Comments on: Prediction: Apple will recommend security software
Analyst Jon Oltsik believes in the next 18 months Apple will back using security software. Given the state of cybersecurity today, pragmatism should trump romanticism, he says.
Most Popular
15 sites that went kaput in 2009
Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.
Top 10 news stories of the decade
Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.
About Security
Online security is threatened by more than hacking and phishing attempts. Check here for the latest updates on software vulnerabilities, data leaks, and rapidly spreading viruses--and learn how to protect your systems.
Add this feed to your online news reader
Security topics
The backup feature, does it cost anything more?
Nope, it?s all included for free as a part of the service provided by Palm included with your Pre.
What happens to my phone when it?s in USB Mode?
All calls are routed to voicemail when the Pre is in USB Mode. Slight downer, I know ? but how often are you really gonna have the Pre in USB Mode? And even then, not more than a couple minutes @ a time.
What IM services will the Pre support for real-time status indicators?
Google Talk (GTalk) and AIM at launch. Do you really know anyone without a Gmail address?
In the Calendar, can I choose my own colors for the appointments?
Yes! it?s easily selectable, or can sync with your Outlook category colors with Exchange.
What about the web browser, can I disable cookies?
Yep, it?s an option in the Web Preferences.
How do I get the calendar to do the cool ?compress? when displaying?
Simple! it just has to be a block of time that?s 2 hours or more.
Can you have multiple IM conversations going at the same time?
Yes, the possibilities are limitless ? talk to everyone, share the Pre love!
Office 2007 ? Any issues?
Nope. Go ahead, tell your boss about it, and bring it to work. Welcome to life with the Pre ? it just works!
Can I use Pictbridge (wirelessly sending pics to a printer)?
There?s not a profile for it yet. Hang in there, grasshopper.
With the new webOS, what about virus protection?
The core is not open, and isn?t subject to any viruses, in other words, you?re covered!
What about Calltones?
Would you expect any less? It?s a network feature, so they?re 100% supported, no problems.
Can I save music as a ring tone for my Pre?
Sure, customize it all you want.
Family locator ? can I track my son with his Pre?
While it?s great you?d get a Pre for your son (umm, sure!, lol), you won?t be able to track lil Timmy with it just yet using Family Locator.
Can I take videos with my Palm Pre?
Not at launch, but hang in there as great things are on the way, and as the Palm Pre uses the webOS, updates are just a gesture away!
Can I send pictures as a text message?
Using MMS, of course. You can?t however crop pictures yet, so be aware of any size limitations the receiving person may have with their device or carrier, or adjust the camera settings.
That?s all for now! Don?t forget about the folks over at SprintGurus, where you can discuss not only these Palm Pre FAQs, but anything Sprint related. I do monitor and reply to the comments here on the blog as time permits, but there?s a great community of people there that are very knowledgeable, and if you?re looking to discuss Sprint or the Pre, it?s the place to be!
Thought provoking comment. Thanks
Last time I saw a Mac was when a Faux art-school guy with a baret was heading to Starbucks.
And by the way, it's "beret".
I did try a Mac , and the OS seemed to be a gimmick at best. Look...it`s like a genie going into a bottle !
Wow , I`m not impressed.
You tried a Mac? And all you got out of it is the "Genie effect"? I suggest you sit down with a modern Macintosh running 10.5.6 and actually work with it as your main machine, for say, at least a week. Then, maybe, just maybe, you might be able to make an informed decision. Fiddling with one in the Apple store for 15 minutes, or playing with an 8 year old iBook, does not count.
That's the main difference between Windows users (people that actually CHOOSE to use it) and Macintosh owners. Of course I'm speaking in generalities here. Most Macintosh users have spent plenty of "quality time" with Windows and sought out an alternative. Most Windows users have never spent any "quality time" with a Macintosh of contemporary age. And because of that, they make snap judgements because their exposure is too short for them to get past the aesthetic differences.
Your really not "forced" to use anything you always have a choice. I find it amazing that people think Windows got 90% marketshare because they didn't have a choice.
"You're", not "your".
Windows has 90% of the market share because it was rammed down their throats from an early age. Most people are ignorant of any alternatives. Microsoft weaselled their way to making sure that Windows was put on every new computer by default. They bullied all their competition out of business, and engaged in aggressive deals with corporations. A lot of their business practices have been illegal, Just do a search for the "Department of Justice", "European Union", and "Microsoft", and you'll begin to get the picture.
Kind of ironic I found quite a bit of things for Apple on that subject as well ;)
Most of the Apple stories are probably aren't related to their strong-arm and illegal business practices, as Microsoft's are. I never said Apple was perfect, but compare the stories. Microsoft has been engaging in "questionable" business practices since its inception.
So I will close by saying, as long as you close your eyes and walk backwards no one will be able to see you anyways, so why not go naked. Thats how I role no matter the OS.
Suggested reading:
Mac Vulnerabilities - 58 [NOT EXACT]
http://search.securityfocus.com/swsearch?sbm=%2F&metaname=alldoc&query=mac+vulnerabilities&x=0&y=0
Windows Vulnerabilities - 385 [NOT EXACT]
http://search.securityfocus.com/swsearch?sbm=%2F&metaname=alldoc&query=windows+vulnerabilities&x=0&y=0
Those are exploits not necessarily viruses, so make sure you guys actually get educated on security before you say your secure, unless your my neighbor because then I don't care. ; ) Cause then I can watch ya. OmmNomNom
1. All Pwn2Own participants were tethered to the "victim" computer by a cross-over cable. In fact, the rules expressly forbid a remote "hack".
2. If one has the physical access to a Mac that was enjoyed at Pwn2Own then one can "pwn" the Mac with no mad hAx0r sKilLz what-so-ever.
3. The alleged "hack" was a work-in-progress for over a year.
4. There has never been a documented remote "pwnage" of a Mac. Ever.
5. According to Secunia, Mac OS X has had 125 security advisories since 2003 with 4% classified as still unpatched. Microsoft Win XP has had 216 security advisories since 2003 with 12% classified as still unpatched. Also, of the security advisories listed 51% resulted in system access for Win XP, while 19% resulted in system access for Mac OS X.
Remind me again - which is the more secure OS?
Take for example the so-called iBotnet "virus" from this article. I looked it up. Did any of you notice it doesn't fit the definition of a virus? On the ThinkPad I am running right now (XP SP3), I have been impacted by viruses without doing anything (crashed computer through port scans overloading system resources), or by simply reading e-mail. A "virus" can spread capriciously.
The so-called iBotnet "virus" is definitely "malware" but of a completely different variety: it is a "trojan horse". A user unwittingly installed this piece of malware using proper authorization (prompted for a password). It required the user to explicitly say, "make it so".
Yes, there is a difference; that is why both types of malware have two different NAMES. If your name is "George", it would be inaccurate for me to call you "Mary"---it isn't your freaking name. If you drive a '79 Pinto with exploding gas tank, it would be completely wrong to call that car a "2009 Lexus". Deliberating using the wrong name is the same as a lie.
No OS is 100% secure. Apple has built its new OS starting with MacOS 10.0 on BSD UNIX, a very secure foundation, but NOT bulletproof. No such thing. But it is an excellent, and scalable basis for a secure OS.
The myth (yes it is) that the only reason the MacOS is so untroubled by malware in general is SOLEY because of market size is spread by individuals with no understanding of history. One of the very first viruses was on a Mac, back in the late 1980s, and the marketshare was ALWAYS relatively TINY for the Mac platform. So despite being small (like today), there was plenty of Mac viruses? Why is this so? Because the classic MacOS was not built on a secure foundation.
Apple probably could benefit from one of those annoying databases of known malware -- because they are so few, it wouldn't even need to be invasive. Some classes of suspicious behavior should also be trapped and the user made aware. Though relatively rare on a Mac, it is definitely possible to exploit any of the open standards that Apple uses to communicate to the world like HTTP, WEP, etc; Apple doesn't control these standards; all they can hope to do is patch them, just as Microsoft does.
UNIX was built from the beginning with security, and it has been incrementally improved over 30 years. It is a superb foundation and much easier than trying to reinvent the wheel like Microsoft has attempted to do. But it is an arms race between the bad guys and the good guys, and as new mechanisms of using the internet are invented, there will be new people trying to screw the rest of us. (I had someone trying to scam me within 24 hours of my very first Craigslist post. People are bastards).
This whole article is nothing more than a hyperbolic gloat predicated on a misrepresentation of the truth. The fact is that NO OS can protect you from a brand new Trojan horse, which has been cleared by the user to "make it so"; the very best Apple or MS can do is add it to a database of malware after the damage has been done.
I am still waiting to hear of a single non-BS report of a real Mac virus. You know, the type that requires the writer to report on it without resorting to using the wrong name.
Take for example the so-called iBotnet "virus" from this article. I looked it up. Did any of you notice it doesn't fit the definition of a virus? On the ThinkPad I am running right now (XP SP3), I have been impacted by viruses without doing anything (crashed computer through port scans overloading system resources), or by simply reading e-mail. A "virus" can spread capriciously.
The so-called iBotnet "virus" is definitely "malware" but of a completely different variety: it is a "trojan horse". A user unwittingly installed this piece of malware using proper authorization (prompted for a password). It required the user to explicitly say, "make it so".
Yes, there is a difference; that is why both types of malware have two different NAMES. If your name is "George", it would be inaccurate for me to call you "Mary"---it isn't your freaking name. If you drive a '79 Pinto with exploding gas tank, it would be completely wrong to call that car a "2009 Lexus". Deliberating using the wrong name is the same as a lie.
No OS is 100% secure. Apple has built its new OS starting with MacOS 10.0 on BSD UNIX, a very secure foundation, but NOT bulletproof. No such thing. But it is an excellent, and scalable basis for a secure OS.
The myth (yes it is) that the only reason the MacOS is so untroubled by malware in general is SOLEY because of market size is spread by individuals with no understanding of history. One of the very first viruses was on a Mac, back in the late 1980s, and the marketshare was ALWAYS relatively TINY for the Mac platform. So despite being small (like today), there was plenty of Mac viruses? Why is this so? Because the classic MacOS was not built on a secure foundation.
Apple probably could benefit from one of those annoying databases of known malware -- because they are so few, it wouldn't even need to be invasive. Some classes of suspicious behavior should also be trapped and the user made aware. Though relatively rare on a Mac, it is definitely possible to exploit any of the open standards that Apple uses to communicate to the world like HTTP, WEP, etc; Apple doesn't control these standards; all they can hope to do is patch them, just as Microsoft does.
UNIX was built from the beginning with security, and it has been incrementally improved over 30 years. It is a superb foundation and much easier than trying to reinvent the wheel like Microsoft has attempted to do. But it is an arms race between the bad guys and the good guys, and as new mechanisms of using the internet are invented, there will be new people trying to screw the rest of us. (I had someone trying to scam me within 24 hours of my very first Craigslist post. People are bastards).
This whole article is nothing more than a hyperbolic gloat predicated on a misrepresentation of the truth. The fact is that NO OS can protect you from a brand new Trojan horse, which has been cleared by the user to "make it so"; the very best Apple or MS can do is add it to a database of malware after the damage has been done.
I am still waiting to hear of a single non-BS report of a real Mac virus. You know, the type that requires the writer to report on it without resorting to using the wrong name.
As a mixed-tech person, I'd have to agree with the article on a point or two; namely that sooner rather than later, Mac users would be wise to install some sort of virus protection and internet security software. Nothing is impenetrable, and the more press the Apple and the Mac recieve, the more true that will become. OS X Server already includes ClamAV for which you can find several GUI front-ends for online. I already make use of this as I have Windows boxes on my home network, as well.
What I would take issue with is the statement that the Mac was exploited in 10 seconds. While this is true, in the interests of full disclosure, it has been reported that Mr. Miller spent several hours designing his exploit prior to the contest. So 10 seconds is a bit of bit of a half-truth.
Regardless, while I love the experience I have with my Macs, and oft loathe the experience I have with my PCs, both are an essential part of my office and workflow. The sheer emotion some people invest into the whole Mac/PC thing is simply silly. They are computers. There are far more important things in this world that we should be getting our blood pressure up about!
POINT FOUR IS WRONG and should be modified / retracted.
So I only have a single comment related to the cost issue of PC vs Mac.
I bought a PC to try and run some of my telescopes. Still haven't got that figured out 100%, but doing OK.
My friend Al recently bought a Mac - cost him $900 Canadian yet - and it runs right out of the box. The PC required additional software and actually cost me over $1100. I also have an iMac, and it is so darned easy to run - considering I really know so little about these things - that it surprises me.
However, it is obvious I should delve much more deeply into the security thing.
So thank you all for everything.
cheers,Bukti
- by Henrique_M June 4, 2009 1:58 AM PDT
- I agree with the author. He confirms what i've been thinking for a long time. Everbody knows that Windows/IE have about 80% of the market, there is a lot of info and documentation, thousands of programmers. So it's a large target with lots of hackers willing to exploit it. It's natural that, as Apple grows in the market, with more users and programmers; there is a new breed of hackers that will try to bring it down. It's the human nature, try to defeat the giant: a great warrior, a great gunman (like Billy the kid), a great sportsman... Maybe Windows don't have lot's of bugs, but certainly there are many people to exploit it; Maybe Mac and Linux have the same number of vulnerabilities; and now they are facing the same range of attacks like Microsft have been targeted for too many years.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 3 of 3 pages (162 Comments)