Linked by Hadrien Grasland on Sat 25th Jun 2011 08:55 UTC, submitted by John
Mac OS X "Using a Mac may certainly be a safer choice for a lot of people as despite being vulnerable they are not targeted. However this is not the same as Macs being secure, something Eric Schmidt erroneously advised recently. I may be able to browse impervious to malware on a Mac at the moment, however I personally would not be comfortable using a platform so easily compromised if someone had the motivation to do so. In this article I address just why OS X is so insecure including the technical shortcomings of OS X as well as Apples policies as a company that contribute to the situation."
Permalink for comment 478593
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Just another article
by pantheraleo on Sat 25th Jun 2011 19:58 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Just another article"
Member since:

By only letting applications access their own folder and files explicitly pointed out by the user. I've been told that Android does a bit of this, by forcing applications to tell the user what they want to access at installation time. This system just needs to be improved and polished until it shines.

Android runs each application inside its own chroot environment. Although whether that has made Android any more secure or not is very debatable. Recent reports from security research firms have suggested that Android is the second biggest vector of mobile malware now. Second only to Symbian. And that it is rapidly catching up to become the biggest vector of mobile malware. So it doesn't look like Android's security model actually works.

Reply Parent Score: 2