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 478541
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
No OS is secure
by daveak on Sat 25th Jun 2011 10:47 UTC
daveak
Member since:
2008-12-29

"A fine example of this is the trojan iWorks which was distributed through torrents, and never triggered Xprotect"

This is why. You cannot protect a user from their own stupidity. You obtain pirate software from a torrent you may as well expect your whole system to be infested with unwanted nasties.

Reply Score: 2

RE: No OS is secure
by Neolander on Sat 25th Jun 2011 11:24 in reply to "No OS is secure"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

The problem is that it's not only pirated torrents. No closed-source software distribution channel can be deemed perfectly secure, because there's no way to check a binary for existence of backdoors. Which is why all software should be sandboxed.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: No OS is secure
by Yamin on Sat 25th Jun 2011 13:56 in reply to "No OS is secure"
Yamin Member since:
2006-01-10

That's just not a correct statement. It's the answer you often hear engineers and computer scientists give because we want to do everything with our computers.

It's always a trade off between usability and security.

We could do all sorts of things... but of course they would kill some aspect of usability.

- only run 'trusted' software... signed binaries and verified by the OS
- only allow (untrusted?) applications to install to their own directory and only allow them access to their own files.
- all executables must be registered/installed by with the OS. They cannot be run otherwise.
...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: No OS is secure
by daveak on Sat 25th Jun 2011 14:08 in reply to "RE: No OS is secure"
daveak Member since:
2008-12-29

Installing software from an unknown vendor is a risk, but one that people take because we at least know where the software comes from and so have a course of action to take should it turn out to be buggy, or even worse malicious. This is a trade off between usability and risk, but installing pirated software from an unknown source? In what bat shit crazy world is that a usability tradeoff? It is straight forward stupidity no tradeoff occurring whatsoever.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: No OS is secure
by JAlexoid on Sat 25th Jun 2011 19:20 in reply to "No OS is secure"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

That is why I think the only way to have proper security on the machine is educating users. Anti-virus, anti-malware or other mumbo jumbo is just voodoo...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: No OS is secure
by brichpmr on Sun 26th Jun 2011 13:04 in reply to "RE: No OS is secure"
brichpmr Member since:
2006-04-22

That is why I think the only way to have proper security on the machine is educating users. Anti-virus, anti-malware or other mumbo jumbo is just voodoo...


Yes...if not voodoo, it is simply reactive. The simple proactive antidotes are to run as Standard User, and Snow Leopard will require authentication for anything that looks to install, and don't click on links you know nothing about.

Reply Parent Score: 1