Thinking of my next PC upgrade being not so PC.

[RTHolmes]

and with mac you do it steve's way.

... and with a MS OS you do it steves way.

glad you turned up to give us your impartial advice vulcan, we needed reminding that all windows users are security and OS experts, whereas all mac users are idiots.

so how long exactly have you been using, owning and administering macs? I asked you this before, never got an answer though ...

[gyrene81]

... and with a MS OS you do it steves way.

glad you turned up to give us your impartial advice vulcan, we needed reminding that all windows users are security and OS experts, whereas all mac users are idiots.

so how long exactly have you been using, owning and administering macs? I asked you this before, never got an answer though ...

Actually Holmes...you're not far off...I work at a college and all of the Mac users are complacent about the security of their systems...I have seen people do things on their Mac's that most pc users have learned to avoid or find some way of preventing a backlash that would kill their OS.

Over the last 4 years we have had almost every Mac virus available...and the only way they were found was because the techs have learned to "play it safe" and do scans anytime any issue is reported...exactly the same way we deal with PC's.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

The MAC OS is significantly less secure in the sense that it isn't under constant scrutiny for security weaknesses. At this point it is significantly more vulnerable then windows but there is no motivation outside of corporate espionage to "hack a MAC"...

This by itself is a good motivation to using one. You have to do something really dumb to get infected using one.

[humble]

This by itself is a good motivation to using one. You have to do something really dumb to get infected using one.

Like buy a MAC and assume your "bullet proof"?

[MrRiplEy[H]]

They work the same way PC malware works. And that spreads easily enough.

There is now both mac and iphone botnets in operation ( http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/04/16/new_ibotnet_analysis/  and http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?storyid=7786 ) .

With a PC, you have a paranoid user usually using AV and AS software. So there is a safety net for their stupidity.

With a Mac you have a complacent user usually using no AV protection. No safety net for their stupidity.

So yes, while there are significantly more virus's and malware for the PC, the PC is usually more protected versus the zero protection you see on the mac. The signatures Apple included in OS X Snow Leopard are fixed, not dynamic, heuristic, or updateable - so good for all of 5 minutes protection.

I've shared an office with apple people for 6 years now. Mac's have their issues just like PC's. It all boils down too two things, which way of doing things you prefer (and I must say Win7 is an awesome improvement), and with mac you do it steve's way.

I'm getting a feeling that in fact there's anti-Apple bias in many of the comments i.e. hatemail. Fear of unknown or something.

The stuff I read so far from gyrene81:s links show that Apple doesn't suffer from windows-like remote exploitable code weaknesses which scare me the most i.e. holes that require no user interaction for infection. The threat comes mainly from trojan horses and these can be readily avoided.

Add in the fact that Mac is very uninteresting target to virus makers / malware makers count for a low amount of existing viruses / malware. Now, considering Snow Leopard has a built in protection against even the few known ones, what are the chances you're going to run into the 2-3 possible new viruses that will be made if you keep using legal software? About the same as winning a lottery most likely. And I'm not sweating every weekend about my lost millions over not playing the game. The '5 minutes of protection' comment is based on pretense that Mac viruses are being factoried like Windows viruses i.e. new virus every minute. But the reality is that Mac is not an interesting target for attackers, therefore small people develop stuff for it, therefore it's very rare to get a new exploit in the wild.

If you don't believe me maybe you believe the maker of open source antivirus for mac www.clamxav.com:

Back in the days before OS X, the number of viruses which attacked Macintosh users totalled somewhere between about 60 and 80. Today, the number of viruses actively attacking OS X users is...NONE!

As a lifetime PC user I use every precaution with Mac as I use with PC.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Like buy a MAC and assume your "bullet proof"?

You can have any issues you want on Mac and Mac users humble. They're not my problem.

[RTHolmes]

Over the last 4 years we have had almost every Mac virus available

I'd be interested to know exactly what these were, afaik there are no osx virii in the wild. If you mean virus in the broader sense of malware (inc trojans etc) then yes there are some out there (as you linked to earlier), but you have to explicitly grant permissions to install them (like any other executable that requires system access) using an admin password. I'd quite like to know how this was possible too, assuming they were all using limited accounts.

bottom line - if you're going to be installing dodgy software (ie. kracked software from warez sites) or anything from untrusted sources then of course you should be scanning it whatever os you use.


I'm going to ask a friend of mine for his experiences with malware, he lives in a parallel sysadmin universe to me but in reverse - a network of 25ish OSX machines and 1 XP box - and has been in charge of it for about the same time. The major differences i'm aware of are; he spends 1/4 the time I do maintaining his network, and if he screws up he has complaints from users whereas I face criminal prosecuction under the Financial Services and Data Protection Acts

btw his users are truly tech clueless - they're art students

[RTHolmes]

I wouldn't, it has significant hardware flaws at the moment. Don't touch em with a barge pole.

got to agree with this, stay well clear of 27" iMacs until the hardware problems have been resolved.

