Think XP and Vista Are Security Disasters? Have You Looked at Tiger and Leopard Lately?
section: windows, for your questions: KezNews forum, 18.12.2007
Do you think that Windows Vista and Windows XP are security disasters? Well, in all fairness, chances are that indeed you would think that.
Traditionally, the Windows platform, no matter the actual label of the iterations, has not been associated with a bulletproof operating system. Mac OS X and Linux, on the other hand, come with a natural end user perception of security. But at the same time, and this is a direct result of Apple's irresponsible marketing techniques, OS X has somewhat of an aura of impermeability to malicious code.
In fact, among the list of reasons delivered by the Cupertino-based software company as incentive to grab a copy of the latest cat, Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard, Apple states: "It’s secure. In a world where PCs constantly do battle with viruses and malware, Mac OS X is a sea of tranquility. Just go about your business and Mac OS X minds the fortress. Your documents are safe even if you share your Mac with others, and you can keep your kids safe by using a rich set of parental controls."
Sea of tranquility? Fortress? The immediate consequence of such "descriptive" epithets for OS X security is the fact that Apple users generally run the operating system without a security solution. In fact, OS X users even deride Windows for the constant and immutable need to run an antivirus. But, OS X is not a fortress. Not by a long shot.
Case in point the December 12th, 2007 Apple Security Update 2007-009. With the update, the Cupertino-based company patched no less than 31 security holes impacting a variety of products, but with Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger and Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard taking center stage. Although Apple does not rate security flaws in accordance to a severity rating, almost half of the vulnerabilities allow for the execution of arbitrary code. This is equivalent with a Critical label judging by Microsoft terms.
In order to make a comparison between Vista and Leopard, you would have to consider that Microsoft has released a total of 12 Critical security bulletins for its latest Windows client, in the entire period since its launch, for over a year, judging according to the business release in November 2006. Out of the 18 patches impacting Leopard, no less than eight can be considered critical, as the vulnerabilities allow potential attacker to run arbitrary code on an affected platform.
That's eight in a single month. Now in all fairness, Microsoft's security bulletins account for more vulnerabilities in some cases, as a single release can address multiple holes, but by the looks of it Apple's really catching up with Leopard. And when it comes to malicious code, last I checked Sunbelt had an extensive list of websites serving the TrojanDNSChanger Trojan Horse (just scroll down and read the posts). And all that malware needs its vulnerabilities, well, Leopard and Tiger have plenty of those.
source:
news.softpedia.com
Send link 2 friend | Permalink
MORE RELATED ARTICLES:
XP SP3 and Vista SP1 Critical Security Patches || Vista vs. Leopard – a Microsoft Perspective || XP SP3 and Vista SP1 September 2008 Security Release ISO Image || The First XP SP3 Security Vulnerability || Critical Security Patch for Windows XP Service Pack 3 Final
Comments(17)
true. so true.
so not true. anything can be broken.
wtf? i have no antivirus on my xp and vista machines and i have both of them running
smooth with no viruses, u don't need antivirus if u have everything set to highest
(pop-up blocker, cookies) and delete ur temporary files. so as long as u don't download
tasty_teens.exe u'll be fine. but i don't know about the apple os, nothing's totally
secure, apples' are more like rich person toys than computers.
"windows usually has an issue with virus's.
mac osx usually has an issue with
exploits."
since apple has used its 'new intel platform' (a lazy parody of
the x86 and 64bit pc arcutexture) they have had issues with osx exploits, virus's and
malware.
it also does not help when apple is advertising that you can run windows
os's on a apple machine.
the problem with this is that some virus's that exist in
windows will start causing issues with the mac os on the machine as well.
it
will be quite soon that all 'windows' virus's will be mac osx virus's as well.
so apple can have both exploits and virus's.
the reason why i point this
out with apple is because they produce their own hardware for their os. (contracted
through hardware manufacturing companies)
so they have a hardware platform which has
few configurations,compatibilty issues, thats propriotary and excutes arbitrary code thats
for pc's.
:)
if i am not mistaken, vista's sp1 contains no less than 500 !! security fixes , none
were publish to the public.
i agree that both os's have security flaws and thats y theyre patched but its really
about what sites you visit and what you do on your pc. like the turd master said if you
downoad tasty_teens.exe your gonna get a virus simple as that
vista sp1 rc1 does have 479 patches. but only 17 of them are security patches. the others
are bug fixes, ehancements, etc.
i believe the current context is about
security related patches.
apple is pretty much a "closed" market, in the
terms that they produce most of their hardwares, and their produce their own os.
if even on this situtation apple has this many issues, i can't imagine if apple's
os market is as large as ms os market.
mac marketing... else non sense
macs are stuck in a dream world
of false advertising
at least with
windows - u know what ur getting
what can you say but "told you so". i see so many mac users think they are kings of
the world with their macs yet they are so vulnerable. get to the real world and 90
percent of the earths users...get a pc.
quote:
"wtf? i have no antivirus on my xp and vista machines and i have both of
them running smooth with no viruses, u don't need antivirus if u have everything set to
highest (pop-up blocker, cookies) and delete ur temporary files. so as long as u don't
download tasty_teens.exe u'll be fine. but i don't know about the apple os, nothing's
totally secure, apples' are more like rich person toys than computers."
seriously, you just plain nutty if you think that strategy is going to work........
yeah, you can do everything right and still get burned-- some kind of security
software is in order.
as far as all the mudslinging about os's- all are
exploitable.
it is irritating, tho, when an "update" screws up a workable setup.
seems that incompetence has become the norm.
hahah what a fuc ken noob
mac suc ks massive cock
there are thousands of computer virus's for windows none for the mac. therefore it is
just a bit more important for windows to be rock solid. enough said!
i find it highly dishonest to forget that there are thousands of viruses and spyware
targeting only windows (like a previous poster said). why aren't they considered as
vulnerabilities when microsoft itself has entered the antivirus market ?
after
all, symantec didn't gross 5 billion dollars in revenue last year by dealing with a dozen
vulnerabilities.
so yes, windows (any version) is a security disaster. that's
compounded by the fact that small groups of volunteers can produce operating systems (like
freebsd) that are a breeze to use.
i've recently realized that while i'm
using freebsd or mandriva, i'm at peace. however, as soon as windows xp boots, my anxiety
level rises. i can't wait for the day when customers will stop sending me *.doc files.
i see mac's as just being a unpopular target. if they continue to gain ground in market
share. i am certain someone will start to attack these holes.how sucessful they will be
nobody knows?
but you see, its not the fact of it being full of holes or not, its more the fact that i
can go to my mac and turn it on and not have any problems while im using it. security
holes may be there, but i've never been hacked. thats why we say macs are better.
No new comments are allowed for this article.
For your questions use our KezNews Forum
so true
By drwillmore on 19.12.2007 - 01:12