I gonna link to your post and use it later for pwning other Winzealots, if you don't mind ;)


RE: Meanwhile in the real world....
By Alexstarfire on 8/2/2009 2:41:15 PM , Rating: 3
And you said pretty much exactly what I said but made it 3 times longer and tried to make me appear stupid. Certain businesses may benefit from using Macs, of which I don't know and don't really care, but most businesses simply can't use Macs. This is likely because they either don't want to port the software, pay for the higher hardware costs to get less performance, or simply can't for whatever reason it may be. The markets you mentioned might seem rather large, but that's only 3 "corners" of a giant business world.

And to say that the mac is "better" for the average person really depends on what you consider. If ease of use is the only thing considered, then perhaps. I haven't tried every program out there and certainly haven't looked into it at all since I actually rarely do the things you have mentioned. Windows doesn't exactly come loaded with the best programs for the jobs you mention, MS Paint comes to mind. But if you include other things such as compatibility (with other devices), functionality, and the quality of the results obtained then I'd say that PCs are superior in that respect.

And how do you factor in infections when you're using a writing program? Yes, a pencil and paper would be cheaper, but far less productive. I think it'd be more appropriate to think of this a person by person basis. Morons can use macs that don't get infected in the real-world, yet, and those that have a shred of common sense who can use PCs without getting infected. I must sadly say that most people probably fall into the former category. Though with firewalls (both hardware and software), anti-virus, and anti-spyware software it's actually petty difficult to get infected. Only thing that would cost money is a hardware firewall, but that can usually be found in a router, the rest can be found for free with very little effort. Ohh, and require very little knowledge to use, though knowledge means you can use it more effectively.

Ummm, I think that concludes my post.


By Tony Swash on 8/3/2009 5:21:29 AM , Rating: 2
A lot of people post here as if Windows and Macintosh were just different operating systems to be considered simply on their narrow technical merits but there is a broader and more important different between Microsoft and Apple as companies that goes beyond the technical merits of their respective operating systems.

I don't think most people are idiots I just think most people are not IT geeks. What do I mean by geek? To use a metaphor a car geek would be someone really interested in how a car engine works and who loves to lift the hood and tinker about. The vast majority of drivers don't want to do that they just want a car that is safe and reliable and gets them where they want to go. Similarly most people want to feel that they can control their computer and it gets them where they want to go with no unpleasant surprises and they are not interested in what is under the hood if it just works.

What I can't forgive Microsoft for is that in the end it used its monopoly position and vast profits to foist such unreliable, unnecessarily complex and disempowering crap on the world - and as a result the vast majority of people became convinced that using a computer always had to be a hard and scary experience.

What did Microsoft do when it had won the browser war and crushed Netscape? It disbanded its Internet Explorer development team! Job done, threat crushed - not a thought to what could be done with this new Internet technology to empower people, to take forward the internet as a tool for everyone. In the process it fatally weakened its OS security because the way that Explorer was integrated into windows was shoddy, rushed and not thought through. Millions of people paid for that through losing precious photos on comprised machines, having their bank accounts hacked and all sorts of other crap. Thats what happened when MS ruled the world.

So I look forward to a world where no company dominates ever again, where windows is reduced to less than 50% of the desktop, where Microsoft never comes close to dominating the new mobile pocket computing platforms. And if Apple is the biggest player in the new mobile world then at least they seem to be a company with a genuine commitment to making really good stuff, they really want to make the best with no comprises, even if they don't always succeed.


Is it just me?
By KeithP on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Is it just me?
By sebmel on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Is it just me?
By just4U on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Is it just me?
By Alphaman on 7/30/2009 1:37:54 PM , Rating: 2
The same could be said of clueless Windows users. I venture I could say the same about Linux users in some regards, as they keep on bragging about how they're going to take over the desktop. (NB: I would love nothing more than see Linux and UNIX take over the desktop.)


RE: Is it just me?
By just4U on 7/30/2009 2:31:55 PM , Rating: 2
I don't find alot of "clueless" windows users on Tech forums. Some misinformed (naturally.. and we all fit that catagory sometimes) but in general? Not so much.

On the other hand you get some Folks posting who do fit the stereotype Apple user. Granted, they might be just having a little fun and trolling a bit to spice up one of the threads but their a little more visible. Many of the off the cuff remarks are aimed at such people. I wouldn't read to much into it though. It's just vindication when you read articles like this is all.


RE: Is it just me?
By teng029 on 7/30/2009 2:36:01 PM , Rating: 2
i wonder why people take it so personally that apple does well, or that people buy apple products. so what if they do? so what if they spend more on apple products? it's their money and it's none of anyone else's business.

i don't get this need to police the computer users of the world and force them to switch to windows or osx, or whatever the hell else os is out there. besides, each time i read about someone "educating" about the virtues of windows, it's always in a condescending and arrogant manner.

for the record, i use both. each has its own merits and pitfalls. last i checked, all this crap is still man-made and not infallible. anyone who thinks apple computers are immune to attacks and viruses are kidding themselves. in the same breath, anyone who believes that windows is end-all solution is equally delusional.


RE: Is it just me?
By dark matter on 7/30/2009 3:34:08 PM , Rating: 5
It is the sheer arrogance of the Apple owners that I have issue with.

In case your memory is short, security was a big stick that Apple posters used to beat a discussion off topic with regards to Windows threads. They would come along and laugh and say "ha, this wouldn't happen if you had a Mac".

So you have to forgive us Windows owners having a good old chuckle at recent developments, such as this, the poor thermal range of the iPhone, the bizare claims jailbreaking a phone is a terrorist act or the fact the encryption is useless on it.

Ha ha ha ha. It really is just THAT funny. Ha ha ha ha.


RE: Is it just me?
By teng029 on 7/30/2009 5:33:17 PM , Rating: 1
yes, because the humble people often post here. i still don't get why it's so personal.

it's not like microsoft or apple are paying anyone here to defend their products. get over it already. and i guess my memory is short, cause i don't really give a shit as to how it started.


RE: Is it just me?
By jimbojimbo on 7/30/2009 2:57:15 PM , Rating: 2
Agree. That's why Apple's campaign has been emphasizing ease of use. It's to pull in users who know nothing about computers with the allure that it would "just work" without any effort on their part. Microsoft's campaign? Money conscious peole of any technological level. It's just Microsoft had so many users that they had far higher numbers of suckers using it. Now that a lot of those suckers are going to Apple I'd wager a higher percentage of Apple users are much less technical than the percerntage of Windows users.


RE: Is it just me?
By PhoenixKnight on 7/30/2009 8:43:23 PM , Rating: 3
Maybe we just like having any excuse to drink champagne.


RE: Is it just me?
By SiliconAddict on 8/2/2009 12:24:18 PM , Rating: 2
The rest of the PC industry will stop "popping the cork" as you put it when Apple, Steve Jobs, and many...not all...of Apple's users stop being douchebags.

Its really that simple. One of Apple's vector for sales is its not Microsoft and they push that with their users and their users respond with venom to ANYTHING Microsoft. In short Apple is a hate filled company and many of us who do not subscribe to Apple's philosophy do not believe their shit smells any better then anyone else's. As such its things like this article that prove that OS X is not, contrary to Mac user's belief, God's gift to the computing industry.
And said Mac users further antagonize everyone when they say something retarded like...well this will be patched within a few days and ignore that its another security hole...just like a MS security hole.

If Apple would stop the campaign. If everyone would accept the fact that no OS is perfect when really probed. If everyone would just STFU about their OS and realize its not a damn religion...maybe just maybe this would all go away. But it won't because again this is a selling vector for Apple and it works because their are idiots out there completely blinded because they are in the equivalent of a gang who's logo is an Apple. Think about why people join a gang...it took me a while to think this through but its true. I know my post is going to get all kinds of flack for this but thinking back to my original MBP purchase it comes down to I wanted the Porsche of the computer world. But then as I hung out with other Mac users I saw the attitude. I saw the if you don't have a Mac you are a tool of MS...sorry M$. Then there was macrumors....and then I sold my Mac.
Sorry but Apple as a company has a lot of growing up to do as do their users. Everyone wants to feel special, but when you are a douchebag to get to that point you do nothing but spew hate.

Feel free to respond. I won't and I won't read this again.


Jason courting controversy for clicks?
By sebmel on 7/30/09, Rating: -1
By SoCalBoomer on 7/30/2009 12:17:41 PM , Rating: 5
And what you're saying is not the same thing as Jason is referring to - and you know it.

Apple has said for years that Macs are immune to malware and viruses. I have parents calling that since their kids are coming to college, they want them to have a Mac because a Mac is secure - since Apple said it, it has to be true, and they're shocked when I tell them that Phishing attacks and social engineering does not depend on the platform but rather the fleshy bits between the chair and the computer.

YOU have had a good experience on a Mac, and that's wonderful. I have had a good experience with Vista - wanna call me a trend?

We say that Macs are not immune because they are not - and for the same reasons that Windows machines are not: They are a connected computer, and their browser (Safari) is tied to the OS (which is the prime weakness - just as it was/is with Windows, although it seems that Adobe is starting to supplant that. . .) - although now, Apple's memory management seems to be well behind the times as hackers seem to find it easier to find specific locations - which they can no longer do with Vista or Win7. . .

So sorry if you're offended. . . open your eyes and look at today's environment. If you don't start harping on Apple (not that they would care) you're going to be a big juicy target here pretty quick.


RE: Jason courting controversy for clicks?
By CU on 7/30/2009 12:20:30 PM , Rating: 5
I have never heard a Mac user say anything close to "I've had a good experience over a very long time." They always say something like Mac's can't get a virus or Mac's are so secure no one can attack them. So it seems the Mac user's are misrepresenting what has happened, and Jason is just telling it like most Mac user tell it.


RE: Jason courting controversy for clicks?
By FITCamaro on 7/30/2009 12:39:22 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Macs have been the subject of a low level of attack for years. Mac users know that.


Please. The vast majority of people buying Macs these days are doing so because it is the hip and trendy thing to do. They know nothing of the OS and view the computer as invulnerable to crashing and viruses/malware.

I have had Mac owners tell me this when asked why they bought a Mac.


RE: Jason courting controversy for clicks?
By rippleyaliens on 7/30/2009 1:48:16 PM , Rating: 2
MAC this Windows That, rofl...
ONCE AGAIN PEOPLE.. Every single person who post here, can make a 100% Bullet proof computer, or Purchase one, IE, Dell, HP, APPLE, rofl..
i can make a Dos 6.x/win 3.11 machine that would NEVER get compromised.. The key is that it is never hooked up to anything. Now fast forward to today, and We are on the internet, sharing files with friends, browsing web sites, etc... Availability to do things other than desktop publishing, (cliche mac) is allowing for more access to machines.

With that said, now it is Apples turn. They have created their own pandora's box.. AS IT SITS RIGHT NOW, Apple has 90% of the PC market in the >$1500 range. What this means, as yah, their owners have money to burn. With that said, those are hacker targets. Most MAC users however intelligent, are not pure genius's. Which means, they will indeed hit sites that are not 100% legit. They will get virus's. Considering that development of good anti virus's for Apple is almost non-existent, that also means a high amount of possible targets.

Apple slow in responding, just adds fuel to the fire. AND the ultimate. BEING Arrogant with their products, and thumbing their nose at people, especially hackers.. WELL, they are playing with fire, and it is about to get hot.

When i read this, the theme from the Empire Strikes Back came to mind... ROFL... Apple, Fumble....................


RE: Jason courting controversy for clicks?
By Daeros on 7/30/2009 2:54:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
AS IT SITS RIGHT NOW, Apple has 90% of the PC market in the >$1500 range.

Actually, it is 91% of the over $1000 market. But we don't expect factual accuracy around here. Especially in an article written by J. Mick or about Apple.


By manoj252 on 7/30/2009 4:04:39 PM , Rating: 3
Actually, it is 91% of the over $1000 market in local brick & mortar (B&M) stores. Obviously, it is not counting PC sales via manufacturer websites (Dell.com, Lenovo.com), online companies (amazon.com, newegg.com), business sales through large vendors (CDW) and self/boutique custom built PCs. But we don't expect Kool-Aid drinking Apple fanboys to comprehend facts contrary to their beliefs ;)


RE: Jason courting controversy for clicks?
By omnicronx on 7/30/2009 2:33:15 PM , Rating: 2
I love how the random Mac Geek thinks they are the majority. Nobody is saying that every single Mac user makes this assumption, but are you really trying to imply that the vast majority of users do not? If you want to use a Mac and you are an educated user, all the power to you, but realize that you are surely the minority.


RE: Jason courting controversy for clicks?
By sebmel on 7/30/2009 3:10:31 PM , Rating: 2
"If you want to use a Mac and you are an educated user, all the power to you, but realize that you are surely the minority."

Well there have been a number of surveys on that very subject and the research leans against you.

Research into education has shown Mac users, on average, to be better qualified than PC users.
Research into vocabulary in forums has shown Mac users to have, on average, a larger vocabulary than those using PC forums.
Research into wealth has shown Mac users to be, on average, richer than PC users.
Research into buying habits has shown much higher levels of Mac use at universities in the US than in the population as a whole.

Now, I'm not goading. That's just what the surveys have found. Of course there are intelligent, educated, well off PC users. The research simply shows that Macs have a higher appeal, on average, to the educated than they do to the less well qualified.


By FITCamaro on 7/30/2009 4:41:35 PM , Rating: 3
Yeah all those blonds and "artists" in Starbucks posting on their blogs from their Mac are freakin gonna save the world with their genius....

quote:
Research into education has shown Mac users, on average, to be better qualified than PC users.


Better qualified at what? Being smug? Feelings of superiority?

quote:
Research into wealth has shown Mac users to be, on average, richer than PC users.


This is about the only one that is correct.

quote:
Research into vocabulary in forums has shown Mac users to have, on average, a larger vocabulary than those using PC forums.


I've seen 12 year olds trying to sound smart by using big words. Besides who does research into how people talk on computer forums? That right there belies a lack of intelligence for wasting time.

quote:
Research into buying habits has shown much higher levels of Mac use at universities in the US than in the population as a whole.


Maybe because there's a lot more liberal arts majors than engineering majors.


By zsdersw on 7/31/2009 9:24:32 AM , Rating: 2
Clearly, many highly educated and well-off people make stupid decisions and are just as susceptible to being duped as anyone else. They bought a Mac, after all; a sign of having more money than sense. Unfortunately, though, common sense isn't common.


"Let's face it, we're not changing the world. We're building a product that helps people buy more crap - and watch porn." -- Seagate CEO Bill Watkins











botimage
Copyright 2013 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki