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 478601
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: At least safer than
by Alfman on Sat 25th Jun 2011 21:15 UTC in reply to "RE: At least safer than "
Alfman
Member since:
2011-01-28

pantheraleo,

"Those are three that I am aware of without even looking very hard. None of them achieved very wide spread infections because they could only propegate through Macs."


I always thought that the argument was (simply) that macs were less of a target for malware authors due to small market share.

However it never occurred to me to think that even when the mac os is targeted by viruses, those viruses will have more trouble than windows viruses in randomly finding more targets. The lack of targets would help retard mac virus propagation.

Reply Parent Score: 2