4 ms·

This article cites repeatedly the idea that Windows is less secure than Mac because it has a larger market share than Mac and is thus a larger target for malwar

This article cites repeatedly the idea that Windows is less secure than Mac because it has a larger market share than Mac and is thus a larger target for malware writers. Here are some counter-arguments which refute that idea that market share alone makes Windows a more attractive target: - There's also a lot more anti-malware software available for Windows. Windows users are much more likely to run anti-malware. Shouldn't this make Windows a less-attractive target for malware writers? - Microsoft have alleged that open-source software is less secure than closed-source because it's easier to find vulnerabilities. As much more of Mac OS is open-source, shouldn't that make it a more attractive target than Windows? - If Windows itself has more inherent vulnerabilities (including design traits that make it more likely users will do unsafe things) would that not be the simplest explanation as more malware writers see it as an easy target? (E.g., so many cryptic UAC warnings that users quickly learn to click "ok" without understanding them.)

jamesbritt 17y ago
"Microsoft have alleged that open-source software is less secure than closed-source because it's easier to find vulnerabilities. As much more of Mac OS is open-source, shouldn't that make it a more attractive target than Windows?" Wait.. what? What has Microsoft's unsubstantiated and biased opinion on OSS got to do with whether in fact Windows is more or less secure than Snow Leopard? "If Windows itself has more inherent vulnerabilities (including design traits that make it more likely users will do unsafe things) would that not be the simplest explanation as more malware writers see it as an easy target? " That was addressed by some of the respondents. Basically (they claim), Mac users are just as likely to mindlessly enter their user name and password when asked to install some bit of code as some random Vista or Win7 user might click past all the warnings. You get used to it for the safe cases and it becomes routine; it's just one of those steps, like agreeing to the default install folder. Many of the security people claimed that Windows had fewer inherent vulnerabilities than OSX, but that the main issue was, essentially, social engineering and poor user habits all around.

jamesbritt 17y ago

"Microsoft have alleged that open-source software is less secure than closed-source because it's easier to find vulnerabilities. As much more of Mac OS is open-source, shouldn't that make it a more attractive target than Windows?" Wait.. what? What has Microsoft's unsubstantiated and biased opinion on OSS got to do with whether in fact Windows is more or less secure than Snow Leopard? "If Windows itself has more inherent vulnerabilities (including design traits that make it more likely users will do unsafe things) would that not be the simplest explanation as more malware writers see it as an easy target? " That was addressed by some of the respondents. Basically (they claim), Mac users are just as likely to mindlessly enter their user name and password when asked to install some bit of code as some random Vista or Win7 user might click past all the warnings. You get used to it for the safe cases and it becomes routine; it's just one of those steps, like agreeing to the default install folder. Many of the security people claimed that Windows had fewer inherent vulnerabilities than OSX, but that the main issue was, essentially, social engineering and poor user habits all around.