Apple's Mac OS X is less secure than Windows

Lets look for the conflicts of interest here.

The company that did the anti-Mac report. Does it make its money selling security software to Windows users? I think so. Does it sell equivalent software for Mac users? No. Of course it would want everyone to go Windows, and use its software and services.

Conflict of interest #2.
Some journalists have admitted they like to stir up the Mac crowd, and that is their aim, rather than the aim of reporting accurately.

The thing is might be biased article, but I remember the hacking competition winner last year said he used an exploit on the Mac that he had known about from year before.

Also must remember Apple always use to state security and safety no need for any software to protect, seems they removed all the guff info.

"The Eset survey said that the only safer Mac user was one who used both a Windows PC and an Apple Mac because they tended to be a bit more clever than your average fanboy."

Shouldn't that be basically every Mac user then? Given the prevalence of Windows, especially in the work place, I think Mac users who rarely have to use a Windows PC are in the minority of Mac users. I thought part of Mac's recent popularity is the ability to also run Windows either through Boot Camp or virtualization.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pwn2own-mac-hack,2254-6.html

In any case, the effective threat or chance that a user will experience a security issue still favours OS X. Even Charlie Miller, who is a security researcher with Independent Security Evaluators and famous for hacking OS X in the Pwn2Own contests, feels while OS X may be less secure than Windows, OS X is safer to use for the end user in terms of actually realizing that risk. And between Windows and OS X, Charlie would still recommend OS X to the average user.

"Further, Eric Johanson, a security researcher pointed out that the Mac OS X has far more published vulnerabilities per user than Windows" = There are more Windows vulnerabilities

(and I'm not even a Mac fan)

This guy's reasons are terrible. He barely addresses the actually vulnerabilities of the system and just talks about how the users are more ignorant. This is pointless.

Moving past conflicts, reporting and whatsoever, the point of the article I think is that Mac's security comes from the fact that it is a small percentage of the pie. Apple has not provided us with any real data to make us consider that if it's operating system is under attack, it will withstand. Where are the real technical data of security? Where is a really quick response to announced vulnerabilities?

I'm sure there are more ridiculous metrics than that one out there, but I'm having trouble of thinking of one off the top of my head. A system with 10 users and 5 security flaws is less secure than a system with a million users and 1000 security flaws? You'd have to be a complete window licking mentalist to think so!

Agree, and I'm enough stirred at the ridiculous metric to support Apple.

A far more objective measure is the number of ports open and services running by default, plus design flaws like Autoplay, and IE having direct hooks to the kernel.

There are over 200,000 known viruses, malware, adware, etc. in the wild for Windows.

There are 0 known viruses, malware, adware, etc. in the wild for Mac OS X.

Even if Mac OS X is only a small percentage of overall computers, it should still have a relative number of security issues - there should be 10,000 viruses for the Mac if it has 5% of the users. But it has 0.

"""Unfortunately in the case of the Mac the user is a smug, technologically illiterate person who believes they are invulnerable because they use a Mac. Such people randomly press buttons, visit sites that sensible people don't and download things carelessly because Apple's marketing tells them they are safe."""
I, for a moment, thought you were referring to a Windows user. Also, I think that the people that are moving to Macs are Windows users... Even Steve Ballmer was using a Mac in a presentation. OSX is based on FreeBSD, it can be as secure as any UNIX system, if they want. Windows, well, is based on Windows; and before that is was running on top of DOS, maybe is still running on DOS; that's why is a piece of crap. How many years is MS trying to make windows more secure? Since 3.1

Wow, the apple fanbots need to chill! When someone disses their totem pole, they get all upset! Yes, know a few people that do have macs, they did feel impervious to malware/viruses, until one of them had all kins of issues (porn pop ups, processes running rampant, etc.). I guess macs are not really perfect after all? Wait, most of us already knew that! Love Win 7 so far, no macs here!

Yes it is!
Phishing isnt something OS can control.
Its like computer education. The one who is using the computer must know what is phishins and what is insecure..
this comparsion is bullshit.

This is just one more anti-apple article from Nick. This reminds me of the anti-NVidia articles by Charlie some months ago. I know these articles might be good for the inquirer since they achieve long discussions among readers. But, in the same way it happened with Charlie's articles, I'm skipping every single article of Nick. Haven't even read this one...

I converted to Mac a few years ago and am one of those people that also have Windows running: 2 bootcamps and one standalone. One of the reasons I have Windows is I look at it as Jupiter of my OS solar system...

This article is based on a wish-fantasy that one day a group of meanies will sit down and write a Melissa for Mac that will cause Mac machines to domino all over the World. It may happen and will not kill Apple. It also fantasizes that Apple has one security specialist that plays Tetris all day. The simple fact is that Apple is on top of its security game and that includes the end user's mentality. We don't click on everything that says FREE... What is happening with IE today is only a glimpse of what can happen to Windows if Microsoft does not mature.

Thankyou Nick Farrell and for the complainers listed above at the hacking competitions the Apple machine for the last couple years have been the first hacked. In one year it was done in something like 38 seconds. All three systems were eventually hacked but the reality was the MAC didn't provide a challenge at all to the hackers.

APPLE MAKES A GREAT GUI. Because its pretty doesn't mean its secure. Sure a lot of people like the Apple interface/gui but the underlying security is poor. Probably the biggest reason for this is their lack of experience being a target for hackers. Sure it will improve but Apple just doesn't have the experience in security that Microsoft and the Linux community posses.

There are worse metrics they could have used. Like crashes per watt consumed while on standby, or ports open per km of power lead. Those metrics are even more meaningless than 'published vulnerabilities per user,' but only just.

I must ask though - if there are vulnerabilities galore on Macs, why aren't they exploited? If it's so easy, why are they not attacked daily? If there are exploits, why can't the 'security researcher' list any?

It's funny, this is at a time when IE is still reeling from a vulnerability that affects v6-8, while even Nick was forced to admit Apple has patched cross-platform vulnerabilities that Microsoft leaves open.

Oh, well, off to install Linux, and chuckle at the stupidity of 'security researchers' you meet in online chat rooms and agenda-driven journalism.

Bill Gates announced Windows in 1983. Steve Jobs announced Mac OS X in 1999. Windows is more secure because it has a 16 year head start. Microsoft has had thousands of failures to learn from in over 25 years. Apple's Mac OS X has had no failures to learn from in it's 10 years of existence.

"Fanbois" will point out that Mac OS X is actually FreeBSD under the hood, and UNIX is 33 years old. The Baby OS is still sucking from it's mothers teat, and benefiting from it's mother's experience.

What do they know?

Please list all the people you know who have experienced a Mac virus. Or that you have heard of.

Personally I don't know anyone who has experienced an OS X infection, nor any Windows user who has not.

Jim

So you're taking this from IT managers? These are the guys who couldn't cut it as real engineers and who are dedicated to slowing those engineers down in every way possible. Whatever they learned in the IT course at community college 15 years ago is good enough for now.

Wow, such a biased article. It reminds me of Fox news, an agenda looking for content. Painting Mac users with a big brush labeled idiots.

I've been running my business for six years off Mac laptops. I haven't had any problems, even as Windows computers around me fall to security problems again and again, while running various virus and security software. In fact, many of those users, to MY surprise have switched to Mac in the last year.

I am careful and I am not stupid. Mac users for many years have had to play the ugly stepsister to the Windows world
and are more apt to find their own solutions. Also, OSX is based on Unix, a tried and true system that has been around a long time.

For me, Windows has never done job one right. It's nice to see that others agree and are making a different choice.

The last 'infection' I had on my Windows machine was back in 1993 when I got the 'Stoned' virus, and that was using DOS.
All those Windows users that have viruses are those people that open '3nlarg ure p3n1s' emails and open the attachments. Any decent (and free) virus software will prevent issues of 'ignorance'.
Virus writers exploit ignorance and attempt to infect the masses.

So, Jim, you found a Windows user that never had an infection in Windows.

@Steve W: Gates announced Windows in 1983? That is the most ridiculous claim I've heard so far.

Apple introduced the Mac in 1984. Gates loved it, and tried to get them to port it to DOS machines; Jobs demurred. So Microsoft developed Windows as a bolt-on to DOS. That's all recorded history. I don't know what 1983 announcement you are referring to, but Windows was from the beginning an attempt to copy Apple's 1984 operating system.

If a vulnerability falls in an operating system, but no one exploits it, does it make a sound?

My company uses both Mac and PC, and I can tell you, over the past 18 years, my Windows servers and desktops have caused 100% of my virus and security headaches. I've can't tell you the number of hours and days and dollars I have spent on PC security. It is one of the hidden costs of the "cheaper" PC. My Mac servers and desktops have not required any IT support whatsoever. They just work.

(I can see why IT guys like PC security... it's called "job security.")

Potential problems are not actual problems, they are fantasy. This article sounds like absolute nonsense, from my experience.

PC fans like assure themselves that there are no viruses on Mac's because there aren't enough of them.

It's all a lot of nonsense.

Before MacOSX, Apple's share of the market hit its lowest, but there were plenty of viruses around.

Also, the PC virus writer that creates a significant Mac virus would be famous in those circles, so there is huge incentive to create such a thing.

But they haven't been able to so far. The reason?

Better architecture.

wining about macs security...lol, and its always the same. well, SHOW me the viruses, show me the damage. NOW. If it was SOOO easy to write viruses, and exploit macs, WHY do we not see it? Same questions as always. I am satisfied anyway, 15 years with mac, no viruses so far. Can somewhat agree...I do not care much about viruses therefor, and I am maybe a securityrisk myself. But so far....

@mike it must be nice being you without feeling it necessary to get your facts straight or develop a mature perspective before shooting your mouth off.
There was a prize of a new Macbook/Air for hacking the Mac and 'only' the Mac. Charlie Miller admitted he had known about the vulnerability for a year and was well prepared for the contest. You don't think he just sat down and hacked it without knowing how to beforehand do you?
Oh wait... you did!!
Last security conference I went to, 90% of the hacker community were using Macs and the bile was being heaped on the PC promoting security firms for their myopic mantras. Why that percentage of Macs? - better machines and easier to lock down.

If you switched to Mac 11 years ago and just let the system do what it does by default. You would have had to worry about 0 viruses and 2 trojans (over about a 6 month period) 1 required you to be on a bogus porn site and stupid enough to download and install software a purported codec. The other if you tried to steal iWork and believed it would download in a 200k file.
Both of these are now blocked with the current OS and much to the frustration of security researchers no additional updates have been needed because no others have been distributed.

So, I could have wasted a couple hours every week for the past 11 years worried about the eventual attack on OS X that may or may not come. Or I could ignore the insecure windows whinny boys and get on with my work.

Boy that first attack on OS X had better be a good one if it is going to make up for the 11 years of bliss we have had up till now.

Actually the company that did the report does have a Mac A/V product in the works.

Nick has fallen for the pre-marketing PR. That's what happens when you let your fanboi-ism get in the way of critical review of PR.

So, My Mac, which for the last 8 months has been on a dedicated LAN connection yet wide open without a singe AV software OR antispyware software yet has never been touches is less secure than Windows which if left open for five minutes will have no less than 52 invasive things like rootkits, spyware, and viruses.

Your math just doesn't add up.

Where I work we had several Mac servers, which I didn't use, but knew they existed. One day I noticed one was down and when I investigated I found out the Mac servers kept getting hacked. This was a surprise to me, because I hadn't heard anything about it, even though it had been going on for a year and the one server was down for months. When anything happens to the other servers, Windows, unix, linux, etc, everyone knew about it. But not so with the Macs because people kept that hushed. Yeah, PCs may get viruses from time to time, and we know about it, but how many Mac users know if their box has been rooted? Probably very, very few. And if they do know, how many would swallow their pride and let it be known?

@ Mike,
"Thankyou Nick Farrell and for the complainers listed above at the hacking competitions the Apple machine for the last couple years have been the first hacked. In one year it was done in something like 38 seconds. All three systems were eventually hacked but the reality was the MAC didn't provide a challenge at all to the hackers."

Since I have followed these "hacking tests" closely, I just love seeing a comment from someone who only saw a minor headline in a pc blog and is now an "expert". :-(

Yes there was a minor exploit in the mac. But only after getting their hands on the Mac and manually running the exploit were they able to succeed. Unlike the 100,000 viruses out there for Windows that require the user to do nothing but stop at a web site and leave infected.

Read and understand the details son. Your mother would want you to grow up and be knowledgeable.

Just a thought,
en

This article is clearly a hit piece.. There are no facts, there is simply drivel designed to stir up emotions, which in turn creates hits..

The best anyone can do is completely ignore this article and DO NOT post any more comments..

Eventually, this kind of nonsense will go away..

To understand how stupid this article is, let's break malware down:

User-installed and self-propogating

User-installed malware is a problem for both platforms. The OS basically does what it's told to do: "Do you want to install this app?" If the user tells the OS to install something, it will install it. There's no way for the OS to prevent that kind of stupidity. While there are less examples, on the Mac at present, let's be generous and call it a wash. Smart people don't have this problem, but inexperienced people do.

Self-propogating. This one is beyond the user's control. There are lots of Windows viruses in the wild that can attack your system without any effort on your part (visiting a web site, or simply being attached to a network). There are ZERO (that's zip, nada, none, zilch) of these in the wild for Macs (for that matter, there are none known to exist even in the labs for Macs.

Takeover of computer - local or remote. Locally, any system can be compromised. If you give me physical access to your computer, I can take it over - whether it's a Mac or a PC. Remotely, PCs have been compromised, but no Macs have (at least not since OS X came out).

So:
User-installed malware -- it's a wash

Self-propogating malware -- Macs are infinitely better

Local takeover of control -- it's a wash

Remote takeover of control - Macs are infinitely better

Now, instead of throwing around 'fanboi' and other stupid comments, feel free to explain what's wrong with that logic

As someone in a VERY small town who has to fix a lot various virus infections on the general public's machines. Recently we had a number of infected Mac's. All were actually botnets, and all installed by playing off of the "we are immune" belief. And having the users download tat which they never even thought about any possible issue.

As Ken said above, part of the issue is even if you point out to them that there machine has a botnet running on it, and its the reason the cpu is stuck at 100% all the time. They will still crow on and on about "it's a Mac, it's immune" and the usual bullshit we expect from them. The arrogance and the thought of immunity, which is a huge issue with Mac users (just look at the ones here) makes attacks around exploiting human stupidity a ticking time bomb. And the only security a Mac has is obscurity since most malware writers want numbers and the Mac's market is too small to bother with. Nothing else!

"And the only security a Mac has is obscurity since most malware writers want numbers and the Mac's market is too small to bother with. Nothing else!"

This is, of course, nonsense.

There was a virus for jailbroken iPhones - when there couldn't have been more than a couple thousand targets in the entire world. There have been many examples of malware circulating for platforms with less users than OS X. There were Windows 7 viruses back when it was only a beta in the hands of a few hundred thousand people. There were AmigaOS viruses when Amiga's market share and installed base are a fraction of the current level. There were BeOS viruses - and BeOS never reached more than a few thousand users.

The 'security through obscurity' argument is always thrown around, but none of its advocates have ever backed it up with anything approaching logic - and it is clearly in conflict with reality.

"Most tell us that even if Apple gear was half the price it's just security by obscurity."

Apple Mac is now almost 10% of the market. In ten years, it has zero viruses. People of say it is because hackers want to attack the larger market are missing one vital point. Before OS X, the Mac had up to 80 viruses at a time they only had 3% marketshare. So the 'security by obscurity' is a myth.

Secondly, Macs are far more secure by the fact they ship with the Firewall OFF by default. Windows users have a system so insecure they have to have the Firewall on.

So we know that cars using gasoline engines pollute more than if we all used electric cars which can be charged with atmospherically clean solar, wind, and hydroelectric power. That's why the whole world has completely changed over to electric cars and clean power already, right?

Er, uh...

I guess the status quo doesn't represent the truth nor does it demonstrate a factual, logical cause after all.

Get real. What a fantasy world you windows people live in.

Mac has security in spades compared to any flavor of windows. And the man on the street knows this. Some of them are dumb enough to install malware, but that is hardly Apple's problem anymore than it's a problem for Microsoft that people are dumb enough to buy their excuse for
software.

Irrespective of the actual article - Alan ['The issue is arrogance'] posted 'Recently we had a number of infected Mac's. All were actually botnets'.

Please be very specific - how many of the 'small town' Macs were brought to you, and over what time period?

Of those Macs - numerically speaking, how many were infected?

You state the infected Macs had botnets. Please identify each botnet, and exactly where on the Macs were the botnets installed? And also, just how did you remove each botnet?

If you were able to ask (the small town botnet infected Macintosh owners) about the web sites visited, and such was provided - please list the web site URL's and any additional factual information.

I would understand (as would many others) if you were unable to provide the requested information.

-------------------

Most of the posts are attempts to slander those who use an operating system other than theirs. Facts, about all mentioned operating systems, do not seem to matter.

I have personally - Linux, Macintosh (System 9.2.2), Macintosh OSX, and Windows based computers; and assist clients of all platforms.

I have made much in assisting in the removal infected based Windows PC's; or installations of protection software to minimized such. To date, no Linux or Mac based computers I have assisted with were infected.

-------------------

Computers are tools - use the right tool to do the job [document creation, surfing the internet, design, playing games, etc.] for you. Just be aware of where you are and what you are doing - when surfing the internet, or installing software from a Disc or disk, USB storage device, or external hard disk drive.

"However Apple is also actually more insecure because of the attitude of its customers."
Idiot's logic: There has never been a Mac virus in the 10 years that Mac OS X has been in existence... therefore Mac users are more relaxed about security than Windows users... therefore Macs are less secure :-)

You had me until the drivel about paying too much and the iPad. At that point any pretense toward objectivity flew right out the window, or should I say Windows?

This article is so hilarious. OS X has been out since 2001 and no amount of troll articles like this one will change the fact that there have been ZERO viruses on the platform. ZERO! Now, you windows fanboys get started on your virus scanning and updating definitions OK. Me, I'm surfing and using my Mac with impunity. LOL.

OS X user since March 2001.

Farrel is famous for being an ubuntu user. You mac heads don't get it. He hates Microsoft more than you. But you are easy targets.

@KNows the Truth: (obviously, you don't):
"Farrel is famous for being an ubuntu user. You mac heads don't get it. He hates Microsoft more than you. But you are easy targets."

What does that have to do with anything? Should he be allowed to get away with outright lies because he's a Ubuntu user? Does the fact that he hates Microsoft (even if that's true, but his articles sure don't support that conclusion) justify his incessant lies?

"Unfortunately in the case of the Mac the user is a smug, technologically illiterate person ..."

I stopped reading there; knowing few actual facts, or even reasonable arguments, would be presented.

So, Security By Obscurity explains Mac safeness? Really?

So, then Google's Android OS should not have already had Phishing APPS released already. Because, Android has nowhere near the marketshare of Apple's iPhone. And, because Apple's iPhone is the more dominant OS so far, it should have far more, but it has.... ZERO. Wow, so much for SBO.

Using a neighborhood metaphor, North Philly must be safer than all the Philly suburbs because the houses are far more secure (more locks and deadbolts on doors; bars on all windows).

You know, it's ok to personally like Windows better, but let's not pretend it's a safer platform. 9+ years of Mac OS X and 30 million plus computers hardly counts as obscurity, and there are STILL no self-propagating malware programs in existence. It doesn't mean one should become complacent. It simply mean... Windows users, and "news" sites looking for hit count, stop lying.

Just ONE proof of a true OS X virus (a file that self-propagates without ANY user intervention) is all it takes to shut up the Mac fans. Good luck with that, because the count is still ZERO.

I love the angry North Philly (Windows) boys claiming that Doylestown has the same crime rate. lol

Charlie Miller got the luck of the draw, and had the first time slot for the browser competition. His target- Safari on Mac OS X. Before I could even pull my camera out, it was over within 2 minutes- and Charlie (coincidentally also last year's first winner of the day) is now the proud owner of yet another MacBook, and $5,000 from the Zero Day Initiative.

If that wasn’t enough, Nils pulled a Safari exploit out of his hat (perhaps the same one used for the drawing?) and wowed us a second time- quickly taking down Apple’s browser for another cool $5,000. As a reminder, even though a browser may have been exploited once, anyone else is free to use a different zero-day exploit in order to cash in again.

http://dvlabs.tippingpoint.com/blog/2009/03/18/pwn2own-2009-day-1---safari-internet-explorer-and-firefox-taken-down-by-four-zero-day-exploits

Suck it Apple Fanbois

Wow, Mike, so you used a contest where the contestants needed to:
1) Use an exploit (I'm ok with that)
2) Needed physical access to the Mac to make the exploit work (NOT ok with that)

If cyber-criminals need physical access to my Mac, I guess that explains why 9+ years and counting, no security software, and visits to sites that would destroy a Windows box, my Mac is still as safe as ever.

I guess you think HIV has been cured, since scientists can kill the HIV virus in the labs and been doing so for many, many years. Contests and lab experiments do not equate to real life issues.

Thanks for playing, dummy.

Known vulnerabilities according to secunia.com:

Windows 7: 7 vulnerabilities since 2009
Windows Vista: 147 vulnerabilities since 2006
Windows XP: 308 vulnerabilities since 2003