[MadHatter]

Its not untrue that a MAC can indeed POSSABLY get a virus..  its not out of the relm of possability.

but to make the statement that its just as likley as with a PC is in the highest order of absurdity.

You cannot get a virus on a MAC just by visiting a website, a PC you can.  and Its nothing to do with macs purposfully being more secure, its just an intrinsic part of its architecture. windows is such a hack job of patched and hotfixes and trying to be compatible with everything, it just naturally lends itself to being attacked..  its like a house with a door on every wall.

Currently no normal person will get online with a PC that has no AV, the idea seems absurd you are just totally asking for it. , and currently no normal person with a MAC even worries about viruses or has AV.

is it possable to get a virus on a MAC? yes..   is it possible to browse with a PC with no AV and not get one.. sure..

but both scenarios are at the far end of the normality spectrum.


But I will tell you this, if it ever does indeed become necessary to have AV on a MAC.. mark my words, Apple will develop it, and it will be part of the OS, and it will work far far better than these catastrophic turd boxes like Mcaffe, or Norton, which seem to ironically be the cause of more problems than they prevent most the time.

1: Granted Macs hardly get viruses. Why? Because there aren't that many out there. With the exception of TV stations (most use Apple servers) and video design, Apple is not used in any sort of "Mission Critical" sense. It costs too much for major companies to use Apple. Why waste the time to write a virus to strike at a target that will yield you little to nothing. That would be like bombing the ords at a landlocked V-base. As more and more Macs become mainstream you will see a rise in Mac viruses.

2: Macs can fall prey to Websites just as easily, if not easier. In fact, Mac was the first to fall in a "Hackers" convention. TCP/IP was used to redirect the Mac to a different website then Telnet was used to break into it.

The "highest order of absurdity" is to believe your system is 100% safe. You are just as vulnerable to the world as the rest of us. Now if a Mac fulfills your needs, and you are happy with it, by all means get a Mac.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no11eIx0x6w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ig1qtduR9ik


The whole Apple -vs- PC debate is moot. Everyone has their own preference. Just don't be blind and believe nothing will happen to you just because you own a Mac.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

2: Macs can fall prey to Websites just as easily, if not easier. In fact, Mac was the first to fall in a "Hackers" convention. TCP/IP was used to redirect the Mac to a different website then Telnet was used to break into it.

They were exploiting a flaw in Safari to do that. And regardless of the fact there's about 1 in 1000 0000 0000 chance you will run into the random hacker that's interested to break into your mac when he has gazillion times more windows victims to target.

[MadHatter]

They were exploiting a flaw in Safari to do that. And regardless of the fact there's about 1 in 1000 0000 0000 chance you will run into the random hacker that's interested to break into your mac when he has gazillion times more windows victims to target.

Thank you for proving my point. Like I said, going after a Mac will yield you next to nothing. Again tho, as more and more Macs become mainstream, that little security flaw in Safari is going to become a bigger issue. Besides, by the attitude of most die-hard Mac users I've run into, that security flaw shouldn't have even existed, because Macs are impervious to the world.

I'm not saying that Macs aren't worth it. Personally, I'll stick to PC. I like the fact that I have more options available, at a lower cost (software-wise). But, like I said before If the Mac fulfills your needs, and you are happy with it, get a Mac. Just don't think you're invulnerable because you have a Mac.

[RTHolmes]

I dont think anyone here has said that OSX is unvulnerable, but several have implied that OSX is considerably less secure than anything from MS which I cant agree with.


as for mission critical applications there are a bunch of macs running them. apple has decent penetration into legal markets where security is very important and a range of academic, business and medical applications where reliability is a bigger factor. ranging from single machines to massive clusters of xserves running OSX Server (iirc U Illinois has literally hundreds of em clustered up). Even the US navy uses xserve clusters ...

The only reason for running a MS server os in a mission critical application is because your server app only runs on that os. In most other cases of course they will be running a different flavour of *nix than OSX because they will be more interested in tweaking than easy configuration. theres good reasons why the bulk of the worlds web and mail servers run on *nix rather than MS servers ...

so why are so many organisations using MS servers? I think this quote from a US Navy tech director after USS Yorktown was left dead in the water for a few hours when its NT farm fell over is telling:

Because of politics, some things are being forced on us that without political pressure we might not do, like Windows NT. If it were up to me I probably would not have used Windows NT in this particular application

[Skuzzy]

<snip>as for mission critical applications there are a bunch of macs running them. apple has decent penetration into legal markets where security is very important and a range of academic, business and medical applications where reliability is a bigger factor. ranging from single machines to massive clusters of xserves running OSX Server (iirc U Illinois has literally hundreds of em clustered up). Even the US navy uses xserve clusters ...<snip>

You were doing fine until you said this.  I cannot count how many of the businesses, you listed, I have walked into and found their so called security to be a joke.  Why do you thank banks continually lose customer information?

