3 ms·

I'm not sure I'm too happy about that. Increasing enterprise sales will increase the desire to build malware for the platform.

stcredzero 15y ago
This implies that the penetration of companies is the biggest driver of malware. Do you have numbers that support this?
- Niten 15y ago
  He/she never said "biggest". But an increase in corporate penetration would increase the value of OS X as a malware target, and that is what drives malware.
  - stcredzero 15y ago
    He/she never said "biggest". I stand corrected. But an increase in corporate penetration would increase the value of OS X as a malware target, and that is what drives malware. Are that many corporate LAN/WAN really run so badly that people can run botnets out of them on a regular basis? If that's the case, it's disappointing. If it's not, then I'd be a bit shocked at the prevalence of illegal corporate espionage.
- micampe 15y ago
  This thing of people always asking for hard numbers, sources, proofs for everything one says and if you can't provide them your words are worth zero is getting a bit tiresome. Sometimes you can also express personal opinions, you know, gut feelings, and you can discuss about those even if you don't have numbers to show. Those discussion are also usually slightly more entertaining than numbers.
  - stcredzero 15y ago
    This thing of people always asking for hard numbers, sources, proofs for everything one says and if you can't provide them your words are worth zero is getting a bit tiresome. Well, I said the first part of the above, but not the second. This thing where people put words into your mouth is getting a bit tiresome. The data is interesting in its own right! Many scientists would urge you to be skeptical of your memories. The human mind is subject to many unconscious biases: http://www.realsimple.com/work-life/life-strategies/10-ways-better-thinker-00000000011582/page2.html http://www.realsimple.com/work-life/life-strategies/10-ways-... http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Bias http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Bias
- SoftwareMaven 15y ago
  Actually, I think my comment confused you because I lumped pretty much everything that could comprimie my system in the malware bucket (including both things like rootkits and tools to find exploitable vulnerabilities. I have no evidence more enterprise adoption will increase the overall threat to my system, however, I could prove my statement technically true by writing a script that uses a rainbow table to attempt to access my keychain. Being "technically correct" is meaningless to me, though. Instead, I believe my initial comment (with the context above) stands: more enterprise Apple adoption will increase the number of attacks against OS X and the quantity of tools available for the hacker. A root kit with a key logger to steal the CEO's credentials will work equally well to steal my bank account information.

stcredzero 15y ago

This implies that the penetration of companies is the biggest driver of malware. Do you have numbers that support this?

Niten 15y ago
He/she never said "biggest". But an increase in corporate penetration would increase the value of OS X as a malware target, and that is what drives malware.
- stcredzero 15y ago
  He/she never said "biggest". I stand corrected. But an increase in corporate penetration would increase the value of OS X as a malware target, and that is what drives malware. Are that many corporate LAN/WAN really run so badly that people can run botnets out of them on a regular basis? If that's the case, it's disappointing. If it's not, then I'd be a bit shocked at the prevalence of illegal corporate espionage.
micampe 15y ago
This thing of people always asking for hard numbers, sources, proofs for everything one says and if you can't provide them your words are worth zero is getting a bit tiresome. Sometimes you can also express personal opinions, you know, gut feelings, and you can discuss about those even if you don't have numbers to show. Those discussion are also usually slightly more entertaining than numbers.
- stcredzero 15y ago
  This thing of people always asking for hard numbers, sources, proofs for everything one says and if you can't provide them your words are worth zero is getting a bit tiresome. Well, I said the first part of the above, but not the second. This thing where people put words into your mouth is getting a bit tiresome. The data is interesting in its own right! Many scientists would urge you to be skeptical of your memories. The human mind is subject to many unconscious biases: http://www.realsimple.com/work-life/life-strategies/10-ways-better-thinker-00000000011582/page2.html http://www.realsimple.com/work-life/life-strategies/10-ways-... http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Bias http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Bias
SoftwareMaven 15y ago
Actually, I think my comment confused you because I lumped pretty much everything that could comprimie my system in the malware bucket (including both things like rootkits and tools to find exploitable vulnerabilities. I have no evidence more enterprise adoption will increase the overall threat to my system, however, I could prove my statement technically true by writing a script that uses a rainbow table to attempt to access my keychain. Being "technically correct" is meaningless to me, though. Instead, I believe my initial comment (with the context above) stands: more enterprise Apple adoption will increase the number of attacks against OS X and the quantity of tools available for the hacker. A root kit with a key logger to steal the CEO's credentials will work equally well to steal my bank account information.