RE: [Fed-Talk] ammo: mi2g OS X is world's safest and most secure
RE: [Fed-Talk] ammo: mi2g OS X is world's safest and most secure
- Subject: RE: [Fed-Talk] ammo: mi2g OS X is world's safest and most secure
- From: "Cole, John (Civ, ARL/CISD)" <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:00:21 -0500
- Thread-topic: [Fed-Talk] ammo: mi2g OS X is world's safest and most secure
All,
I believe that Mac OS X is safer for a combination of reasons:
1. OS X is possibly more secure than other Oses. (I believe it is, but
XP has made significant improvements.)
2. There are way fewer installed instances
a. Effects of attacks on MS Windows has a wider impact, and this
makes a more attractive target.
b. Fewer attackers have the expertise for this OS than for MS
Windows, and this makes MAC OS X a less attractive target.
3. Possibly there is a general, positive feeling among ptential
attackers for Macintoshes and their OS, and a negative feeling toward MS
Windows and PCs. Possibly because one is "establishment" and the other
is "rebellious". Whether such a view is justified or not, it may be
cause increased focus on WinTel machines and MS Windows than on Macs and
OS X by attackers.
If the situation reverses, and the Mac world predominates, then I
believe we will witness a similar reversal in the rate of attacks on
Macs and the Mac OS X. But which OS and platform will dominate in the
next decade? More of the same? Probably.
My EUR 0.02,
Jack
-----Original Message-----
From: fed-talk-bounces+cole=email@hidden
[mailto:fed-talk-bounces+cole=email@hidden] On Behalf Of
R. Carvel Baus
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 9:47 AM
To: Fedtalk List
Subject: Re: [Fed-Talk] ammo: mi2g OS X is world's safest and most
secure
My statement was clearly an assertion. While a lower install base
(OSX/BSD only) is not the sole reason for fewer hacks, the difference
has some impact.
The main point of my initial response was to say that the article
didn't prove anything concrete. The methods used were not thorough
enough by any means to draw the conclusion they did.
Carvel
On Nov 12, 2004, at 5:16 PM, Pike, Michael wrote:
> I totally disagree - I often hear this response from Microsoft
> advocates any
> time a security hole arises in Windows (whoa, there is another one!
> And
> another! :)
>
> Last time I checked on the internet, *nix based servers out number
> Windows
> based servers by quite a large margin.
>
> But lets look at the "heart" (kernel) of the matter.
>
> *nix kernels (OS X, FreeBSD, etc) are open source, and reviewed by
> millions
> of developers. Microsoft's kernel is not.
>
> If you have a corn field that is 600 acres, and you have to find every
> ladybug in that field with 3 spots (bugs), and you have 1 million
> people
> looking at it, you will find a significantly larger number of bugs
than
> someone who has a team of 100 people looking for them.
>
> I believe the low number of "hacks" related to *nix OS's is due to the
> fact
> that problems are found and fixed BEFORE they become a problem, as
> opposed
> to the Microsoft platform which are patched AFTER someone gets hit.
>
> No OS is totally secure - but the trend you will see is clear - you
> get an
> Apple Security Update fixing the problem before anyone even knew it
> was a
> problem - as opposed to Microsoft - where you come in and find the
> latest
> version of MyDoom has trashed your system.
>
> Even if the number of OS X and Microsoft based installations were
> equal (I
> believe it's possible, I'm working for that), you would still see a
> significantly smaller number of "hacks" for the OS X platform for the
> mere
> fact that problems are discovered and fixed before they were ever
> realized
> to be a problem.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> On 11/10/04 12:18 PM, "R. Carvel Baus" <email@hidden> wrote:
>> When there is a larger install base of Mac OS
>> X clients and servers, it is most likely that the number of
>> successful hacks on the system will go up. Consider if the positions
>> of Windows and Mac OS were swapped, historically. Based on this
articles logic,
>> it
>> would find Windows as the most secure system (many assumptions are
>> made
>> in such a statement.)
>>
>> So while there may be fewer successful hacks of a Mac OS / BSD
>> system, I would think it is more likely due to the lack of install
>> base.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
> email@hidden
>
> This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden