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."
Thread beginning with comment 478536
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: A few counterpints
by Kroc on Sat 25th Jun 2011 09:36 UTC in reply to "RE: A few counterpints"
Member since:

Because it's good PR?

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: A few counterpints
by someone on Sat 25th Jun 2011 10:13 in reply to "RE[2]: A few counterpints"
someone Member since:

Wouldn't be good PR if the researchers ended up revealing afterwards that none of their often-voiced concerned were properly addressed...

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: A few counterpints
by vodoomoth on Wed 29th Jun 2011 14:20 in reply to "RE[3]: A few counterpints"
vodoomoth Member since:

There's a thing that exists and is called an NDA. Would you put it past Apple to mandate and later enforce one?

Edited 2011-06-29 14:24 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2