The headline might seem self-evident to most of us, but there are still quite a few drooling idiots who are incapable, or unwilling (it’s a hit-whoring prerequisite, after all), of seeing the vast gulf between Windows and Mac OS X security and the effects on end users.
The reason you see this sort of bullshit is because, according to IDC analyst Marcel Warmerdam, for every $1 that Windows earns for Microsoft, it will pump a minimum of $12 into the global economy. Billions upon billions of dollars are riding on duping people into continuing along with Windows.
If protecting the Windows hegemony means distorting all sorts of things to make Apple’s Mac platform look like an unacceptable alternative, then so be it. They really have no other defense for the indefensible Windows except for FUD when comparing to Apple Mac OS X’s stellar record of protecting their users’ security. The fact is that Mac OS X users, using only common sense, surf the Net with impunity while Windows sufferers most certainly do not.
Yet again, for the umpteenth time — sigh — it is utterly illogical to state or imply that the Mac platform is secure via obscurity. Why, if obscurity means security, in April 2007 was there a virus for iPods running Linux (a few thousand devices total, to wildly overestimate, in all the world), but there are no viruses in nine, yes nine, years for the over 30 million Mac OS X computers that are currently online? When we hit a nice round virus-free decade will certain abject morons finally wise up? And, why would criminals not target the most affluent personal computer users, the tens of millions of Mac users around the world?
I’ve asked those and similar questions for years, yet the silence remains deafening and telling. Instead we get a steady stream of ignorance and/or lie from hit-whorish Microsoft apologists.
The idea that Windows’ morass of security woes exists because more people use Windows and that Macs have no security problems because fewer people use Macs, is simply not true. By design, Mac OS X is simply more secure than Windows. Period. For reference and reasons why Mac OS X is more secure than Windows, The New York Times’ David Pogue, long ago providesd a concise mea culpa on the subject of the “Mac Security Via Obscurity” myth here.
Simple logic is certainly not what disingenuous hacks, AV software peddlers, Windows PC box assemblers, and the leeches affixed to the Windows ecosystem want people to hear. Generating fear and/or website hits is what they’re after. The sheep must be kept in the Windows pen, no matter the cost to reputations, reality, logic, productivity, sanity, etc. Far too many have far too much invested in Microsoft Windows for them to stand idly by and let it all slip away due to a vastly superior, vastly more secure solution from Apple. But, slip away it does nonetheless.
Every single time there is a Windows virus outbreak, a new OS release, record Mac sales, or a threatening new Apple product, the “Security Via Obscurity” myth gets trotted out. This is done for a reason, even though it gets more ridiculous with each passing year.
“Security via Obscurity” is a defense mechanism for the delusional and also tool for Microsoft apologists and those who profit from the Windows economy that’s designed to be used when attempting keep Windows sufferers from straying. 30 million Mac OS X installs is not “obscure” at all, but nine (9) years of Mac users surfing the Net unimpeded certainly is “secure.” Besides social engineering scams (phishing, trojans; no OS can instill common sense) the only thing by which Mac users are really affected are large swaths of compromised Windows machines slowing down the ‘Net with spam and nefarious botnet traffic targeted at exploiting even more insecure Windows boxes.
The. Problem. Is. Windows. Get a Mac.
SteveJack is a long-time Macintosh user, web designer, multimedia producer and a regular contributor to the MacDailyNews Opinion section.
DUH!
Is there anybody still doubting it?
The record speaks for itself.
Microsoft you are the worst computer company ever you never think about special education don’t you
GRRR
Read the original article…. and more importantly, the comments following it.
Such lame Windows users just plain deserve to be infected. Young kids that glance at pc blog headlines and think they are now pc experts. Its sad, but then when their kids grow up in their PC infected world, its only natural.
🙁
Just a thought,
en
This is news!
How can anyone argue this point…
btw Where the Hell is my iLife ’10?!?