Apple Macintosh OS X: 1114 vulnerabilities since 2003

462 vs 1114

1 http://blog.intego.com/2009/01/22/mac-trojan-horse-osxtrojaniservicesa-found-in-pirated-apple-iwork-09/
2 http://blog.intego.com/2009/01/26/new-variant-of-mac-trojan-horse-iservices-found-in-pirated-adobe-photoshop-cs4/
3 http://blog.intego.com/2009/03/17/new-rsplug-trojan-horse-variant-new-code-new-theater-of-operations/
4 http://blog.intego.com/2009/06/19/new-rsplug-trojan-horse-variant-found-on-game-sites/
5 http://blog.intego.com/2009/06/26/new-variant-of-rsplug-trojan-horse-rsplug-l/
6 http://blog.intego.com/2009/07/02/new-variant-of-the-rsplug-trojan-horse/
7 http://blog.intego.com/2009/07/21/new-version-of-rsplug-trojan-horse-masquerading-as-mac-os-x-crackkeygen/
8 http://blog.intego.com/2009/03/12/new-variant-of-rsplug-trojan-hackers-taunt-intego-again/
9 http://blog.intego.com/2009/04/29/intego-discovers-a-new-proof-of-concept-malware/
10 http://blog.intego.com/2009/04/29/intego-discovers-a-new-proof-of-concept-malware/
11 http://blog.intego.com/2009/10/29/loselose-is-it-a-game-is-it-malware-its-both/
12 http://blog.intego.com/2009/02/12/apple-stays-at-the-top-of-operating-system-vulnerability-league-table/
13 http://blog.intego.com/2009/01/13/critical-safari-rss-vulnerability-and-how-to-fix-it/
14 http://blog.intego.com/2009/06/09/apple-releases-dozens-of-security-fixes-for-safari-4/
15 http://blog.intego.com/2009/07/09/apple-updates-safari-with-security-fixes/
16 http://blog.intego.com/2009/08/12/apple-plugs-six-holes-in-safari-update/
17 http://blog.intego.com/2009/11/12/apple-updates-safari-includes-security-fixes/
18 http://blog.intego.com/2009/02/24/acrobat-vulnerability-present-in-apples-preview/
19 http://blog.intego.com/2009/03/12/itunes-81-ships-with-security-fix/
20 http://blog.intego.com/2009/09/23/apple-updates-itunes-fixes-a-security-hole/
21 http://blog.intego.com/2009/06/02/apple-updates-itunes-and-quicktime-security-fixes-included/
22 http://blog.intego.com/2009/09/10/apple-issues-quicktime-security-update-for-tiger-and-leopard/
23 http://blog.intego.com/2009/08/04/apple-issues-security-update-for-garage-band/
24 http://blog.intego.com/2009/08/12/apple-issues-security-update-for-bind-dns-server/
25 http://blog.intego.com/2009/09/15/apple-issues-security-update-for-xsan-file-system/
26 http://blog.intego.com/2009/05/20/apple-hasnt-updated-java-to-protect-mac-users-from-critical-vulnerabilities/
27 http://blog.intego.com/2009/06/16/apple-finally-updates-java-after-six-months/
28 http://blog.intego.com/2009/04/17/mac-os-x-kernel-vulnerability-could-lead-to-dangerous-malware/
29 http://blog.intego.com/2009/05/13/apples-patch-tuesday-mammoth-security-updates/
30 http://blog.intego.com/2009/08/25/snow-leopard-contains-an-antivirus/
31 http://blog.intego.com/2009/08/28/intego-virusbarrier-x5-compared-to-apples-mac-os-x-10-6-snow-leopard-anti-malware-function/
32 http://blog.intego.com/2009/09/02/how-the-anti-malware-function-in-apples-snow-leopard-works/
33 http://blog.intego.com/2009/08/06/apple-updates-mac-os-x-includes-security-fixes/
34 http://blog.intego.com/2009/08/31/snow-leopard-ships-with-insecure-version-of-flash-player/
35 http://blog.intego.com/2009/09/04/apple-releases-java-security-update-for-10-5/
36 http://blog.intego.com/2009/09/11/apple-updates-snow-leopard-includes-security-fixes/
37 http://blog.intego.com/2009/09/11/apple-releases-large-security-update-for-leopard/
38 http://blog.intego.com/2009/09/22/1155/
39 http://blog.intego.com/2009/11/10/apple-release-os-x-update-with-dozens-of-security-fixes/
40 http://blog.intego.com/2009/12/04/apple-issues-updates-for-java-in-leopard-and-snow-leopard/
41 http://blog.intego.com/2009/06/18/iphone-os-3-0-includes-more-than-40-security-fixes/
42 http://blog.intego.com/2009/07/02/apple-scrambling-to-patch-sms-flaw-in-iphone/
43 http://blog.intego.com/2009/08/01/apple-updates-iphone-for-sms-vulnerability/
44 http://blog.intego.com/2009/07/02/jailbroken-iphones-are-weak-on-security/
45 http://blog.intego.com/2009/07/30/apple-highlights-risks-of-jailbreaking-iphones/
46 http://blog.intego.com/2009/09/10/iphone-and-ipod-touch-updates-contain-security-fixes/
47 http://blog.intego.com/2009/09/10/apple-adds-safari-anti-phishing-feature-that-doesnt-work-to-iphone/
48 http://blog.intego.com/2009/09/14/response-from-apple-regarding-iphone-anti-phishing-problem/
49 http://blog.intego.com/2009/11/03/iphone-ransomware-dutch-hacker-exploits-jailbroken-iphone-bug-and-asks-for-money/
50 http://blog.intego.com/2009/11/09/worm-affects-jailbroken-iphones-changes-wallpaper/
51 http://blog.intego.com/2009/11/11/intego-security-memo-hacker-tool-copies-personal-info-from-iphones/
52 http://blog.intego.com/2009/11/23/intego-security-memo-iphone-worm-creates-botnet-copies-personal-data/
53 http://blog.intego.com/2009/12/15/zero-day-adobe-acrobat-and-reader-attacks-in-the-wild/
54 http://blog.intego.com/2009/02/09/hp-printers-open-to-unauthorized-access-security-fix-available/
55 http://blog.intego.com/2009/02/12/mobileme-users-beware-phishers-are-targeting-you/
56 http://blog.intego.com/2009/03/19/hacker-contest-mac-hacked-in-10-seconds/

@Mike
Are you really that obtuse?

Most people are smart enough to realize that Phishing will work on any platform. If I willingly give you my personal info, it's MY fault, not the computer's. Similarly, trojans are MY fault - the computer is simply doing what I tell it to do. And taking over a computer when you have physical access to it is trivial. All of those things can be done both on Macs and PCs (of ANY type).

What's different is that there are no remote exploits affecting Macs nor are there any viruses (which, by definition, are self-replicating) on the Mac.

See my post about breaking it down:

So:
User-installed malware -- it's a wash
Self-propogating malware -- Macs are infinitely better
Local takeover of control -- it's a wash
Remote takeover of control - Macs are infinitely better

Until you understand the difference between a trojan or phishing attack where the computer just does what the user tells it to do and a self-replicating virus, then you have no credibility at all.

Apples Market share has never been 10%. Fanbois of Apple would like to believe that but the most market share using actual sold mac's is believed to have peaked at 5.7% back in 2008. Its estimated that Apples current market share is 3.7-4.3% currently and dropping since Windows 7 release. The only OS your beating in Market share is Linux and that's debatable. I know you want proof. That comes from watching Safari numbers. Mac people run Safari and since Safari is available on Windows those numbers are slightly inflated over Apple MAC actual market share.

If Mac has 10% market then how can Safari be only 5.2% of the browser market?
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=1

Keep Dreaming of 10% MAC.

Sorry thats %4.53
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=1

@Mike:
"Joe, are you that vacuous"?

Maybe you should have someone teach you how to read. I'm not the one who claimed 10% market share.

(btw, if you want to get into market share figures, you need to define what you mean by it. Are you talking about domestic? global? retail? units shipped? Dollars? In general, anyone who simply throws around market share figures without identifying what they're talking about is usually blowing smoke)

Just this afternoon, I went to a website I'd never been to before, ...clicked on an embedded video window to start the video...
and guess what: an '.exe' file downloaded itself onto my mac desktop and attempted to execute.

