“The recent move by Apple Computer to begin shipping Macintosh computers that use microprocessors from Intel could open the door to more attacks against computers running the company’s OS X operating system, security experts warn,” Paul F. Roberts reports for eWeek. “The shift to Intel processors from the Motorola Power PC processors will make it easier to create software exploits for Macintosh systems, and could result in a steady stream of Mac exploits in years to come.”
“The change could put more pressure on Apple to build security features into OS X, according to interviews conducted by eWEEK,” Roberts reports. “Apple declined requests for interviews. In an e-mail statement, the company said that the security technologies and processes that have made Mac OS X secure for PowerPC remain the same for Intel-based Macs.”
Full article, in which Roberts dredges up “experts” from the likes of Symantec (big surprise) and others to talk their way around the statement ” the security technologies and processes that have made Mac OS X secure for PowerPC remain the same for Intel-based Macs” for three pages, here.
MacDailyNews Take: It is our contention that articles such as the one above are intended to confuse one very simple issue — that Apple Mac OS X users have had zero viruses in the over 5 years since Mac OS X debuted while Windows has been repeatedly decimated by viruses — in order, not to inform Mac users, but to confuse average computer buyers by implying that “Macs are or will be the same as Windows, so don’t bother with a Mac” and/or to sell crappy “security” software to Mac users who might not understand the situation fully.
Guess who picked the “story” right up and blogged it for CNET? That’s right, Munir Kotadia (ZDNet Australia publishes latest Mac OS X security FUD article – January 26, 2006).
Advertisements:
• MacBook Pro. The first Mac notebook built upon Intel Core Duo with iLife ’06, Front Row and built-in iSight. Starting at $1999. Free shipping.
• iMac. Twice as amazing — Intel Core Duo, iLife ’06, Front Row media experience, Apple Remote, built-in iSight. Starting at $1299. Free shipping.
• iMac and MacBook Pro owners: Apple USB Modem. Easily connect to the Internet using dial-up service. $49.00.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
Related articles:
Windows virus threatens 170-year-old Toldeo newspaper’s perfect record, Apple Macs save the day – January 27, 2006
ZDNet Australia publishes latest Mac OS X security FUD article – January 26, 2006
‘Highly critical’ flaw in discovered in Symantec AntiVirus for Mac OS X – December 21, 2005
Microsoft Windows virus spreads rapidly; Apple Macintosh unaffected – November 28, 2005
Computer columnist: anti-virus software purely optional for Apple Macs, not so for Windows – November 01, 2005
Microsoft apologists and why Apple’s Mac OS X has zero viruses – October 24, 2005
$500 bounty offered for proof of first Apple Mac OS X virus – September 27, 2005
ZDNet: How many Mac OS X users affected by the last 100 viruses? None, zero, not one, not ever – August 18, 2005
I’m no expert but that sounds like bollocks.
Quick, people are buying macs, think of an excuse to put them off!
Strangely written article that keeps setting up a certain scenario and then dispels the chances of it ever happening. It does seem as IOactive (quoted in the article) has more to lose if there is a defection from Windows to MAC, since they seem to be making a living off of the security woes that beleaguer MS users. BTW, Steve Wozniak (“The WoZ”) join IOactive’s Advisory Board in September ’04!
Read this aloud to your IT staff: “Mac OS X users have had zero viruses in the over 5 years since Mac OS X debuted while Windows has been repeatedly decimated by viruses.”
Expected reply? With fingers in ears and eyes shut, “LALALALALALALA – I CAN’T HEAR YOU!”
“Specific Windows buffer overflow vulnerabilities depend on the rigid stack-order execution and limited page protection inherent in the x86 architecture.” —Paul Murphy
The design of Intel chips is old and decrepit. PPC is a new, clean-sheet-of-paper design. Too bad IBM didn’t like all those super computers Apple was supplying.
Right on, Ampar.
You know,maybe there are aspects of the Intel chip that are of concern, but its such a small part of the story, like <1%. Its the OS, stupid.
Now, do you REALLY want to be able to boot Windows on your mac?