I agree with the article, but I doubt there will ever be even a majority of Doze users that believe it. We’ll never convince 90% of people that they are not good looking, they are not the best thing the opposite sex has ever seen (or the same sex as the case may be), or that they are not good drivers.
So why should anyone expect to change the 90% of computer users who use Doze that it is not as secure as OS X?
…and in other obvious news…green is not purple.
Steve Jack glosses over phishing for which WIndows and Mac users are equally susceptible and which is just as destructive as any virus.
He also fails to mention that Macs are enablers who pass on virus-laden emails to Windows users, which only reinforces the problem.
Also, if Mac users are using Bootcamp or virtualization to run Windows, then they should be just as vigilant as any seasoned Windows user. If fact, it would be unwise to ignore any discussion of viruses regardless of platform. The enemy of my enemy is not my friend!
I recommend all Mac users running Windows software to invest in decent antivirus software, because any Mac user who thinks that just because they’re running Windows on their Mac, they aren’t susceptible to viruses are sadly mistaken.
I would also recommend that Mac users use an ISP that processes all their email through antivirus software before its delivered to you. I receive notices frequently about emails that have been quarantined by my ISP.
To avoid phishing expeditions and Root kits, I use Little Snitch. The Mac’s firewall, as well as my router’s firewall, are good for incoming requests and Pings, but there is nothing in Mac OS X that scrutinizes outgoing data.
I mean let’s face it, were human, and are susceptible to phishing attacks but without a product like Little Snitch, how would you know if someone has p0wned your Mac?
Viruses are the least of my worries because the of the way Macs are set up, but, I can’t always trust myself not to fall victim to resourceful phishermen.
In fact, if I’m not mistaken, Safari won’t alert you if you encounter a website that is attempting to take advantage of you, whereas Firefox and Opera will.
I know viruses are an afterthought for Mac users but, we can’t afford to pretend were safe.
I should have stated also that I am aware that antivirus software won’t protect you from the newest viruses, only known viruses. So for all the good it does, not even AV software can keep you 100% safe, but good AV software can alert you to suspicious activity and even isolate a suspected virus.
Here we go again…
Going by the “logic” of the Inquirer, North Philly is safer than Blue Bell, PA because homes in North Philly have extra deadbolts on the doors and bars on the windows. See? Extra security means safer living. Anyone who has ever lived in, or around, Philly can understand my statement.
Must be a good press week for security folks or something…interesting security perspectives here for anyone interested and not drowning in Cupertino Kool-Aid:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-10444561-245.html
Good quote from one of the panel:
“Robert G. Ferrell, information systems security specialist at the U.S. Dept. of Defense: “Is it more dangerous to take off from a terrorist-infested airport, or land at one? Flippancy aside, I just don’t think this question (Mac or PC) has any real meaning today. Far more relevant to me are the browser and e-mail clients a consumer is using, irrespective of the operating system or hardware platform. Even more critical from a safety standpoint is the level of security awareness exhibited by that consumer. If you haphazardly visit every link and download every file sent to you in e-mail or posted to your social-networking pages, sooner or later you’re going to get nailed. Period. Platforms are passe. Apps are where it’s at.” “
He’s right.
I could not agree more with Steve Jack.
To g4duality and anybody who would like to be protected from phishing, I introduce to you “OpenDNS”. check it out. I know it’s working for me!
It’s safe to say that OpenDNS.org will help.
That site is filled with Windows-centric idiots, quoting bad statistics.
But, statistically speaking, people living in suburbia live with LESS security than their ghetto-living counterparts. Sure, I know plenty of people in suburbia who:
– don’t have multiple locks on their doors; hell, their doors are UNLOCKED all the time, even when at work.
– don’t have bars on their windows
Since ghetto neighborhoods typically employ those two pieces of security, I can now conclude that the ghetto is far safer than any suburban neighborhood and I don’t have to worry about robberies, mugging, gunshots…
I know. I’m preaching to the choir, but it is amazing what people will do and say to defend a platform that invites malware.