If I had a PC, what do YOU think would have happened?
..lemme guess: (1) you never would have known anything was downloaded -and (2) your PC would now be just another bot among millions.

NICK, NICK, NICK! Another opinion piece? I am seriously surprised you''re still working after the "Apple is still cavalier about security" article last week. Especially after so many pointed out the false statements you made and incorrect conclusions you drew. But hey...I guess you got clicks and I guess that's more important heh? Carry on!

This article is so ridiculous, it makes me laugh. I've been using various Macs since OS X came out. The last re-install was in 2002 (Mac OS X 10.2), I've upgraded smoothly since (from PowerBook Titanium G4 to AlBook to my current white MacBook). I work over 10 hours a day, and only ever restart the MacBook for system and security updates.

Note that I have never installed anti-virus software on the Mac side. At the same time, I have 10 instances of Windows 2000, XP, and Vista sitting on my drive (all of which I use to test my company's software). Every time I start up the XP and Vista VM's, I am confronted with annoying in-your-face alerts that "my system is at risk". If I were to use Windows for day-to-day productivity work (boy, am I glad I don't need to!), I would have switched of those warnings long ago.

Microsoft may have crippled the user experience by adding these alerts, but in practice, users end up clicking them away without reading them. This is NOT good security. And, aside from this usability aspect, Mac OS X' Unix foundation definitely shields system files from potential viruses and trojans way better than XP did.

Sure, there's a risk that Mac users become complacent about their using the Internet. Trojans work on any platform. I warn my friends about this all the time.

But to suggest that Mac users are more at risk than Windows users is simply too ridiculous for words. Using a Windows system today without anti-virus software is asking for trouble. Using a Mac today without anti-virus software is perfectly fine, as long as you don't download and launch software from untrusted sites or emails.

This article spreads FUD. I guess people are getting complacent about that, too.

If my platform is so insecure, prove it and hack me please! (Ain't gonna happen)

I usually speak strongly against name-calling or insults that populate so many comment areas... And from that perspective, I am going to have to resort to it here to say,

"What a bunch of vacuous drivel! You get paid for this!?"

Since the size and frequency of successful Mac attacks are fairly obscure, it's safe to assume that they are secure.

There are plenty of reasons for mac os slow adoption. Just like digicalc was the reason for a mac back in the beginning now windows has plenty of digicalc like programs where apple will never penetrate.
In the automotive industry, alldata ondemand, snapon and plenty of windows only programs that are essential for the automotive and insurance industry . Then you go into countless other areas or industries that rely on programs that just dont run on mac os. Apple does itself more harm by allowing windows to run in their computers. Maybe they think that most people will probably just pirate windows to begin with. The thing that gets me is that if apple machines are running windows, does that mean that they are as vulnerable of all the windows problems plus os 10's. Doubly bad.

How exactly does this guy know what an average user on any platform does? I work in a large corporation all windows systems. Most of the people that work there barely know how to send an email, make a folder or navigate the file system. The most trivial tasks confuse them & they can't grasp the simplest concepts, but they are all experts on security, ummm yup. Put down the glass pipe.

Mac market share nearing 10%. That wasn't me that made the claim - that was Infoworld.

"Windows market share dives, Mac nears 10 percent" Infoworld, Jan 05, 2009

http://tinyurl.com/ygcmjv4

Should be noted that the year since that article, Apple has had historic record sales of Macs, especially in the last quarter.

For machines that cost $1000 and up, Apple has over 90% market share.

http://tinyurl.com/ybdp7db

For the past 15 years, my windoze friends have said "next year the mac will have a virus!"

in 15 years i have never wasted 1 minute of my life installing virus software, updates, rolling my system back, etc.

I am fine with a virus next year every year.

And no, it isn't security by obscurity. The first person to have a remotely exploitable vulnerability for the mac os will be famous. Every hacker truly wants fame (except those going for the money)- so they would be all over this if they could.

To say windows is more secure is simply ignorant. Too bad for you. I stopped trying to convert people to macs 15 years ago- cause i don't care how stupid YOU want to be.

...some people need to find something better to do with their time than defend or insult a computer OS. I mean really.

Another fine article, a bit of poking and joking around and a loads of comments too.

I hate sites where they make you register to comment, being able to comment this way is so much better.

There has never been a successful remote attack on Mac OS X. Never. Not once. Mac OS X has security built in, not bolted on. Get a clue. In every case, the people who claimed to have cracked OS X had local access. Deal with it.

This article is so idiotic that it could have only been posted as page view bait.

Mark,

What high school do you go to ?

This can't be written for adults. It offers nothing new,.it has no depth or insight. I may print it and pick up the dog poop.

It's cute how everyone is up in arms just because someone has the nerve to critisize something blessed by uncle Steve. Well, this article is not alone.

http://news.techworld.com/security/1798/mac-os-x-security-myth-exposed/
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Think-Vista-Is-Insecure-Have-You-Looked-at-Mac-OS-X-Lately-76848.shtml
http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/OS-X-insecure-how-do-you-like-dem-Apples-/0,130061733,120280461,00.htm

Of particular interest might be this Black Hat webcast regarding OSX:

http://www.blackhat.com/html/webinars/osx.html

Yes, I know you're not gonna believe anything I or any of these sites say, because love is blind. These links are for the people on the fence. Have a nice day.

We've been hearing this for years and years ... Having said that, all Mac users should be running Little Snitch and becoming familiar with the normal network activity on their Mac. At least that way people could sense that something untoward is occurring, IF or when the PC malware plague finally reaches the Mac. www.themacgroove.co.uk

Nick is merely looking into his crystal ball crossing his fingers, rubbing his rabbits foot and sitting beneath a horse shoe tired of the listening to faithfuls talk about their bullet proof Macs. He also explains what happened to my daughters computer 5 times on 3 different windows machines. And what happened to me once with a malware running VISTA and both of my neighbors who spent hundreds of dollars trying to free their computers running XP. And our Mac Mini and Powerbook? BULLET PROOF!

