March 13, 2007 5:16 PM PDT

Apple megapatch plugs 45 security holes

Apple on Tuesday issued a security update for its Mac OS X to plug 45 security holes, including several zero-day vulnerabilities.

The megapatch is the seventh Apple security patch release in three months. It deals with vulnerabilities in Apple's own software, as well as third-party components such as Adobe Systems' Flash Player, OpenSSH and MySQL. Sixteen of the vulnerabilities addressed by the update were previously released as part of two high-profile bug-hunting campaigns.

The vulnerabilities pose varying risks to Macs. Several of the flaws could be exploited to gain full control over a Mac running the vulnerable component, according to Apple's advisory. Other holes are limited and could only be exploited to crash a Mac or used by somebody who already has access to a machine to elevate privileges, for example.

One focus of the patch is to fix eight vulnerabilities in the way Mac OS X handles disk images, files that when opened appear as a drive within the Macintosh Finder. Mounting a malicious image may lead to an error and could provide a means for an attacker to breach a Mac, Apple said.

Tuesday's update deals with nine vulnerabilities released as part of the Month of Apple Bugs in January and seven bugs disclosed in the Month of Kernel Bugs in November. In earlier fix releases, Apple fixed several flaws identified during the projects.

While several of the vulnerabilities repaired by Apple's updates were previously known, it doesn't appear that any attacks that exploited the flaws actually occurred.

In addition to the Mac OS X patch, Apple issued a second update on Tuesday to fix a security bug in iPhoto that could expose Mac users to a serious attack. An attacker could craft a malicious "photocast" which, when opened, could compromise a Mac, Apple said in its alert. The Photocasts feature allows people to share pictures in iPhoto.

Tuesday's two releases bring Apple's total patch count for the year to seven. Microsoft, meanwhile, on Tuesday skipped its monthly patch day. However, it released a dozen security bulletins with fixes for 20 vulnerabilities in February and four bulletins with fixes for 10 bugs in January.

The Apple patch can be downloaded and installed via the Software Update feature in Mac OS X, or from Apple Downloads.

See more CNET content tagged:
vulnerability, security hole, Apple Computer, Apple Macintosh, Apple iPhoto

686 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment
Welcome to the Real World Mac Fanatics
From the time it was born, the Apple Computer was destine for failure. Apple Developers promoted Apple as the greatest computer ever designed. Steve Jobs was once quoted as saying that one day Apple will be bigger than IBM.

They built their company with a self righteous attitude and propaganda style marketing. This style of engineering lead to the refusal to license Apple Computer out to other manufactures, and a refusal to allow compatibility with other operating systems. This eventually caught up with them when it brought Apple to the point of near bankruptcy. Apple owner?s today fight like hell to deny the fact that if Bill Gates had not bailed them out, there would be no Apple Computer. SEE ?MS to invest $150 million in Apple? here on CNET NEWS.Com

A real slap in the face is how Apple owners discovered that their cherish software from previous versions of Apple Operating systems will not run on OSX. I can run any program from any version of Windows including Windows 3.0 on Windows XP. The biggest laugh my friends and I had was when they used Apple Computers in the movies ?Hackers? and ?The Net?. It was hilarious. The truth is HACKERS DON?T USE APPLE!

If Apple Computer had continued developing their operating system on the original platform, Apple Computer would have become extinct. What saved Apple? Using the same platform of those that Apple despised????UNIX. Apple Computer owners used to brag ?No one can get into an Apple system?. The fact is no one wanted to. All the major sources of information were stored on UNIX or Windows NT based systems. And now that Apple has finally wised up and started to develop their operating system on UNIX, Apple Computer owners are still complaining, and refuse to accept the truth.

Yes Windows has had a variety of problems including security issues, but the advantages have always been enormous in choosing Windows. I have a Windows base system that runs 3 versions of Windows, OS2/Warp, and 2 versions of Linux. If you doubt this look up System Commander. Another advantage is if I don?t like the way IBM builds my Windows based system I can go to Dell, Compaq, Gateway, or build one from scratch. Could Apple Computer owners say that?

You?re into the real world now Apple Computer owners get used to it and move on. And by the way before you scream how Bill gates copied the Apple operating system, you better do a little study in history. Here is the facts> But although Apple was the first to successfully mass-produce a GUI, they were not its inventors, nor were they the first to market it.

The honor for producing the first working GUI goes to Doug Englebart ? at the time an employee of Stanford Research Institute. Englebart and colleagues created a program called the oNLine System in 1965-?68. This program used the first mouse, a windowing system, and hypertext, and was based on a description of a system called ?memex? proposed by Vannevar Bush in 1945.

<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://imrl.usu.edu/OSLO/technology_writing/004_003.htm" target="_newWindow">http://imrl.usu.edu/OSLO/technology_writing/004_003.htm</a>
Posted by the1kingarthur (47 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You beat me to it! Darn.
the1kingarthur,
Congrats on being the 1st to post on this. All the MSFT Bashing Apple User have continually stated how secure Apple is.(Macintosh) Well, I guess this blows that theory! 42 patches? For what? Macs are so secure they don't need patches. LOL.
Posted by bunnyman (21 comments )
Link Flag
so sad/
Who's the fanatic?
Posted by Jesus#2 (127 comments )
Link Flag
Blah... Blah... Blah...
I got to give it to you. You just accomplished to write a HUGE
one paragraph comment that says nothing !!!!

Well, it says the same old stuff that most Apple haters keep
repeting and repeting... and repeting... "Apple is bad... uhhh...
Apple has accomplished nothing.. uhhh... Windows is better ..
uhhhh... Apple has no viruses because nobody cares.. UHHH..."

But well... we would not be talking about this if Apple was not
relevant.. or would we?
Posted by Sabroson (88 comments )
Link Flag
Unbelievable FUD
No one should be impressed by your rambling. The sky is not
falling. There are still no real viruses for Mac OS X, no real-world
exploits that matter, and Apple is still a technology and design
leader.

Mac users already are in the real world; they exercise free will to
use a secure, easy to use operating system. The fact that Apple
provides patches for Mac OS X and other software only shows
you how much they care about their duty to their customers.

May I ask if you are a talkbot? It is pretty hard to believe your
post was real. In any case have a nice day.
Posted by lesfilip (496 comments )
Link Flag
Hilarious!
That was the best laugh I've had in years!

I don't think you missed a single piece of Microsoft spoon fed
FUD. Looks like you drank ALL the cool-aid.

I guess we Mac users will just have to be satisfied with the best
operating system in the world and the most secure operating
system in the world. Apple never breached, never beaten 30
years and counting...

Once again loved all the vitriol, way over the top, just the way we
like our Microsoft zealots. Posts like yours remove all doubt
about your objectivity, sanity and ignorance in one fell swoop.
Please post your ignorance more often we need a good laugh
now and again.
Posted by Clues (84 comments )
Link Flag
Seriously Messed Up
Tisk Tisk Tisk.

Your Darkness and Anger reveals a true nature.

Have you considered trying a Mac?

I've got Linux, I've got 2000, I've Got XP. I've even got Vista.

I like them all.

I code. I design. I produce high end animation, video, flash, web,
and print for Hollywood, musicians and publishing.

I prefer the Mac.

The Mac is FAR from Extinct.

Free you soul, my friend.

Open your mind.

A closed mind is a terrible burden to carry.
Posted by dansterpower (2511 comments )
Link Flag
RE: Welcome to the Real World Mac Fanatics
Since I am not an Apple fanatic I think it is fitting that I reply to
your diatribe. It seems a likely that in spite of your claims you
most likely have never seriously used anything but Windows. But
first, my credentials.

The first computer I worked on used Vacuum tubes. I have
worked on just about everything from mainframes to mini's to
PC's. In the process I have probably used more OS's than you
ever knew existed. And I can say no OS is bulletproof. Some are
just better than others.

Anyway, during all these years the Windows line of OS's, and I
even used them from just about their beginning until 2003, are
the most insecure OS's I have ever used. (Sorry to deflate your
bubble). And there are Windows programs that will not run
properly on the later versions of Windows. I know because I have
them mothballed.

As for your statement that software from previous versions will
not run on OS X, that just shows you do not know what you are
talking about. I can run almost any piece of software fro OS 9 on
the PowerMac I bought about 3 1/2 years ago. Which was the
first Apple computer I have ever owned.

Maybe "real hackers" don't use Macs, well, most of them don't
use Windows as their main OS either. If you want a secure
system you are going to need to run UNIX/Linux. Windows
security is the ultimate oxymoron. Oh, BTW, just how many fixes
did MS release this past patch Tuesday? And it wasn't because
they have no outstanding vulnerabilities either. I have to give
Apple credit for not waiting to release fixes once a month.

But I have to admit, you would probably make a good politician.
You seem to have mastered the art of half truths and mis-
statements. And your sense of history seems a bit distorted as
well. As far as I remember Apple never claimed to have invented
any of the things you say they did not invent. In most cases they
took something that was already there, improved it and made it
popular.

Anyway, I run two systems here in my office. A PowerMac G5
with OS X on it and an IBM with PC-BSD and Linux on it. All of
these OS's are head and shoulders above Windows when it
comes to security. And System Commander? Really, there are
better ways to accomplish the task. And yes, I have used SC in
the past. You seem to be stuck in a Windows world with no way
out. I feel sorry for you.
Posted by protagonistic (1868 comments )
Link Flag
Interesting
Two things....

if you have that much time to write all that surely you are a MS
zealot. Interesting that it seems you have not be labeled as such.

2nd,

why does everyone say MAC vs PC debate???? I see no debate,
Mac people are into Macs and Windows people are into Windows.

You can scream all you want about how great your platform of
choice is but is it really going to change anyones mind?
Posted by David Turner (114 comments )
Link Flag
I can run every program EXCEPT...
I can run every legacy program that I wish, but the only one I truly [i]want[/i] to run is 2001's "Anachronox".

...But I can't...

='(
Posted by Christopher Hall (1205 comments )
Link Flag
"HACKERS DON?T USE APPLE!" Really?
There sure seems to be a lot of them showing up at defcom. They aren't as popular as Thinkpads running Linux, but their numbers are growing.
Posted by rcrusoe (1305 comments )
Link Flag
See more comment replies
Welcome to the Real World Mac Fanatics
From the time it was born, the Apple Computer was destine for failure. Apple Developers promoted Apple as the greatest computer ever designed. Steve Jobs was once quoted as saying that one day Apple will be bigger than IBM.

They built their company with a self righteous attitude and propaganda style marketing. This style of engineering lead to the refusal to license Apple Computer out to other manufactures, and a refusal to allow compatibility with other operating systems. This eventually caught up with them when it brought Apple to the point of near bankruptcy. Apple owner?s today fight like hell to deny the fact that if Bill Gates had not bailed them out, there would be no Apple Computer. SEE ?MS to invest $150 million in Apple? here on CNET NEWS.Com

A real slap in the face is how Apple owners discovered that their cherish software from previous versions of Apple Operating systems will not run on OSX. I can run any program from any version of Windows including Windows 3.0 on Windows XP. The biggest laugh my friends and I had was when they used Apple Computers in the movies ?Hackers? and ?The Net?. It was hilarious. The truth is HACKERS DON?T USE APPLE!

