What is Digg?73 Comments
- digitalpencil, on 04/18/2008, -4/+44I keep hearing people say this but you can't hold a bunch of fanatical wankers as being representative of a user-group. There are loads of mac, windows & linux fanboys, so maniacal about their chosen OS that they feel the need to justify and even evangelize other users to it. Whatever, these are they type of people you cross the street to avoid.
Equally, OS/X's security is largely attributed to its BSD roots. However, its inherent security measures are also well implemented. Many argue, as the article points out, that the only reason that OS/X has remained virus/malware free for so long is due to its obscurity. Whilst this too is true to an extent its equally an entirely naive perspective to hold suggesting that this is the only reason it has remained secure since for so long..
Think about it, how may mac-haters out there would love to see a virus spread on this platform? Hell, how many are going to jump on this thread and argue about how the first mac-virus is just around the corner? The truth is simple, most virus writers, code for community kudos. If one managed to write the first successful virus, to spread outside a lab environment, they would be the veritable virusKings of the computing world! Championed by Windows lovers and Apple haters alike, for once and for all, wiping that smug fanboy smile off the faces of so many mac users..
Has it happened though?? No.. People have been waffling on for years about how OS/X's secure base is under attack and soon enough someone's going to crack it but they haven't. I love macs for various reasons and I own one, I also own a Windows/Linux box and love it for other reasons & hate the airs of superiority associated with each specific group but you can't carrying on flogging the same dead-horse... OS/X is secure! The vast majority of mac-users have never even thought about securing their machines and have never suffered any security issues whatsoever.
That aside, screw the mad fanboys.. Anyone who feels the need to justify their computer to others, going to the length of pointing out flaws with others' equipment is obviously unhappy with their OS and for some reason, feels threatened by others' choice.
So let the flame-war ensue but bare in mind.. your computer does not define you, if you feel it does, it might be worth closing the lid ad venturing out to the real world for a moment or to. There are after all more important things in life. - borez, on 04/18/2008, -4/+24Macs are still safe for the fundamental reason that they won't let you install system specific software without alerting you to the fact and making you input your password first ... an entry level feature that Microsoft just hasn't quite got it's head around.
It ain't rocket science.
/
Fool me into installing a bogus bit of software on my Mac, and then you're ( maybe ) in with a chance of getting into my system.
/not - Karmavs, on 04/18/2008, -0/+13UAC is similar, but it appears_too_much_. Once dialogs start coming up for everything you do, you no longer think about why they come up, you just put in your pass automatically.
The weakest part of almost any computer is the person behind the keyboard - santaliqueur, on 04/18/2008, -2/+13So, after they relaxed the competition to include applications (instead of just the OS) and a Macbook Air got "hacked" through a loophole in a brand new version of Safari, ALL Macs are now weak?
Nope. A real hacker does not need physical access to a machine. Windows makes it easy. - GCarden, on 04/18/2008, -0/+11Hey, just like I did with you!
- punkcat, on 04/18/2008, -0/+8and relaxed the rules to include code and the web from the outside competition because nobody was getting anywhere the first day.
- inactive, on 08/28/2008, -0/+8yes, but that can be bypassed if you:
1. open up the machine and change the amount of ram
2. start up while holding apple-option-p-r until it resets the pram 3 times
3. boot into single user mode
but most people don't carry a screwdriver and some extra ram around with them, so you'll be safe. - Karmavs, on 04/18/2008, -0/+8BTW — that hack no longer works in Safari 3.1.1
- santaliqueur, on 04/18/2008, -1/+7Really? We need another flamewar? Give it a rest. Use whatever computer YOU like, and leave the others alone.
- lfernandez91, on 04/18/2008, -0/+6No computer is safe if the hacker has access to the machine itself. Although you could implement a firmware password.
- rpark, on 04/18/2008, -0/+6Note: negative diggs.
- bigsteve, on 04/18/2008, -0/+5UAC is only similar in how it visually appears to the user. Under OS X's hood is a tried-and-true Unix Security Hierarchy; a gold standard of hardened enterprise-level access control from years before and for years to come.
Under Vista's hood is a rehashed ACL engine dragged through from Windows NT4 with a nag screen stapled to the front of it called UAC. It boggles the mind that the OS market share leader would see the need for a ground-up rebuild of their security model, then see all the issues with spyware that their OS suffers from that is in part due to the "just keep clicking" habits of its users, and think that just one more click is the end-all answer to their security woes.
I'm never going back. - marike, on 04/18/2008, -0/+5A good read. I enjoy most of the articles at Ars Technica. I thought the suggestion to look at you System Logs was a good one. Not always the easiest thing to recognize when something is fishy in the logs.
- inactive, on 04/18/2008, -4/+9One exploit in 7 years and all the Windows Fanboys come out of the woodwork to say OS X security sucks, even though Windows has 140,000 known viruses and was also hacked at CanSecWest.
- ANT1138, on 04/18/2008, -2/+6will it stop this(http://lifehacker.com/software/mac-tip/reset-your- ... from working?
- n8o8, on 04/18/2008, -0/+4This was really helpful.
- peestandingup, on 04/18/2008, -1/+5Yeah, and we all know how user friendly OpenBSD & Solaris is too, huh.
- fkr3, on 04/18/2008, -3/+7Or you could go all MacGyver and put some form of explosive trap fashioned out of toothpics, 3 inches of duct tape and a smooth pebble inside the case that detonates when someone opens it.
- inactive, on 08/28/2008, -0/+4many people have computers with the minimum amount of ram installed.
not everyone has their computers maxed out on everything like us diggers. - RandyGandy, on 04/18/2008, -1/+4the firmware password will. you cant access single user mode without the password
- santaliqueur, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3No sarcasm needed.
- Karmavs, on 04/18/2008, -2/+5It isn't for me. i don't get an ad column when I search for iTunes (I do get one if i search for 'apple' or 'shoes' or other things, so nothing's blocking them) and the first result is apple.com/itunes, the second is apple.com/itunes/download the third is iTunes on wikipedia… etc.
The first link that I'm not entirely sure of the authenticity of is a filehippo.com link, which is the tenth result.
Apparently google doesn't like you very much. - Karmavs, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3(obviously, security includes viruses; but that's not all it includes)
- Vytorious, on 04/18/2008, -1/+4I've been running in an Administrator account for the convenience and saw the error of my ways. I recently downgraded to a standard account, and encrypted my home folder.
These are the basics, but I haven't heard of these tips, so I'll probably implement them next time I reformat. - inactive, on 08/28/2008, -0/+3also, that guide is slightly outdated
the command "sh /etc/rc" should be replaced with "sh /etc/rc.common" - Karmavs, on 04/18/2008, -2/+5viruses ≠ security
The latter, you need to worry about. - 3amboo, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3what idiot did you know that did that?
- markflo, on 04/18/2008, -3/+5Excellent article highlighting some simple but effective things to do to keep your Mac as safe and secure as possible.
- inactive, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2I don't know what the ***** you are talking about but the first link is to the real itunes site.
- inactive, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3I know you are joking but no one ever claimed that.
- lamiaconfitor, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2I can do it with two inches of duct tape. McGyver ain't *****.
- bigsteve, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Yea, the article should be called "Macbook Air pwned in (a day and) 2 minutes flat (once the rules were relaxed to include web browsers)"
You know, because there's never been a vulnerability in Firefox. - ANT1138, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3couldn't you just remove extra RAM?
/noob - stephendv, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2A comprehensive guide to securing mac os x 10.4: http://research.corsaire.com/whitepapers/060517-se ...
(A Leopard version will be released soon)
And the NSA's guide is also very good: http://www.nsa.gov/snac/downloads_macx.cfm (Only for 10.3 though) - inactive, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Irix?
- AppleMacStud, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3Great article. I think as Mac users we get a little to smug about security. It's good to practice basic security no matter the platform.
- nelsonjs, on 04/18/2008, -3/+4Very useful info, will come in handy.
- Ouze, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1you guys are a little too smug about a lot more then security
- peterinjapan, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1I run J-List with all Macs, even though we port PC software (dating-sim games). It's a good decision for us, since I can say we've never lost data to malware/virus/whatever, which is pretty important. My lawyer once had to re-do $5000 worth of work for me because a virus ate his laptop once. I'm just sayin'...
- ZephyrNinety, on 04/18/2008, -2/+3Unless you're a complete nimrod, you really don't have to worry about it
- lamiaconfitor, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Come to think about it, I dont know why I wasted my time, OSx does suck... in comparison to linux. oh no, I said that on an apple article!
- inactive, on 04/18/2008, -2/+3Never heard of DEP, eh? Windows users lauded it, because the ones that don't need it were shocked that anyone could be so stupid to need something like that.
- Karmavs, on 04/18/2008, -2/+3No it doesn't. http://www.google.com/search?q=iTunes
1. apple.com/itunes/ - eavesdrop, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1The guide was a rehash of many other guides on the net. Informative but nothing new really.
- bradleyland, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1DEP is not a user security measure in the same category as UAC or traditional Unix-type user permissions hierarchy. DEP is a hardware/software measure used to prevent buffer overflow execution.
- FKnight, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2No, just Apple and their fan club. Don't lie.
- ANT1138, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1I guess... Um, could you explain that to me in simpler terms or direct me to a site that could teach me what you're talking about. I'd really appreciate it.
- inactive, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1beat me to it...
- fr34k5h0w, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1I used File Vault for a while, but if you download much (torrents, anyone?) then you have to resize your home directory every time you shutdown. And turning off File Vault is even more of a hassle if your home directory takes up half of your hard drive as you will get an error when you go to turn it off saying that there's not enough disk space (in 10.4 it told me that I needed 10000 GB more [an obvious bug], even though my home directory was 84 GB)
- lamiaconfitor, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1then, Jim, it ain't worth hacking.
-
Show 51 - 72 of 72 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is