2 ms·

No, it's not safer than I'd like to admit just because you don't agree with my analogy. I am relying on empirical evidence, thank you very much. Are you one of

by WayneDB 15y ago

No, it's not safer than I'd like to admit just because you don't agree with my analogy. I am relying on empirical evidence, thank you very much. Are you one of those people who thinks that the Mac has fallen first at Pwn2Own because it's a "nicer" computer that all the hackers want? Because that's not the case at all. It's been shown a number of times that OS X can be rooted more easily than Windows. So, no I don't think it's "safer" because of anything technical either. Even if it were though, that wouldn't matter. Windows is safe, yet it can be hacked much like any OS. The only remaining possibility must be true: Hackers don't pay little attention to OS X because too few targets are using them to make it worth the effort. Windows is the larger oasis (quite obviously to the non-obstinate reader). This is because even with virus protection, you can't protect users from themselves and more users means more chances to try. If a malprogrammer can get you to run a binary, you're done. If OS X were the more popular OS and it were being run by almost every business in the world that utilize computers, then I have zero doubt that it would have the same problem as Windows in that regard. I don't think that it will ever be a problem though for Apple since I doubt OS X could ever reach the same market penetration within the highly hacker-targeted business and enterprise market. So, people can go on believing what they want I guess.

Samuel_Michon 15y ago
Wow, so much to respond to... I'll limit it to what I think is the core of your message: Why would cyber criminals be more interested in breaking into some empty business desktop, if they can break into a personal desktop filled with personal information like credit card numbers and iTunes/Paypal/Bank logins?
- WayneDB 15y ago
  Why don't you just tell me why you think the Mac is safer despite empirical evidence the says otherwise? That'd probably be quicker than me trying to explain to you why the Mac is worthless target. (Actually a no explanation is typically needed for that since the market share numbers don't lie. I just think you're being extremely obstinate at this point, so there's no way you'll see that. You might as well attempt to prove _your_ point to me since there's obviously no way you'll accept _my_ point.)
  - Samuel_Michon 15y ago
    "Why don't you just tell me why you think the Mac is safer" I'll let Pwn2Own winner Charlie Miller answer that for me: "I'd say that Macs are less secure [...] but are more safe because there simply isn't much malware out there. For now, I'd still recommend Macs for typical users as the odds of something targeting them are so low that they might go years without seeing any malware, even though if an attacker cared to target them it would be easier for them." http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pwn2own-mac-hack,2254-6.html http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pwn2own-mac-hack,2254-6....
    - WayneDB 15y ago
      Thanks for proving my point. It's not _technically_ safer. It's security by obscurity.
      - Samuel_Michon 15y ago
        A 58 million Mac installed base, more than 250 million iOS devices sold, and you're still arguing obscurity? That's commitment. http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/04/250-million-ios-devices-sold/ http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/04/250-million-ios-devices-sol...
        WayneDB 15y ago
        Oh please. Compared to over a billion PCs worldwide? If you are going to build a bot-net, would you really target the Mac? Gimme a break dude. Considering the vast difference between Windows and OS X APIs; it's quite clear why mal-programmers don't waste their time with OS X. You would have to spend MORE than half your time attacking the Mac for less than 10% of your total attack surface. The only other argument that has been made in the face of this fact is from Gruber who said: If Macs have 10% of the market, why don't they have 10% of the viruses? That's like saying because I am Nth the size of the sun, I should have Nth the power of the sun. Reality does not work that way. Everything does not have to be proportional and in this case it's crystal clear why it is not proportional. Would you please kindly concede this point now?

by WayneDB 15y ago

Samuel_Michon 15y ago

Wow, so much to respond to... I'll limit it to what I think is the core of your message: Why would cyber criminals be more interested in breaking into some empty business desktop, if they can break into a personal desktop filled with personal information like credit card numbers and iTunes/Paypal/Bank logins?

WayneDB 15y ago
Why don't you just tell me why you think the Mac is safer despite empirical evidence the says otherwise? That'd probably be quicker than me trying to explain to you why the Mac is worthless target. (Actually a no explanation is typically needed for that since the market share numbers don't lie. I just think you're being extremely obstinate at this point, so there's no way you'll see that. You might as well attempt to prove _your_ point to me since there's obviously no way you'll accept _my_ point.)
- Samuel_Michon 15y ago
  "Why don't you just tell me why you think the Mac is safer" I'll let Pwn2Own winner Charlie Miller answer that for me: "I'd say that Macs are less secure [...] but are more safe because there simply isn't much malware out there. For now, I'd still recommend Macs for typical users as the odds of something targeting them are so low that they might go years without seeing any malware, even though if an attacker cared to target them it would be easier for them." http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pwn2own-mac-hack,2254-6.html http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pwn2own-mac-hack,2254-6....
  - WayneDB 15y ago
    Thanks for proving my point. It's not _technically_ safer. It's security by obscurity.
    - Samuel_Michon 15y ago
      A 58 million Mac installed base, more than 250 million iOS devices sold, and you're still arguing obscurity? That's commitment. http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/04/250-million-ios-devices-sold/ http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/04/250-million-ios-devices-sol...
      - WayneDB 15y ago
        Oh please. Compared to over a billion PCs worldwide? If you are going to build a bot-net, would you really target the Mac? Gimme a break dude. Considering the vast difference between Windows and OS X APIs; it's quite clear why mal-programmers don't waste their time with OS X. You would have to spend MORE than half your time attacking the Mac for less than 10% of your total attack surface. The only other argument that has been made in the face of this fact is from Gruber who said: If Macs have 10% of the market, why don't they have 10% of the viruses? That's like saying because I am Nth the size of the sun, I should have Nth the power of the sun. Reality does not work that way. Everything does not have to be proportional and in this case it's crystal clear why it is not proportional. Would you please kindly concede this point now?