If Apple Computer had continued developing their operating system on the original platform, Apple Computer would have become extinct. What saved Apple? Using the same platform of those that Apple despised????UNIX. Apple Computer owners used to brag ?No one can get into an Apple system?. The fact is no one wanted to. All the major sources of information were stored on UNIX or Windows NT based systems. And now that Apple has finally wised up and started to develop their operating system on UNIX, Apple Computer owners are still complaining, and refuse to accept the truth.

Yes Windows has had a variety of problems including security issues, but the advantages have always been enormous in choosing Windows. I have a Windows base system that runs 3 versions of Windows, OS2/Warp, and 2 versions of Linux. If you doubt this look up System Commander. Another advantage is if I don?t like the way IBM builds my Windows based system I can go to Dell, Compaq, Gateway, or build one from scratch. Could Apple Computer owners say that?

You?re into the real world now Apple Computer owners get used to it and move on. And by the way before you scream how Bill gates copied the Apple operating system, you better do a little study in history. Here is the facts&gt; But although Apple was the first to successfully mass-produce a GUI, they were not its inventors, nor were they the first to market it.

The honor for producing the first working GUI goes to Doug Englebart ? at the time an employee of Stanford Research Institute. Englebart and colleagues created a program called the oNLine System in 1965-?68. This program used the first mouse, a windowing system, and hypertext, and was based on a description of a system called ?memex? proposed by Vannevar Bush in 1945.

<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://imrl.usu.edu/OSLO/technology_writing/004_003.htm" target="_newWindow">http://imrl.usu.edu/OSLO/technology_writing/004_003.htm</a>
Posted by the1kingarthur (47 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You beat me to it! Darn.
the1kingarthur,
Congrats on being the 1st to post on this. All the MSFT Bashing Apple User have continually stated how secure Apple is.(Macintosh) Well, I guess this blows that theory! 42 patches? For what? Macs are so secure they don't need patches. LOL.
Posted by bunnyman (21 comments )
Link Flag
so sad/
Who's the fanatic?
Posted by Jesus#2 (127 comments )
Link Flag
Blah... Blah... Blah...
I got to give it to you. You just accomplished to write a HUGE
one paragraph comment that says nothing !!!!

Well, it says the same old stuff that most Apple haters keep
repeting and repeting... and repeting... "Apple is bad... uhhh...
Apple has accomplished nothing.. uhhh... Windows is better ..
uhhhh... Apple has no viruses because nobody cares.. UHHH..."

But well... we would not be talking about this if Apple was not
relevant.. or would we?
Posted by Sabroson (88 comments )
Link Flag
Unbelievable FUD
No one should be impressed by your rambling. The sky is not
falling. There are still no real viruses for Mac OS X, no real-world
exploits that matter, and Apple is still a technology and design
leader.

Mac users already are in the real world; they exercise free will to
use a secure, easy to use operating system. The fact that Apple
provides patches for Mac OS X and other software only shows
you how much they care about their duty to their customers.

May I ask if you are a talkbot? It is pretty hard to believe your
post was real. In any case have a nice day.
Posted by lesfilip (496 comments )
Link Flag
Hilarious!
That was the best laugh I've had in years!

I don't think you missed a single piece of Microsoft spoon fed
FUD. Looks like you drank ALL the cool-aid.

I guess we Mac users will just have to be satisfied with the best
operating system in the world and the most secure operating
system in the world. Apple never breached, never beaten 30
years and counting...

Once again loved all the vitriol, way over the top, just the way we
like our Microsoft zealots. Posts like yours remove all doubt
about your objectivity, sanity and ignorance in one fell swoop.
Please post your ignorance more often we need a good laugh
now and again.
Posted by Clues (84 comments )
Link Flag
Seriously Messed Up
Tisk Tisk Tisk.

Your Darkness and Anger reveals a true nature.

Have you considered trying a Mac?

I've got Linux, I've got 2000, I've Got XP. I've even got Vista.

I like them all.

I code. I design. I produce high end animation, video, flash, web,
and print for Hollywood, musicians and publishing.

I prefer the Mac.

The Mac is FAR from Extinct.

Free you soul, my friend.

Open your mind.

A closed mind is a terrible burden to carry.
Posted by dansterpower (2511 comments )
Link Flag
RE: Welcome to the Real World Mac Fanatics
Since I am not an Apple fanatic I think it is fitting that I reply to
your diatribe. It seems a likely that in spite of your claims you
most likely have never seriously used anything but Windows. But
first, my credentials.

The first computer I worked on used Vacuum tubes. I have
worked on just about everything from mainframes to mini's to
PC's. In the process I have probably used more OS's than you
ever knew existed. And I can say no OS is bulletproof. Some are
just better than others.

Anyway, during all these years the Windows line of OS's, and I
even used them from just about their beginning until 2003, are
the most insecure OS's I have ever used. (Sorry to deflate your
bubble). And there are Windows programs that will not run
properly on the later versions of Windows. I know because I have
them mothballed.

As for your statement that software from previous versions will
not run on OS X, that just shows you do not know what you are
talking about. I can run almost any piece of software fro OS 9 on
the PowerMac I bought about 3 1/2 years ago. Which was the
first Apple computer I have ever owned.

Maybe "real hackers" don't use Macs, well, most of them don't
use Windows as their main OS either. If you want a secure
system you are going to need to run UNIX/Linux. Windows
security is the ultimate oxymoron. Oh, BTW, just how many fixes
did MS release this past patch Tuesday? And it wasn't because
they have no outstanding vulnerabilities either. I have to give
Apple credit for not waiting to release fixes once a month.