Same FUD, different day. What else is new. Meanwhile, those of us that have Macs now go on ahead worry free…
“Too bad IBM didn’t like all those super computers Apple was supplying.”
And too bad they couldn’t ever make a PPC chip that didn’t also contribute to global warming…
Motorolla PowerPC processors??? Here I thought they were made by IBM…idiot
Quick, who would you rather have predicting the future:
(1)Symantec
(2)eWeek
(3)Apple
John: If you’re gonna use clear, simple logic, you’re just going to frighten them more!
Arguing with a virus protection company is all about semantics.
MDN, I refuse to give their site the hits they are seeking. I will not read what these ignoramuses have to say.
What an idiot. Its not the processor. Its the OS. Linux has been running on Intel since 1991. How many viruses exist on Linux? 0.
The Intel lawyers should sue this eWeek guy for false statements about their product. Make him prove his claims.
Loru. You’re the idiot. My Laptop has a PowerPC made by Motorola. Only G5’s are made by IBM, everything up to the G4 was made by Motorola.
Although now Motorola spun off the PPC business into a business called Freescale I believe.
MDN:
Here is a story you ought to be covering.
“Telecommunications companies like AT&T and Verizon are lobbying Congress for the right to control where you go on the Internet, how fast you get there, and how much you pay for the service. “
Go to http://www.commoncause.org/ and click “Hands Off My Internet
A related article on Salon is also worth reading:
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2005/10/18/broadband/index_np.html
To all of you saying “its not the processor, its the OS”. This is mostly true.
However as mentioned in that article, Intel chips are far more susceptible to Buffer overruns than PowerPC are due to their architecture.
Buffer overruns are the #1 security hole in Linux on x86 for this reason.
I believe Intel have supposedly done something about this with their latest chips, but it should not be ignored.
So, a newbie buys an Intel Mac, someone gets Windows to run on Macs. They fill up their drive with Windows programs, etc and suddenly their Mac slows to a crawl and barely is usuable.
They decide that:
A. Windows sucks and is the root of all this evil and will never use it again.
or
B. I just spent $500 more for a mac and its no better than my old PC. It still has all the problems my PC had and I can’t even run my games in OSX.
well, all of this is fine and dandy. Better for apple stock which are getting cheaper.
I’m wondering about the sudden attention OS X is getting from the so called analists now OSX is running on Intel. Why don’t FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Linux, Solaris, etc, get as much attention from these analists? They too run on Intel, don’t they? According to these security analists OS X will be susceptible to malicious code just because it’s running on Intel hardware. Or perhaps these so called analists aren’t really analists. Perhaps these analists don’t really know what they are talking about. I think these analists don’t understand anything about the underlying structure of Windows and the Unix like os’s. Somewhere on this planet some guy starts talking about security issues and then all the “analists” just keep repeating these issues, without actually knowing what they’re talking about.
Symantec latest news:
‘OSX vulnerable to viruses acquired via LCD screens and keyboards’.
Ananlists are only that, predictors! they have no insite into the future.
Symantec sucks, I have never been able to properly use my computers throughout time with their software. Be it antivirus, parental guidence, etc… They just are no good. There are alternatives in the open source, you know…
FTFA: “Windows, Linux and Unix all use the x86 architecture” (pg2)
I’m sure that will come as a shock to those running Yellow Dog Linux or a variety if Unix flavors on Alpha, MIPS, PPC, etc.
[ …we secretly replaced John’s microprocessor with an x86 chip. Let’s watch… ]
The article is a hack job. Two additional examples of sloppiness:
(a) “The move to Intel will end a 10-year relationship with Motorola” (pg1) — I guess they missed the memo about Freescale. Probably busy with their TPS reports.
(b) Page 2 – they quote “David Mackey, director of security intelligence at IBM” without disclosing his conflict – people who don’t know that IBM was part of the AIM alliance might be led to think they’re a disinterested observer. The only other mention of IBM comes on page 3: “Security companies from IBM to Symantec Corp. have warned that attacks against OS X are on the rise…” — I’m not sure I know which of those two companies would be more offended by being grouped with the other….