Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 3rd May 2006 16:11 UTC
The recent ruckus about the claimed growing vulnerability of Mac OSX from certain sources has caused an indignant outcry from Mac advocates who claim the stories are mostly media hype. According to an expert in Unix and Linux systems, the outcry is not without justification. Con Zymaris has been working with Unix systems for nearly three decades and for the past 15 years has been running a consultancy on open source software implementation. Zymaris says that, while it is true that a Mac can get infected with a virus, it is not easy and it is not likely to cause much damage. What's more, Mac users don't need to install firewalls and anti-virus software.
Thread beginning with comment 120892
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-01-02
someone wrote:
"Classic didn't even have protected memory. That should tell you how secure and crack-resistant it is."
Are we talking about crashing the machine? Because Windows and Mac OS had their equal crashes back then.
Taking control of the machine with malware or hack (cracking) was something easier done on Windows 9x than Mac OS Classic.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-01-12
The Classic Mac OS has never been cracked. It was very secure because it has no telnet built into it and it didn’t came with its ports open.
Classic didn't even have protected memory. That should tell you how secure and crack-resistant it is.
Edited 2006-05-04 13:47