But I have to admit, you would probably make a good politician.
You seem to have mastered the art of half truths and mis-
statements. And your sense of history seems a bit distorted as
well. As far as I remember Apple never claimed to have invented
any of the things you say they did not invent. In most cases they
took something that was already there, improved it and made it
popular.

Anyway, I run two systems here in my office. A PowerMac G5
with OS X on it and an IBM with PC-BSD and Linux on it. All of
these OS's are head and shoulders above Windows when it
comes to security. And System Commander? Really, there are
better ways to accomplish the task. And yes, I have used SC in
the past. You seem to be stuck in a Windows world with no way
out. I feel sorry for you.
Posted by protagonistic (1868 comments )
Link Flag
Interesting
Two things....

if you have that much time to write all that surely you are a MS
zealot. Interesting that it seems you have not be labeled as such.

2nd,

why does everyone say MAC vs PC debate???? I see no debate,
Mac people are into Macs and Windows people are into Windows.

You can scream all you want about how great your platform of
choice is but is it really going to change anyones mind?
Posted by David Turner (114 comments )
Link Flag
I can run every program EXCEPT...
I can run every legacy program that I wish, but the only one I truly [i]want[/i] to run is 2001's "Anachronox".

...But I can't...

='(
Posted by Christopher Hall (1205 comments )
Link Flag
"HACKERS DON?T USE APPLE!" Really?
There sure seems to be a lot of them showing up at defcom. They aren't as popular as Thinkpads running Linux, but their numbers are growing.
Posted by rcrusoe (1305 comments )
Link Flag
See more comment replies
Security Holes in Apple?
I must start a discussion on this one. I have read so many posts bashing MSFT about their security holes and seen so many posts about how "Secure" the Macintosh OS is. I said it before, there is no absolutely "secure" OS. Not Windows, not Apple's Macintosh, not Linux, etc. Vulnerablities can be found and exploited in ANY OS. So, all the MSFT bashers, read this one. Now, how "secure" is your OS?
Posted by bunnyman (21 comments )
Reply Link Flag
if...
if you can't see the difference... they you don't know dooky about
operating systems.
Posted by Jesus#2 (127 comments )
Link Flag
A heck of a lot more secure than Windows
You Windows fanboys should actually do some research before
you talk about OS X. Apple has been patching security holes in
OS X since it came out in 2001! We Mac users are quite aware of
the challenges Apple faces from potential attacks.

Doh!

No Apple computer has ever had a single spyware exploit
sucessfully annoy its user. No virus has sucessfully attacked a
Mac. Sure they're not absolutely secure. No OS hooked to the
Internet is invlunerable except for maybe the extra secure
version of Solaris? Obscurity, better built, a combination of both.
Who cares? Them's the facts. As long as we're careful and watch
for attacks which will inveitibly arrive some day, and we'll enjoy
our time without the burden Windows users deal with every day.

So, one guy says he can run programs for all versions of
Windows since 3.0? Hogwash. I've been a Windows user.
Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP and no doubt Windows
Vista will break old software and it won't work anymore. Games
especially. There are DirectX9 games that don't run in Vista! Go
figure.

OS X could run OS9 apps just fine. So dude, you were wrong.
And guess what? It can't any more. But a Mac can run all
Windows versions since 3.0 to Vista, OS/2. Solaris, Linux, and a
bunch of others. How many of those can be run on a PC now? All
at the same time? All of 'em? Good for you, but it can't run OS X.
Macs win.

We Mac users are plenty savvy about the world. Just because you
have never bothered to learn much about Macs means nothing.

As for who invented the GUI, there may have been a GUI and
mouse in the 60s (there was) but the GUI that Apple borrowed
from came from Xerox PARC. Ever hear about the conversation
between Bill Gates and Steve Jobs on the topic. Gates compared
it to breaking into someone's home to steal, and ends up saying
something like, "Imagine getting in there and finding that
someone beat you to the TV set."

Remember GEM? I didn't think so. Remember Amiga? No? Yes?
Fine. NeXT created the first really sophisticated computer that
was way ahead of the competition. And NeXT raided Apple and
took them over. Jobs lead the charge. And that's why Macs are
so good now. It has little to do with the Apple geneolgoy. It's the
legacy of NeXT that we inherit now.
Posted by ewelch (767 comments )
Link Flag
All software has security holes...
That's the nature of the beast. It's not a
matter of having no security holes, it's a
matter of risk (probability of event * cost of
event), a mitigating that risk. Most of the
issues addressed here are low risk, and
historically there's been very low risk
(security-wise) using Mac OS X.

Not that it makes much of a difference. Windows
has a comparably much higher risk associated
with using it, but they are willing to accept
the higher risk and spend considerable effort
attempting to mitigate those risks, because of a
perceived higher value to the product. I.e., the
risk is worth it. Note that Linux still has
higher risk than Mac OS X despite having fewer
and lesser severity issues by virtue of the fact
that it's a popular target for crackers --
namely because it runs many servers containing
sensitive information.

The only wrinkle is that people's perceptions of
value and risk are rarely very objective. Many
people use don't use an software that best
addresses their needs, and many people are
blissfully unaware of the risks associated with
their choices in software and hardware. The
result is a net loss in productivity and
increased costs.
Posted by FellowConspirator (397 comments )
Link Flag
Security Holes in Apple?
I must start a discussion on this one. I have read so many posts bashing MSFT about their security holes and seen so many posts about how "Secure" the Macintosh OS is. I said it before, there is no absolutely "secure" OS. Not Windows, not Apple's Macintosh, not Linux, etc. Vulnerablities can be found and exploited in ANY OS. So, all the MSFT bashers, read this one. Now, how "secure" is your OS?
Posted by bunnyman (21 comments )
Reply Link Flag
if...
if you can't see the difference... they you don't know dooky about
operating systems.
Posted by Jesus#2 (127 comments )
Link Flag
A heck of a lot more secure than Windows
You Windows fanboys should actually do some research before
you talk about OS X. Apple has been patching security holes in
OS X since it came out in 2001! We Mac users are quite aware of
the challenges Apple faces from potential attacks.

