Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 20th Mar 2009 13:51 UTC, submitted by google_ninja
Privacy, Security, Encryption Fresh from winning the PWN2OWN contest yesterday, Charlie Miller has been interviewed by ZDNet. He talks about how Mac OS X is a very simple operating system to exploit due to the lack of any form of anti-exploit features. He also explains that the underlying operating system is much more important in creating a successful exploit than the bowser, why Chrome is so hard to hack, and many other things.
Permalink for comment 354157
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Operating System Security
by TBPrince on Fri 20th Mar 2009 17:26 UTC in reply to "Operating System Security"
TBPrince
Member since:
2005-07-06

Miller seems to take care to differentiate the difference between security of an operating system and built-in operating system preventative measures. They are two very different things. The fact that OS X does not have the same preventative measures Windows has like randomization, no execute bits, etc, does not mean OS X is an insecure operating system. It just means once you have a vehicle into the operating system its easier to take advantage.


Not true. There's a lot of difference if operating systems provide some kind of protective measure or not.

In facts, Miller didn't say Safari is weaker than IE. If you took time to read the article, he said that EVERY BROWSER has holes and bugs.

However, while Windows (to name one) has developed some kind of protective measures to mitigate bugs and security flaws, OS X didn't. And of course that matters. He also joked about the fact that if you want fast cash, you can just concentrate on Safari on OS X.

If I was a OS X user, I would take his words in a serious way, demanding Apple to introduce all those protections other OSes enjoy. He has a good example: Firefox on Windows is very hard to break while the same software on OS X was very easy to break.

For the records, he also stated that he considers Chrome architecture a very good starting point. The fact that Safari (which he considers the weakest) and Chrome (which he considers the strongest) share the same rendering engine is a good proof of what many people say: being open-source doesn't automagically mean secure.

Kudos to Google guys, whose first browser is already a very strong implementation (and you guys know that I'm a IE user...)

Reply Parent Score: 5