Comments on: Mac flaw puts Safari surfers at risk
Combination of hole in Apple's OS X and a feature in its Web browser opens Macs to attack, Secunia says.
Most Popular
Latest tech news headlines
- Report: Apple event to be held January 26
December 30, 2009 5:38 PM PST
- Just how free will the Nexus One be?
December 30, 2009 4:57 PM PST
- RockYou sued over data breach
December 30, 2009 4:14 PM PST
- See all headlines
RSS Feeds
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
- Markets
Related quotes
I've had this function off for a while, pending an update. Please do
not report on stuff that everyone knows already, just to get the
public's attention.
operator's error. Nothing whatsoever to do with Apple.
downloading "dodgy" software. The flaw allows for concealment of
malicious code under a disguise as a (usually) benign file, such as
video, PDF, etc. That's what makes it a security flaw--and rightly
mentioned as an issue, since Apple's not fixed it yet. (Though they
have come out with the over-hyped Apple TV and iPhone.)
back over the last year and look at how many pot-shots they've
taken at Apple vs say Microsoft. It's not that Apple does everything
right, but CNET would serve it's readers better by being more even
handed. It's too bad that the editors have taken this approach as
the site could be a great source for news and product reviews. Have
you noticed how companies that advertise heavy with CNET get
better ratings?
;)
of a bug-a-day in Mac Land; it's news. Not the biggest, but worth
spending a few bytes and electrons on.
and wife--four lovely Macs of various species. And i've not yet
freaked over them or any announcements about them. Now, about
the iPhone, OTOH, I think Apple freaked a fair number of folks by
tying the product to Cingular and it's freaking failure of a data
service, EDGE.
The surprise is how Cult of Mac (not regular Apple computer owners but, the fanatics) believers continue to loose it any time something like reality threatens to shatter the delusions they've developed based purely on Apples ad campains.
"Hi, I'm a PC."
'And I'm a Mac; impervious to viruses, bugs, hardware falures and solar flares.'
My comments are not targeted to the regular computer owners who chose to buy an Apple; only the Blindly Brand Loyal who disregard facts about whatever there prefered system is unless the facts fit there pre-determined perceptions.
It's time to step back, read an article for what it's worth, if you agree great, if you disagree, than equally great.
But for crying out loud, please refrain from saying how biased these reports are.
Is it wrong for a reviewer to use a Mac when writing a story about a Mac? How about using a PC to write about a Mac? How about using a Mac to write about a PC? Get over it....my favorite color is gray, yours is pink, his is red and hers green.
Who wants to spend their time bashing product reviews anyways???? Get a life!!!!!
Despite this I still read CNet but treat it more as a blogg than as a reputable source of news.
not the norm. For those of you not understanding this, you
simply need to go to just ONE page.
http://news.com.com/The+dawn+of+Vista/
2009-1016_3-6132982.html?tag=nefd.lede
OSX has continued to evolve, and has yet to receive this kind of
treatment. To top it off, since CNET is supposed to be
reporting, you would think they would do actual, fair
comparisons. This rarely happens. Yes there are reporters in
CNET that strive to do a better job. I won't mention their names
because that would alienate them from the rest.
So go to that page, and read all about the innovations etc. We
have been getting a stream of Longhorn/Vista (I've forgotten the
other code names) for longer than I can remember accurately.
A lot of windows developers are still running windows for
development (gotta make a living) but they are using OSX, as
well.
The bottom-line, for years to come, Windows is entrenched, and
as long as they can strong arm vendors into shipping it, entice
and bribe people into using it. Its coming. But quit with all the
complete nonsense about how great it is.
All this talk reminds me of my college days working in a mall software store. We had a small shelf of Mac software in the back of the store, and at least once a day, some indignant Mac owner would complain that we didn't stock enough titles. As gently as possible, we tried to explain to them that no one bought the few titles that we did carry, so it would be bad business to stock any more. We'd usually get some comment about how Windows sucks, and they'd leave without buying anything. Which was the whole problem to begin with.
is doing a great service.
But ... to avoid pushing people's sensitivity buttons, a little more
accuracy in the title of articles, or a little more clarity or less
journalism in the subtitles would be suitable.
For example : Mac Flaw Puts Safari Surfers At Risk could be more
accurately and fairly reported as : Simple Workaround Till Safari
Security Hole Closed.
Not only would this more accurately reflect the content of the
article, but it is significantly less enflamatory and 'journalistic'.
We computer affictionados do not need shock and awe. We'll
read atricles of obviously significant content without the
fireworks in the titles.
1. If a Mac runs a program that it has never run before = IT
ASKS YOU FIRST. It tells you that you are running a new program
and asks for permission to proceed.
2. If a Mac runs a software installer = it not only asks you for
permission + it asks for an administrator's password.
You might feel more secure behind a thousand firewalls - but
being able to work online without worrying about the threat of
viruses or spyware is priceless. I'm in 100% production while
most users spend time downloading updates, scanning files, and
clicking through confirmation pop-ups. While firewalling them
out, you've walled yourselves in.
"Proof of concept" is miles away from an actual exploit. There have been a few proof of concept released for issues with OSX. To date, there has been exactly zero successful attempts to exploit OSX in the wild. At worst, an attacker could affect 1 machine, but even that takes a lot of work. Compare that to the extreme ease of exploiting windows on any given day.
If you had any knowledge of software, much less software security you would know this. No non-trivial software is flawless, and no one has ever claimed it. OSX is more secure and its users don't really have to worry about things like viruses. Not because of market share but because of solid software engineering.
make accurate comparisons versus ranting.
is because it's only one of the operating systems FEW. They don't
put these at the top for windows because there are so many more
holes and viruses that can get into a PC without an anti-virus. Mac
OS X is so much more secure than Windows. I'm confident that
Apple will fix this is no time.
I wouldn't be that confident that Apple will fix this in no time, given they took around 3 months to fix those Apple AirPort Wi-Fi holes they denied to exist to begin with.
- So much for Mac security
- by Ryo Hazuki January 17, 2007 4:23 AM PST
- I wish I had a Mac so I didn't have to deal with these Windows-only problems.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(47 Comments)