Doh!

No Apple computer has ever had a single spyware exploit
sucessfully annoy its user. No virus has sucessfully attacked a
Mac. Sure they're not absolutely secure. No OS hooked to the
Internet is invlunerable except for maybe the extra secure
version of Solaris? Obscurity, better built, a combination of both.
Who cares? Them's the facts. As long as we're careful and watch
for attacks which will inveitibly arrive some day, and we'll enjoy
our time without the burden Windows users deal with every day.

So, one guy says he can run programs for all versions of
Windows since 3.0? Hogwash. I've been a Windows user.
Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP and no doubt Windows
Vista will break old software and it won't work anymore. Games
especially. There are DirectX9 games that don't run in Vista! Go
figure.

OS X could run OS9 apps just fine. So dude, you were wrong.
And guess what? It can't any more. But a Mac can run all
Windows versions since 3.0 to Vista, OS/2. Solaris, Linux, and a
bunch of others. How many of those can be run on a PC now? All
at the same time? All of 'em? Good for you, but it can't run OS X.
Macs win.

We Mac users are plenty savvy about the world. Just because you
have never bothered to learn much about Macs means nothing.

As for who invented the GUI, there may have been a GUI and
mouse in the 60s (there was) but the GUI that Apple borrowed
from came from Xerox PARC. Ever hear about the conversation
between Bill Gates and Steve Jobs on the topic. Gates compared
it to breaking into someone's home to steal, and ends up saying
something like, "Imagine getting in there and finding that
someone beat you to the TV set."

Remember GEM? I didn't think so. Remember Amiga? No? Yes?
Fine. NeXT created the first really sophisticated computer that
was way ahead of the competition. And NeXT raided Apple and
took them over. Jobs lead the charge. And that's why Macs are
so good now. It has little to do with the Apple geneolgoy. It's the
legacy of NeXT that we inherit now.
Posted by ewelch (767 comments )
Link Flag
All software has security holes...
That's the nature of the beast. It's not a
matter of having no security holes, it's a
matter of risk (probability of event * cost of
event), a mitigating that risk. Most of the
issues addressed here are low risk, and
historically there's been very low risk
(security-wise) using Mac OS X.

Not that it makes much of a difference. Windows
has a comparably much higher risk associated
with using it, but they are willing to accept
the higher risk and spend considerable effort
attempting to mitigate those risks, because of a
perceived higher value to the product. I.e., the
risk is worth it. Note that Linux still has
higher risk than Mac OS X despite having fewer
and lesser severity issues by virtue of the fact
that it's a popular target for crackers --
namely because it runs many servers containing
sensitive information.

The only wrinkle is that people's perceptions of
value and risk are rarely very objective. Many
people use don't use an software that best
addresses their needs, and many people are
blissfully unaware of the risks associated with
their choices in software and hardware. The
result is a net loss in productivity and
increased costs.
Posted by FellowConspirator (397 comments )
Link Flag
Grow up.
I love reading comments that go along the lines of "TOLD YOU
SO MACBOYS YOUR OS ISN'T SECURE EITHER HAHAHAHAH!!!1!!
11!!!!11" Please. If your intention is to bag out fanboys by
resorting to this, you're no better than they are. Grow up.

I could also induge myself and ask you to point out the
frequency of Windows problems compared to Mac, Linux, BSD,
Kitchen Sink (hint: it's not all about market share), but then I
guess I'd be a fanboy wouldn't I? It says something about people
who lurk in the shadows desperately waiting for something
other than Windows to slip so they can feel better about their
own.

And at least Apple are actively fixing their security problems
compared to their Redmond counterparts (<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://" target="_newWindow">http://</a>
news.cbsi.com/Microsoft+takes+a+Patch+Tuesday+break/
2100-1002_3-6165647.html)
Posted by rubenerd (75 comments )
Reply Link Flag
ah come on...
You are seriously kidding yourself if you don't think market share has a big thing to do with it.

Falls into 2 categories...
1. more market share means more stupid people using the product who will do more stupid things.

2. less market share means less of a target for attack... less stupid users and less of a reason to bother.

I have two Mac's... an old G4 and an iMac. I also have several PC's running XP, Vista, Linspire and Ubuntu, so it's not like I am particularly biased in the matter. It just cracks me up though how the majority of Mac users act a lot like religious zealots.
Posted by SeizeCTRL (1333 comments )
Link Flag
Ya, Grow Up
"I could also induge myself and ask you to point out the frequency of Windows problems compared to Mac, Linux, BSD, Kitchen Sink (hint: it's not all about market share)"

Ya, if Windows is so problematic, why does majority of business users use windows at their office (with a big investment)? Are all business users dumb? Not to mention home users. Hmm..
Posted by Gunady (191 comments )
Link Flag
The facts
Go to SANS' website and look at SANS@Risk which documents vulnerabilities across all platforms and you will see that rarely a week goes by that something isn't identifed for EVERY major platform.

I will grant you that I am impatient with MS's response to some recent flaws, but at least 2 of the items patched by Apple in this group were reported over 2 months ago.
Posted by adlyb1 (123 comments )
Link Flag
Grow up.
I love reading comments that go along the lines of "TOLD YOU
SO MACBOYS YOUR OS ISN'T SECURE EITHER HAHAHAHAH!!!1!!
11!!!!11" Please. If your intention is to bag out fanboys by
resorting to this, you're no better than they are. Grow up.

I could also induge myself and ask you to point out the
frequency of Windows problems compared to Mac, Linux, BSD,
Kitchen Sink (hint: it's not all about market share), but then I
guess I'd be a fanboy wouldn't I? It says something about people
who lurk in the shadows desperately waiting for something
other than Windows to slip so they can feel better about their
own.

And at least Apple are actively fixing their security problems
compared to their Redmond counterparts (<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://" target="_newWindow">http://</a>
news.cbsi.com/Microsoft+takes+a+Patch+Tuesday+break/
2100-1002_3-6165647.html)
Posted by rubenerd (75 comments )
Reply Link Flag
ah come on...
You are seriously kidding yourself if you don't think market share has a big thing to do with it.

Falls into 2 categories...
1. more market share means more stupid people using the product who will do more stupid things.

2. less market share means less of a target for attack... less stupid users and less of a reason to bother.

I have two Mac's... an old G4 and an iMac. I also have several PC's running XP, Vista, Linspire and Ubuntu, so it's not like I am particularly biased in the matter. It just cracks me up though how the majority of Mac users act a lot like religious zealots.
Posted by SeizeCTRL (1333 comments )
Link Flag
Ya, Grow Up
"I could also induge myself and ask you to point out the frequency of Windows problems compared to Mac, Linux, BSD, Kitchen Sink (hint: it's not all about market share)"

Ya, if Windows is so problematic, why does majority of business users use windows at their office (with a big investment)? Are all business users dumb? Not to mention home users. Hmm..
Posted by Gunady (191 comments )
Link Flag
The facts
Go to SANS' website and look at SANS@Risk which documents vulnerabilities across all platforms and you will see that rarely a week goes by that something isn't identifed for EVERY major platform.

I will grant you that I am impatient with MS's response to some recent flaws, but at least 2 of the items patched by Apple in this group were reported over 2 months ago.
Posted by adlyb1 (123 comments )
Link Flag
So What's the point?
I've used a whole bunch of operating systems: Solaris, Windows
(through XP Pro), All flavors of MacOS, OS2, Linux, SGI, to name
a few.

They all fall in two categories: UNIX and not-UNIX. Apple has
very polished interface over UNIX. Windows has a very polished
interface over DOS (I know I'm asking for it here).

Both express an OPINION about software programming.
Sometimes I agree, sometimes I don't. I don't understand why
Apple users are stereotyped as weird zealots: It's just a 5%
market-share OS alternative.
Posted by GiveMeAUserNamePlease (8 comments )
Reply Link Flag
So What's the point?
I've used a whole bunch of operating systems: Solaris, Windows
(through XP Pro), All flavors of MacOS, OS2, Linux, SGI, to name
a few.

They all fall in two categories: UNIX and not-UNIX. Apple has
very polished interface over UNIX. Windows has a very polished
interface over DOS (I know I'm asking for it here).

Both express an OPINION about software programming.
Sometimes I agree, sometimes I don't. I don't understand why
Apple users are stereotyped as weird zealots: It's just a 5%
market-share OS alternative.
Posted by GiveMeAUserNamePlease (8 comments )
Reply Link Flag
10.3.9 Patch wise guy, + MS still has zero day flaws
First of all, it's a patch for Panther, pretty much a legacy patch to keep the legacy 10.3 line up to date with the 10.4 security updates, so to say that it is in *addition* to the other security updates they've done in the last few months isn't entirely accurate. Besides that, it's 10.3 - when I saw the article I wondered if you were talking about 10.4.9 that came out today too. So I checked and lo and behold, it's just for 10.3.

Besides that, MS didn't have anything for patch Tuesday, but guess what, they still have at least 5 outstanding zero day vulnerabilities:
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/09/1317240" target="_newWindow">http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/09/1317240</a>

Are you just trying to stir the pot or did you have some real security news about Apple or MS?
Posted by jeromatron (103 comments )
Reply Link Flag
actually its both 10.3.x and 10.4.x
I wondered because I had noticed a link about a security update
and a 10.4.9 update but only the 10.4.9 update came up. I
guess they put it all in one installer since the security fixes
probably aren't that big. I hope there was something else other
than security fixes in that update, but I haven't noticed anything
yet.

One big thing about the mac vs PC debate also, and I'm not
trying to sound like a dumb western xenophobe or anything, but
doesn't it always seem like the worst virus/cracks/spyware come
from former soviet/eastern bloc countries, where Apple's
marketshare is far lower than in the west? I know thats a
generalization, but I do remember back in the late 80s and early
90s my mom worked at a university computer services office,
and they had a russian there as part of a new exchange
program. Even though this was after the berlin wall and such, he
said that while he thought macs were interesting he would have
to buy a PC because Macs were on the no-export list (I honestly
don't recall why) to Warsaw Pact countries. That was his
explanation anyway, he might have just been trying to diffuse
my militant mac evangelism and change the subject about his PC
purchase ;)

Anyway point being that perhaps it is that Macs are not just
obscure, but non-existent in the places most likely to breed
virulent electronic contagion. I know when I was in China my
mac got a lot of comment from natives to the effect of "your
computer is very beautiful.", and then from the handful who
were computer-saavy (like my roommate the Comp. Sci major) "I
wish I could afford an Apple, but they are too expensive" I found
that funny because I saw some great deals on Apple hardware
over there, but they were just deals to me because of the
currency valuation, in terms of Yuan Apple's price margin,
particularly in laptops, was often 2x that of comparably
equipped PCs. I found it odd because they make them in China,
one would think they would get a deal because of low shipping
costs, but I guess not. Probably 90% of their Mac customers are
Japanese, so they charge prices that, just as they do to me, look
like a good deal to Japanese consumers.

Wild tangent there ;)
Posted by DaiMac (62 comments )
Link Flag
10.3.9 Patch wise guy, + MS still has zero day flaws
First of all, it's a patch for Panther, pretty much a legacy patch to keep the legacy 10.3 line up to date with the 10.4 security updates, so to say that it is in *addition* to the other security updates they've done in the last few months isn't entirely accurate. Besides that, it's 10.3 - when I saw the article I wondered if you were talking about 10.4.9 that came out today too. So I checked and lo and behold, it's just for 10.3.

Besides that, MS didn't have anything for patch Tuesday, but guess what, they still have at least 5 outstanding zero day vulnerabilities:
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/09/1317240" target="_newWindow">http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/09/1317240</a>

Are you just trying to stir the pot or did you have some real security news about Apple or MS?
Posted by jeromatron (103 comments )
Reply Link Flag
actually its both 10.3.x and 10.4.x
I wondered because I had noticed a link about a security update
and a 10.4.9 update but only the 10.4.9 update came up. I
guess they put it all in one installer since the security fixes
probably aren't that big. I hope there was something else other
than security fixes in that update, but I haven't noticed anything
yet.

One big thing about the mac vs PC debate also, and I'm not
trying to sound like a dumb western xenophobe or anything, but
doesn't it always seem like the worst virus/cracks/spyware come
from former soviet/eastern bloc countries, where Apple's
marketshare is far lower than in the west? I know thats a
generalization, but I do remember back in the late 80s and early
90s my mom worked at a university computer services office,
and they had a russian there as part of a new exchange
program. Even though this was after the berlin wall and such, he
said that while he thought macs were interesting he would have
to buy a PC because Macs were on the no-export list (I honestly
don't recall why) to Warsaw Pact countries. That was his
explanation anyway, he might have just been trying to diffuse
my militant mac evangelism and change the subject about his PC
purchase ;)

Anyway point being that perhaps it is that Macs are not just
obscure, but non-existent in the places most likely to breed
virulent electronic contagion. I know when I was in China my
mac got a lot of comment from natives to the effect of "your
computer is very beautiful.", and then from the handful who
were computer-saavy (like my roommate the Comp. Sci major) "I
wish I could afford an Apple, but they are too expensive" I found
that funny because I saw some great deals on Apple hardware
over there, but they were just deals to me because of the
currency valuation, in terms of Yuan Apple's price margin,
particularly in laptops, was often 2x that of comparably
equipped PCs. I found it odd because they make them in China,
one would think they would get a deal because of low shipping
costs, but I guess not. Probably 90% of their Mac customers are
Japanese, so they charge prices that, just as they do to me, look
like a good deal to Japanese consumers.

Wild tangent there ;)
Posted by DaiMac (62 comments )
Link Flag
Fixes 45, Exploits 00
It seems like the same arguments every time Apple releases an
update.

If they DON'T patch any security holes, then they're called lazy
about security.

If they DO patch security holes, then they're called insecure.
Even though none of the patched holes have yet been exploited.

Kobiashi Maru
Posted by open-mind (1027 comments )
Reply Link Flag
RE: Fixes 45, Exploits 00
You Star Trek fanboy... :-)
Posted by protagonistic (1868 comments )
Link Flag
Yet to be exploited?
So it's only a security patch if a potential hole has actually been exploit?

I guess that means they are optional?
Posted by webdev511 (254 comments )
Link Flag
Fixes 45, Exploits 00
It seems like the same arguments every time Apple releases an
update.

If they DON'T patch any security holes, then they're called lazy
about security.

If they DO patch security holes, then they're called insecure.
Even though none of the patched holes have yet been exploited.

Kobiashi Maru
Posted by open-mind (1027 comments )
Reply Link Flag
RE: Fixes 45, Exploits 00
You Star Trek fanboy... :-)
Posted by protagonistic (1868 comments )
Link Flag
Yet to be exploited?
So it's only a security patch if a potential hole has actually been exploit?

I guess that means they are optional?
Posted by webdev511 (254 comments )
Link Flag
Peanuts..
45 Mac security flaws most of which can only be exploited locally
compared to 114,000+ MS flaws many of which can be exploited
remotely..?? No wonder the MS crowd gets excited every time
there's a Mac patch..
Posted by imacpwr (456 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Please provide your evidence
There were 45 Mac flaws addressed in the latest batch of updates. You state that there are 114,000+ flaws that were supposed to be addressed on Tuesday? Would you please list them in order? I would like to check into your facts before I can accept them. Please list all 114,000+.

I can make up numbers just as easily, but if you can list all 114,000+, I'll gladly back you up on this one.
Posted by Vegaman_Dan (6683 comments )
Link Flag
Apples to Oranges
I don't have a problem with showing the difference, but compare the same thing.

You show the number of bugs for one or two Apple patches and then compare it to the 'possible' lifetime count for Windows bugs across multiple versions.
Posted by adlyb1 (123 comments )
Link Flag
Peanuts..
45 Mac security flaws most of which can only be exploited locally
compared to 114,000+ MS flaws many of which can be exploited
remotely..?? No wonder the MS crowd gets excited every time
there's a Mac patch..
Posted by imacpwr (456 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Please provide your evidence
There were 45 Mac flaws addressed in the latest batch of updates. You state that there are 114,000+ flaws that were supposed to be addressed on Tuesday? Would you please list them in order? I would like to check into your facts before I can accept them. Please list all 114,000+.