@Another IT guy
Ummm…no. I mean, seriously?
/pokes with stick
Back under your bridge, for Chrissakes.
Although the OS as such is more secure a mac will be just as much affected by spam mails themselves as a windows machine
The Windows industry is huge and I doubt if anybody wants to give up their jobs for another OS. All those IT managers that went to school to get their certificates spent a lot of time and energy to get where they are. If I had a job like that now, I’d certainly want to keep Macs and OSX out of the workplace because it might take less personnel maintenance and I might be at risk at losing my job. The Windows platform is just like the iPod accessory industry. I’m sure those iPod accessory manufacturers wouldn’t like to see the iPod go away. People protect their livelihood any way they can even if they have to lie and cheat. I find it understandable that even if something better comes along they’d try to block it. That’s why it’s so hard for me to envision the demise of the Windows platform in the corporate world. There’s just too much easy money to be made maintaining a possibly inferior platform.
This is how I think the military is. If wars don’t happen naturally, they’d try to start a few of their own just to stay in a state of readiness.
@iphonerulez
This is how I think the military is. If wars don’t happen naturally, they’d try to start a few of their own just to stay in a state of readiness.
You make an interesting point about job security and then I get to that last statement and realize you’re just an another idiot who hates our military.
There is a class of viruses for which “security through obscurity” makes sense to me: those that rely upon successive retransmission to generate exponential growth. To see this, consider m infected machines of a given OS type, each of which sends out n emails in an effort to infect others. Let f be the fraction of recipients sharing the senders OS, r being the chance of exposure (user clicks the bad thing, etc.), and p being the chance of infection when exposed. Then the expected number of new infections is the product m n f r p. If the product n f r p > 1, then the infections grows; otherwise, it dies out. Let’s compare OS’s keeping n & r constant–reasonable first-cut assumptions. Then exponential growth depends upon a certain minimum value of the product f p. Assume for this argument that f is 0.8 for Windows and 0.1 for Mac. Then it seems clear to me that, even if Windows’ value of r is 7 times smaller than Mac’s–that is, even if Windows resists infection 7 times better than Mac, Windows is still more likely to suffer a pandemic infection.
Forget the iPod virus example. How about this…
iPhone has a HUGE market share compared to Android. Number of viruses/malware/questionable apps plaguing the system is ZERO.
Android, with maybe 1/10 to 1/5 of the iPhone apps, has already seen its share of phishing apps (pretend banking apps).
So, obviously, security by obscurity is a load of shit.
Well, there is a very small bit of truth in “security via obscurity.” If Windows was as secure as Mac OS X, then there would, in fact, still be more focus on the part of hackers on Windows because Windows has greater user share. The part of the myth that says Windows is a bigger target is accurate.
However, it certainly does not explain why there are zero viruses out there for Mac OS X. And that leads to the greater truth.
The reason why Mac OS X is far more secure is because it would be significantly harder and less profitable to compromise a Mac. The reason Mac OS X gets less attention from hackers is NOT because it is “obscure.” It is because Windows is easier to exploit. A thief is basically lazy. Why work harder to exploit Mac OS X (even if possible), when Windows (not Apple) is the low-hanging fruit?
Even if Mac OS X market share grew to equal Windows market share, the hackers would still be going after Windows. It’s security via “having a much easier target out there for hackers.” Mac users everywhere should therefore offer thanks to Microsoft, for providing that target.
Don’t worry, the iPad will be the new computing platform.
Once the sheep get it in their hands they won’t buy another PC, ever.
It may be true to the slightest degree that developers of viruses, malware etc may not target the Mac platform due to relative “obscurity”.
But in my short experience, I’ve learned that most people creating these viruses are doing it to be recognized for their hard work, and not for money, at least not right away. they will be recognized for their impact on society and then bought out by a company to consult on how to protect people from viruses like the one they made, if that makes any sense to anyone.
So their doing it for recognition right? then why on earth would a hacker or whoever not target the Mac platform? people who know, know that the mac has never had a serious infection or outbreak, and if I were a virus creator I would be trying my hardest to be the first to give it one. Because as far as recognition goes, it’s hard to beat the first one who did anything.
My opinion is that many have definitely tried, but they simply can’t do it…
“Besides social engineering scams (phishing, trojans; no OS can instill common sense) the only thing by which Mac users are really affected are large swaths of compromised Windows machines slowing down the ‘Net with spam and nefarious botnet traffic targeted at exploiting even more insecure Windows boxes.”
Wrong on this one. Macs are also affected by Flash bugs/security holes, Acrobat Reader bugs/security holes and Microsoft Office bugs/security holes that could potentially compromise a Macintosh, as reported in their updates. Apple also has various security updates that appear every now and then (but not as often it seems as the ones mentioned above) that fix potential security holes, although the malware authors have not come out without any zero-day exploits that I am aware of for the Mac.
And Apple does NOT update anything prior to the previous and current versions of the OS, so myself running Tiger right now can NOT get any security updates, while security updates are still being released for XP and sometimes for earlier releases of Windows. But then Windows does need these fixes. Apple only seems to release system fixes and updates for the current release of the OS, although they do release as many bugfix/updates as they can for the previous OS version just after the newest version of OSX is released.
Apple also does NOT update all the various “OSS” (open software system or freeware) components that make up OSX as often as they should and these OSS components could potentially be holes into OSX as has been evidenced by the black hat “hack a mac” contests held over the last number of years. The guy that has hacked into the Mac in these contests has said that is what he looks for, to find his way into a Mac to hack it. This is the Achilles heel of OSX security.
I am a long-time Apple person (1979 on an Apple ][+, Mac in 1984, Newton in 1997) and I only use a Mac to surf the web or for email, but Apple, while heads and shoulders better than Microsoft on security IMHO could also be better too.
Windows, in a setting that does NOT access the internet can be very stable and secure, but the holes for the internet allow the crooks to drive through and drive by your system and plunder it and drop off bots with ease, unless you have lots of time, energy and sometimes a bit of money to secure it properly.
Security by Obscurity for the Mac is only partially true, simply because crooks, like anyone, are lazy and there is enough low hanging fruit via insecure Windows systems (legit Windows as well as so many illegitimate/pirated Windows systems) out there operated by people who don’t know security requirements but only how to work a program. The better design of OSX makes it more difficult, and the saying in physical security that crooks want to break into the least secure building holds true with computer OS’s as well, IMHO.
Let’s just talk about the stats and forget about the technology for a moment…
Let’s look at crime rates in neighborhoods. Crime are essentially viruses, trojans, worms, etc and the crime rate is the number of infection attempts. Police, alarms, and, security doors act like virus protection.
Neighborhood 1 (Windows): Crime is rampant, people have alarms, security doors, and full staffed police. Crime still occurs nightly and high frequency despite protection measures. Attempts and successful breaches in security are normal.
Neighborhood 2 (MacOS): Crime is very rare, people forgo alarms and security doors and there’ only one sheriff in town. One could even mistakenly leave the door unlocked and still not be a victim of crime.
Neighborhood 1 (Windows) can claim to have more secure with all the anti crime measures in place and NOT get robbed whereas neighborhood 2 (MacOS) doesn’t really need the security measures since there isn’t much crime. Statistically, neighborhood 1 has a higher chance of crime whereas neighborhood 2 simply has no crime.
Would you like to live in neighborhood 1 or 2? Lastly, Windows and MacOS are totally different. Quit comparing security technology between two different demographics. What good is security if you don’t need it. It’s really that simple. I’ve never used virus protection and likely never will. People using Macs are less prone because they are living amongst “friendlier” people and Windows users have tons on criminals around friendly people.
If you want to get rid of crime, move to neighborhood 2!