Apple will, undoubtedly, implement some of these basic techniques for "Leopard".
But market share has completely NOTHING to do with "OS X"'s security. Apple always has and will be 100 % when it comes to their software for OS X and OS X itself. Only time will tell. "Leopard"'s release will solve every Mac user's concerns and PC fanboys idiocy! Even my friend, who uses a PC, is considering the purchase of a Mac. I told him to wait until October, which is very near, to buy one. That way he will not have to pay extra for "Leopard"! ;) On 9/5/07, Nick Shank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The One wrote: > > But how would it spread? There have been 2 OS X viruses, yet they > > spread terribly. > > > > And Apple has already fixed the issue. :) > > > > -The One > > > > On 9/2/07, Kennith Mann III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> On 9/1/07, The One <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> On 3/23/07 2:53 AM, Theo de Raadt wrote: > >>> > >>>>> Symantec have been trying to demonise OS X for a long while. > >>>>> > >>>> And it is going to work soon. > >>>> > >>>> Because OS X has no Propolice-like compiler stack protection, nor > >>>> anything like W^X which makes parts of the address space > >>>> non-executable, nor anything like address space randomization which > >>>> makes certain attacks very difficult, especially with the previous two > >>>> techniques. > >>>> > >>>> So when they have a bug, it is exploitable just like bugs are on any > >>>> other powerpc or i386 machine running some other operating system. > >>>> > >>>> These days even operating systems like Vista have the above 3 security > >>>> technologies. > >>>> > >>>> > >>> First of all, "bugs" and "viruses" are two different things. > >>> > >>> Second, OS X does not need third-party "protection". All of the > >>> protection is built into the OS! > >>> > >>> If Vista is so secure, then why does one need to download > >>> "virus/spyware protection" when it can simply be built into the OS? > >>> > >>> -The One > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> I don't have "virus/spyware protection" and I've been fine before with > >> Vista and XP. > >> > >> Perhaps you mean to say "why do users who install things they > >> shouldn't need virus/spyware protection?" which I would argue that the > >> OS doesn't matter. I could write a script that asks for rootly > >> permission in OS X and start nuking stuff with the promise of prettier > >> icons for their desktop or IM client. > >> > >> If you were to argue for worms and things of the like, then I would > >> agree. The only virus I will probably ever catch is some zero-day that > >> hits the world and gets in my work network (won't happen at my house > >> -- I live alone....) > >> > > > > > Here we hit the heart of the issue. The virus and spyware detection > software for Windows isn't really to protect to the OS. It's to protect > the user from themselves.
