Friday’s release of the new version of the Mac OS, dubbed Snow Leopard, could include some security features that would make it secure, or at least push it closer to the level of security that Vista and Windows 7 have, experts said this week.
Contrary to popular Mac fanboy belief, Macintosh is not more secure from a software standpoint than modern Windows; it’s merely safer to use because malware writers prefer to target the platform with the biggest install base, according to Charlie Miller and Dino Dai Zovi, co-authors of The Mac Hacker’s Handbook, which came out this spring.
“Apple hasn’t implemented all the security features that Vista has,” Miller said. “They made some improvements in Leopard, but they are still behind.”
If there is any truth to rumors circulating about Snow Leopard, the operating system security playing field could become more level as of this weekend and Mac users will really have something to brag about.
It had to happen sometime. As Apple gains a larger percentage of the market, hackers/spammers will become more interested.
#17, chuck,
With three running XP and two running Vista, the last time I saw a BSOD was when my burner died about three years ago.
My wife and kid use the Vistas and are seriously security impaired. Nope, no problems there.
A lot of malware comes from other countries too and Apple has even less market share. Last I heard it was 3%. That’s not enough for anyone to bother doing malware for. But in the US Apple has made market share gains and they may finally be realizing that its only a matter of time before they are targeted. What is funny is that many Mac user’s who brag about now viruses have never even scanned their computer to verify this.
They just assume they are free. But I my self have talked to a couple Mac users who actually got paranoid and bought a Anti virus program. Guess what? They did have a couple of suspicious malware problems. Looked as though they were never a real issue but still it was a surprise to them.
I would like to see Apple create at least a online scan or a help section on addressing any malware targeting Mac’s. They seem to have their heads in the sand.
@ #16 JimR
Vista/7 have been killing my computer repair business, they don’t get infected or slow down over time. The worst I’ve seen is a few systems where Firefox/IE were overrun with toolbars. Otherwise they were still running fine.
@ #17 Chuck
I haven’t seen a non-hardware issue BSOD since the Windows ME days. There were still some troublesome drivers in the early days of XP (particularly Creative sound card drivers), but the old notion that Windows crashes all the time is BS nowadays.
#17. “Vista and Windows 7 have a unique security feature that the Mac doesn’t have: when you run any program, it automatically crashes, producing a blue-screen-of-death which prevents viruses from infecting your computer.”
Yeah right, all Windows programs crash all the time. You have obviously never worked in a Mac shop. Mac has nothing on the PC’s when it comes to crashing. Archive and Reinstall is the number one Mac fix. Give me a break.
I ran XP on two computers for over six years and never once had a BSOD. I’ve been running Vista on three computers for a year or so and still haven’t had one BSOD. Operator error!
#16
> I’ve had an average
> of 3 Macs running 10-12
> hrs/day here for 30 years
Really. And what Mac would that be since the Mac came out in 1984?
The sandboxing features 10.6 will employ will help out a great deal. Application developers are on the hook to secure their software regardless of the OS the app is installed on. Above all else, the ignorant user is the greatest threat agent.
I use a Vista Netbook and Leopard. Both OS’s are fine (I did have one BSOD on my netbook and one kernel panic on Leopard) Use what you want and enjoy yourself. And for the love of God, quit bragging about your OS and get a life.
>> Nik (no C) said, on August 27th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
>> And for the love of God, quit bragging about your OS and get a life.
I’m with you… it’s silly to identify with an OS.
I regularly use all the three main OS’s plus the old Palm OS. They each have their virtue.
I probably like the Palm OS best because mostly all it does is launch the apps. That’s really all I want in an OS — a platform to run the software I want.
Re: #26, Thomas, I started with a Mac llci in 1989, and I still can’t add.
(It just seems like 30 years)
Re:# 23 Somebody_Else said, I have to admit, my son said that Windows 7 is as efficient and stable as OSX, maybe even better. It sure took Microsoft a long time to get there though.
I don’t get it. On Dvorak’s own “Security Now” Podcast, he’s explained Mac security vs. Microsoft several times. Yes, the size of the installed base is a factor in making Windows a big target. But Microsoft’s real problem is that it started taking security seriously only recently, and is hamstrung with decades of backward compatibility issues. Like image file formats that can contain executable code, ActiveX, “autoplay”, and the idea that virtually all services should be on by default. Apple got to rid itself of a lot of baggage when it shed MacOS 9.
#16 Well, the same for me during 17 years of windows machines. In my whole life using pc’s, I’ve only gotten 2 viruses and both those times were dumb people opening attachments.
Also, have you forgotten the Norton AV versions for mac? I remember seeing antivirus for the first time on macs. This was circa 1988 and I just laughed at that. But I laugh harder at those dimwits that say then & now that “macs don’t get viri” or “there’s no such thing as viri for mac”.
Anyway, you have to really be borderline moronic or tech clueless to get a virus in any OS.
#17 Very nice one. I’m still laughing.
#19 Any proof on the contrary?
#24 Whenever I need something to cheer me up, I remember those good ol’ mac system bombs. That was much more hilarious than a BSOD.
#19 “…Macintosh is not more secure from a software standpoint than modern Windows…”
Any proof to back up that statement?
#33 “Any proof on the contrary?”
As a reader, I don’t have to disprove something the author says. The burden of proof is on him. He should be able to back up his statements. Especially when most evidence points to the opposite conclusion. If he can’t support his claims, it puts into question everything else he says.
The Mac’s security seems to be mainly based on obscurity, and any serious security nut will tell you that’s not good enough.
#4 I’ve shown you some evidence. The fact that antivirus for macs are as old as macs shows that it is not more secure, just that it is not as important to create a virus for mac as it is for pc.
Now, if you choose to forget that fact, it only shows your macfan colors. Grow up
The fact that you have to resort to personal attacks reveals the weakness of your argument.
Notice that I have not made any statements. I didn’t say OS X is more secure than Windows. I merely asked if the author had any proof to back up his statement. He doesn’t. Because there is no conclusive proof. There is plenty of evidence that can be used to argue both sides.
The whole issue could be resolved by the authors saying, “in my opinion”.
Look at #35′s statement. The word “seems”. That’s all you need. And I agree with him.