Seriously guys. It's just an article. I guess no one left their "my ****** is better than yours" mentality back in the elementary school playground.

Grow up already. Get away from your computers, get some lives and spend more time with friends and loved ones in nature for once. In the grand scheme of life and the universe...whether you use unix, linux, apple or microsoft is completely meaningless.

Seriously. Think about it.

- and this passes as journalism?!

Perhaps Nick could do some research and summarize all of the articles in the Inq describing known exploits for Windows, Linux, and Mac OSX and enlighten us, his loyal readers, with his findings. He can start with today:

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1590449/microsoft-ie-flaw

And, that's not even counting the JIT-spray exploit which cleverly defeats the vaunted address space randomization and non-execute stuff in the latest Windows.

Inquiring minds want to know.

There are hardly any laptops that need to cost $1000+ in Windows and Linux world. Your getting ripped off.

Virtually every Apple laptop is over $1000.00 in fact every laptop for a while made by Apple was over $1000.00

While you need to pay $1000 for an Apple Laptop the people running Windows can spend $500-$800 and get the equivalent or better of that $1000 Apple laptop.

This article is complete shit and a Mac runs 20 times better than any PC. I think you might need to cover your mouth because there is so much bullshit coming out of it .

Any article that starts out with "expensive fruity machines" is very slanted, esp. since Apple dropped the fruit colors many years ago.

This article is totally slamming the Mac user and has nothing to do with the computer itself at all. Phishing has nothing to do with virus protection or the OS. This guy has a bug up his bum against macs users for some reason.

I meet these types all the time. They slam Macs but have never used one. It's the same mentality we see with Evangelical Right wing Christians. It's the Idea that what they think should be what everyone thinks.

Vulnerabilities per user is wrong: v/u is a preposterous way to measure security. Vulnerability is MULTIPLIED by the number of users so v*u is a more accurate picture of the state of things. This provides the realistic picture of the exposure of a population to a given OS platform defects. The MS machine wishes to avoid the accurate view at all costs and the crazy security heads have bought in. That is why the analyst FUD does not match what you and I observe and the real impacts. Don't buy v/u. Its plain wrong.

how childish all this trolling is, I use a macbook and desktop pc, neither is better than the other in my experience just different. as for the "fanboys" on both sides - how sad.

for the record i use AV on the win7 pc and so far have had 2 trojans since release

no AV on the macbook which i use for nearly all my web stuff, no issues in two years - but that not to say there isn't one or that i don't know about!! lol

u shouldn't knock things unless u have really tried them and not a 5minute stab at it either.

As some here said, im gonna skip every Nicks articles..

How could he possible write so many s#h#i#t?

I cant belive that administrators from TheInquirer contracted him, hes a joke!

how can he say that MAC OS X is less secure than Windows using pishing subject? both os are not secure about pishing, both os doesnt have an Artificiail Intelligence to check every fuck email..

This is the most ridiculous article i've ever read.

Im not an Apple fan, but im reallist, you know guys that you can count MAC viruses on your single hand fingers..

Nick Farrel your name will be dirt for ever, youre a completly joke!!

KILL YOUR SELF!!

DO NEVER WRITE AN ARTICLE AGAIN!!

Nick has been suh-lammed by Fake Steve. Hilarious.

http://www.fakesteve.net/2010/02/this-whole-bash-a-mac-to-drive-traffic-thing-is-getting-so-old.html#disqus_thread

You are lying... it is fairly clear you are an apple fanboy pretending to be something else. A PC person would never repeat the stupid line about the viruses. I will qualify that... a person that knew about computers would not. Apple fanboys bang on about viruses but only count the ones that fit a definition that died out with floppies. THere is a very good reason why fanbois and Apple trolls need Farrell to shut up. It is because he is one of the few press who have the balls to stand up to Apple and say they are crap. I doubt you even read the article. He winds people up and he is funny. Live with it.

Hard to believe The Inquirer wants to be taken seriously with an article like this. Or wait... did the inquirer ever want to be taken seriously?

Here you go non Apple-product users  — I'm sorry, okay? I'm sorry that I like Apple products and that I'm very satisfied with them. I'm sorry that I'm not smart enough to know better. I'm sorry that you get so angry that I'm happy with my kit and that I don't have viruses or malware running amok on my machine. I'm sorry that you have to waste your obviously precious time continually reminding me of how stupid I am. I'm sorry that you're so superior to me. I'm sorry that I'm “fanboy” and that I'm a member of a cult who drinks the “Kool Aid.” Thanks for listening but I have to go now … go to enjoy the products I buy from Apple that mostly just work when I want them to.

Hit whore, lol

http://pixobebo.com/index.php/pixonomy/newslinks/apples_mac_os_x_is_less_secure_than_windows_or_not/

The funny thing about many Windows users is that they are so paranoid that when they get security updates, they are not sure whether or not they should trust them. As a result, they just never add any updated security profiles, making their systems even more vulnerable! I can't tell you how many times a day I have Windows people coming to me and asking me if it is safe to add an update!
When Apple went to Unix base, they attached themselves to the largest group of knowledgeable computer users in the 'nix community. These are not only computer professionals, but professors, tinkerers, and HACKERS. All of these people work together to keep Linux, UNIX, and the Apple operating system secure. Compare that to a bunch of guys in Redmond who have to maintain all of that.
Yes, I must be an ignorant Mac owner because I trust a whole worldwide community of programmers and users rather than the employees of a single company.

LMAO! Dude, you've been totally pwned by FSJ!

Security is about the same on the two. The install base on Windows makes them a bigger target for computer crime and less secure. Idiot end-users make them both about the same level of unsafe:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-10444561-245.html

Users that choose to use a Mac tend to be happier end-users too. I support them all, so I use both. At home I choose to use my Mac so I can 'use' it rather than 'support' it all the time.

Enjoy,
Jeff T.

What a ID 10 T!
Thanks for Lying to everyone!

I like windows over osx.
I think people should know how to check the oil in there car and know abit about computers.

But this article (I dont know what else to call it)is somthing to behold like a single piece of crap that has circled the toilet twice.