Companies use Windows servers because they believe the marketing Microsoft does.  They also get used because many IT folks feel it secures a job for them.  If there is a problem with the server, they can always blame Microsoft for the problem.  Then there is the, "No one ever got fired for suggesting Microsoft products be used."

The only reason Apple is used by scholastic institutions is Apple gives the equipment to the schools.  Apple donates more hardware to schools than any other company in the world.  It is a good tax write-off.

The U.S. government procurement for computers takes years to get done.  Apple is popular because they do not change their hardware often enough to have to continue to build obsolete equipment the government specified 3 years ago.  I have been involved with that process.  Many computer companies today will simply not participate in the government process for procurement of products.

At the end of the day, it is all about personal preference as a PC can do what a Mac can do and vice-versa.  I can crash a Mac inside of 15 seconds.  I can do the same to a PC.  Apple's biggest plus is the fact they do not allow you to really do whatever you want with the computer.  PC's are more open and easier to mess up as a result of that.

Apple computers are more of an appliance.  You get what you get when you buy it. PC's are more for the tinkerer and as a result are more prone to have problems.  Most of which, are user induced.  Understand the limitations with either platform, make your choice, and be happy with it.

[MadHatter]

I dont think anyone here has said that OSX is unvulnerable, but several have implied that OSX is considerably less secure than anything from MS which I cant agree with.


as for mission critical applications there are a bunch of macs running them. apple has decent penetration into legal markets where security is very important and a range of academic, business and medical applications where reliability is a bigger factor. ranging from single machines to massive clusters of xserves running OSX Server (iirc U Illinois has literally hundreds of em clustered up). Even the US navy uses xserve clusters ...

The only reason for running a MS server os in a mission critical application is because your server app only runs on that os. In most other cases of course they will be running a different flavour of *nix than OSX because they will be more interested in tweaking than easy configuration. theres good reasons why the bulk of the worlds web and mail servers run on *nix rather than MS servers ...

so why are so many organisations using MS servers? I think this quote from a US Navy tech director after USS Yorktown was left dead in the water for a few hours when its NT farm fell over is telling:

Chase uses an Apple infrastructure, and yesterday their claims dept was "dead in the water" for a couple of hours from their system failing. ANY system is vulnerable to failure. Let me clarify, I'm not saying that OSX is more vulnerable from a system standpoint. It may indeed be more secure, I'm saying it's more vulnerable from a USER standpoint. In other words, the "I have a Mac, I'm bulletproof" mentality that seems to run rampant is the problem. I watched one guy run around our college accusing each of our CCNA class of messing with his Mac when he left it alone. It was working properly, it's a Mac, therefore we must have done something to it. First of all, we're specializing in Cisco systems, go to the Security guys, go accuse them. Second, why the hell did you leave it alone on the first place? His answer: It's a Mac, you can't break in; my answer: A pawn shop will still take it. We told him his OS was probably corrupt, go get it checked out. He denied that up and down till he took it in. His OS was corrupt. In punishment we duct-taped a sign that said "I 'heart' Windows" to him and made him wear it for an entire day. Easy enuff fix is education. RTHolmes this is not aimed at you or anyone, I am not trying to insult or flame, but instead aimed at the populace with that attitude: YOU-ARE-NOT-BULL-LET-PROOF. Just be smart about what you're doing and use common sense. If you are browsing questionable websites, sooner or later it will catch up to you. Just use common sense. Again, if you are happy with you're choice then go for it.

Edit: Thank you Skuzzy

[RTHolmes]

You were doing fine until you said this.  I cannot count how many of the businesses, you listed, I have walked into and found their so called security to be a joke.  Why do you thank banks continually lose customer information?

agreed, although I'm not sure what you're contradicting

Companies use Windows servers because they believe the marketing Microsoft does.  They also get used because many IT folks feel it secures a job for them.  If there is a problem with the server, they can always blame Microsoft for the problem.  Then there is the, "No one ever got fired for suggesting Microsoft products be used."

agreed, thats what I was hinting at with my quote. Plus MS "donate" on a massive scale, our civil service and health service in the UK will be fubar for years because Bill got friendly with Blair a few years back.

The only reason Apple is used by scholastic institutions is Apple gives the equipment to the schools.  Apple donates more hardware to schools than any other company in the world.  It is a good tax write-off.

I'm sure they do, I was thinking more of university research depts than kids with computers.

Understand the limitations with either platform, make your choice, and be happy with it.

the joys of a free market economy