There are enough Macs by far to make hacking it worth while (especially if you can get credit card details of those upper class twits that buy them ;-), let alone the fame. The market share does not hold water. Far fewer iPhones (jailbroken ones to be precies) have been hacked and some Macs that were hacked by stuff hidden in pirated software. All those have very small numbers.

Macs are of course not 100% secure, but how long until this angle dies?

There are a few arrogant Mac users that claim their fortress is impenetrable, but let's be fair. Macs have not been compromised in any serious way in any serious numbers since OS X and that by and large without running A/V etc.

And let's also be fair: many published vulnerabilities of Mac have been in third party (open source) software (e/g/ Apache, PHP) etc. So, what are we comparing: Mac OS X + all kinds of server extras (generally turned off) that can run on it versus Windows with MS Office?

These numbers about published vulnerabilties mean very little. Actual problems in the real world mean more. Haven't seen them so far and I keep an eye out just to be on the safe side.

Microsoft to patch 17-year-old computer bug :

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8499859.stm

Just a quick note to the author, in case he actually reads these comments.
Technologically illiterate? Really?

Me: MSCE, NET+,SEC+,CISSP (Crypto + network security domains)
Also, dedicated Mac user.

Pretty sure my general technological literacy, not to mention knowledge of computer security, destroys yours.

Calling any names because of the platform they use simply invalidates every argument you make.

I find little that makes sense in this article and must conclude that the intent of the author is not to inform.

Ok, so there are alot of people commenting on things but not reading the full article. YES, Windows will always be vulnerable to viruses, malware etc, thats why we need Antivirus software, and basic computer knowledge to keep ourselves safe. Dont forget the first few bricks of Windows were built before hackers, viruses and malware existed in the mainstream. Apple is fairly new in the game compared to Windows, and the products look good and the users always like them. I do though urge Mac users who claim that they have never had any viruses or been hacked into in any way, shape or form, to ask yourself, how do you know that? Most Mac users do believe that their system is safe and secure without having to run antivirus software, but if youre not running any then how do you know if youre system is clean or not? ALL computer users, Mac OR Windows, should have antivirus software, and both system users, YES, even you MAC users, need to be aware of security vulnerabilities in your system. I do think the article is biased, and this is why so many people are argueing about why their Mac or Windows PC is better, but the bottom line is we can all get a virus, and no system is ever 100% safe, we just need to use our brains, keep ourselves protected and our computer OS updated.

This has become something a meme:

• Windows anti-virus interests promulgate story denigrating Macintosh security

• Windows tech hack dutifully propagate

• Windows user fanbois commence Pavlovian ranting

Although i do use Windows occasionally, I am primarily a Macintosh user. I have been since 1993.

I've never suffered a virus, trojan horse, or malware issue on any of my machines in 17 long years.

I've had endless problems with Windows machines, both mine - and those of friends/family where I've been called in as free tech support (a phenomenon with which I'm sure most you are also familiar), to remediate tearful issues that have left machines unusable.

Cavalier, misguided or just plain wrong? Sure - but for me that's the bottom line - the end of the argument.

"I think people should know how to check the oil in there car and know abit about computers."

But being able to put the wheel back on when it falls off doesn't make you an engineer :-)

Somewhat off topic, but the fact that so many Windows posters seem to equate elegance of use with simplicity (or a 'toy') suggests that there is something fundamentally wrong with the way the machines work. You no longer need to mix chemicals to take a photo, or double-declutch to drive a car, but it doesn't make modern devices toys or simple. Well-designed interfaces are not mutually exclusive to 'power-usership'. The terminal is still there if you need it.

Gotta love INQ for its sarcasm, and the amount of fanboys that get insanely wound up. Hence the comments section, I bet this causes a lot of laughs in the office!

Unfortunately for apple, a 16 year old muppet at work just started his trainee position and guess what, he loves APPLE, and is a stereotypical macboy. Literally! The emo hair, the love of GUI, design, white/silver polish, and extraordinary claims of perfection over anything that has a Windows logo on it.

"Gotta love INQ for its sarcasm, and the amount of fanboys that get insanely wound up."

I think you are a bit confused. INQ is meant to be factual and insightful not sarcastic. On the other hand, Fake Steve Jobs *is* sarcastic. Ironically, though his laugh out loud rebuttal to this article turns out to be a lot more insightful than the above.

http://www.fakesteve.net/2010/02/this-whole-bash-a-mac-to-drive-traffic-thing-is-getting-so-old.html

You can say ANYTHING YOU WANT! You can HATE and ABUSE and CONFUSE and LIE and act all SeRiOUs about it. Great acting job! Bravo.

And yet reality tells the tale. Mac OS X remains one of the top 3 safest operating systems available. Microsoft Windows remains the least secure operating system available.

There are serious Apple software and Mac OS X security concerns, well worth every Mac user's consideration. But BLASTING ridiculous myths and nonsense does nothing more than desensitize the victims over time. It's the same old 'Boy Who Cried Wolf' routine. So please shut up, all you FUD mongers, and let's seriously discuss how to make a safer operating system into the safest operating system possible.

The whole point of the article is the attitude about the MAC community. All the comments and out lash from this article are supporting the MAC. MAC vs PC is just like the Ford vs Chevy argument. Everyone has their own opinion and favors their OS or car. Windows has so many holes in it and people give Microsoft hell for their patch Tuesday or out of cycle patching. But they are proactive and continue to fix what they find. I remember the whole DNS issue a few years ago and how long we had to wait to put our MACs back on the network for them to patch it. The MAC community is starting to worry me due to the arrogance and the Hackers out there that want to exploit that. I really don’t believe any OS is safe, some 10year old out there loves the challenge and if they really want in they will.

And my dispute with Apple, why do I have to pay to patch my itouch? This made me look at buying a Zune.

"The cynic in me thinks that if you spend a third more than you need to for your PC and think that the Ipad is a pretty neat idea then you are exactly the sort of mark that a phishing campaign is designed to reach."

Brilliant phrase.