I can make up numbers just as easily, but if you can list all 114,000+, I'll gladly back you up on this one.
Posted by Vegaman_Dan (6683 comments )
Link Flag
Apples to Oranges
I don't have a problem with showing the difference, but compare the same thing.

You show the number of bugs for one or two Apple patches and then compare it to the 'possible' lifetime count for Windows bugs across multiple versions.
Posted by adlyb1 (123 comments )
Link Flag
Lucky so few people use MACs or someone might bother writing an exploit...
Lucky so few people use MACs or someone might bother writing an exploit...
Posted by richto (895 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Are you so stupid you still believe that?
It's been proven wrong again and again. It's NOT marketshare
related.
Posted by gm2net (25 comments )
Link Flag
Not that many people drive Ferraris either...
so your point?
Posted by Musica360.com (106 comments )
Link Flag
For the last time!
For the last time: MAC means Media Access Control! Why is it that
Windows cronies can't get that right? Normally capitalization
wouldn't matter. But MAC is a computing term.
Posted by Kevin Cotham (17 comments )
Link Flag
It's a common misconception
While market share is much lower for Apple products over others in the industry, it doesn't necessarily mean that they are being ignored. Some day when they take over as the number one OS out there, they will likely get targeted.

Give them time. They haven't taken over the world yet. They still have to take on Windows, Linux, Ubuntu, and others. Give them enough time to take over and we can see how they handle the pressure. I'm sure they will do fine.
Posted by Vegaman_Dan (6683 comments )
Link Flag
It's a common misconception
While market share is much lower for Apple products over others in the industry, it doesn't necessarily mean that they are being ignored. Some day when they take over as the number one OS out there, they will likely get targeted.

Give them time. They haven't taken over the world yet. They still have to take on Windows, Linux, Ubuntu, and others. Give them enough time to take over and we can see how they handle the pressure. I'm sure they will do fine.
Posted by Vegaman_Dan (6683 comments )
Link Flag
That's right!
BTW, they have tried writing exploits for the ten million Macs out
there, they just haven't succeeded.
Posted by GGGlen (491 comments )
Link Flag
Lucky so few people use MACs or someone might bother writing an exploit...
Lucky so few people use MACs or someone might bother writing an exploit...
Posted by richto (895 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Are you so stupid you still believe that?
It's been proven wrong again and again. It's NOT marketshare
related.
Posted by gm2net (25 comments )
Link Flag
Not that many people drive Ferraris either...
so your point?
Posted by Musica360.com (106 comments )
Link Flag
For the last time!
For the last time: MAC means Media Access Control! Why is it that
Windows cronies can't get that right? Normally capitalization
wouldn't matter. But MAC is a computing term.
Posted by Kevin Cotham (17 comments )
Link Flag
It's a common misconception
While market share is much lower for Apple products over others in the industry, it doesn't necessarily mean that they are being ignored. Some day when they take over as the number one OS out there, they will likely get targeted.

Give them time. They haven't taken over the world yet. They still have to take on Windows, Linux, Ubuntu, and others. Give them enough time to take over and we can see how they handle the pressure. I'm sure they will do fine.
Posted by Vegaman_Dan (6683 comments )
Link Flag
It's a common misconception
While market share is much lower for Apple products over others in the industry, it doesn't necessarily mean that they are being ignored. Some day when they take over as the number one OS out there, they will likely get targeted.

Give them time. They haven't taken over the world yet. They still have to take on Windows, Linux, Ubuntu, and others. Give them enough time to take over and we can see how they handle the pressure. I'm sure they will do fine.
Posted by Vegaman_Dan (6683 comments )
Link Flag
That's right!
BTW, they have tried writing exploits for the ten million Macs out
there, they just haven't succeeded.
Posted by GGGlen (491 comments )
Link Flag
"The truth is HACKERS DON?T USE APPLE!"
I'm not going to bother with the rest of that (you know it's wrong,
as well as I do), but I'm laughing at this statement 'The truth is
HACKERS DON?T USE APPLE!'...
Posted by gm2net (25 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Neither does anyone else....
1.2% global market share. Looks like no one else does either.
Posted by richto (895 comments )
Link Flag
Neither does anyone else....
1.2% global market share. Looks like no one else does either.
Posted by richto (895 comments )
Link Flag
RE: "The truth is HACKERS DON?T USE APPLE!"
Does this come under the heading of "an Inconvenient Truth"? If
you discount the script kiddies most of them don't use Windows
either. They just abuse Windows. Why, you might ask? because it is
just so darn easy to do.
Posted by protagonistic (1868 comments )
Link Flag
"The truth is HACKERS DON?T USE APPLE!"
I'm not going to bother with the rest of that (you know it's wrong,
as well as I do), but I'm laughing at this statement 'The truth is
HACKERS DON?T USE APPLE!'...
Posted by gm2net (25 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Neither does anyone else....
1.2% global market share. Looks like no one else does either.
Posted by richto (895 comments )
Link Flag
Neither does anyone else....
1.2% global market share. Looks like no one else does either.
Posted by richto (895 comments )
Link Flag
RE: "The truth is HACKERS DON?T USE APPLE!"
Does this come under the heading of "an Inconvenient Truth"? If
you discount the script kiddies most of them don't use Windows
either. They just abuse Windows. Why, you might ask? because it is
just so darn easy to do.
Posted by protagonistic (1868 comments )
Link Flag
45 patched is better than what MS does - none patched, 45 zerodays...
Why is Apple fixing the security holes being spun to be a bad thing
here?
Posted by gm2net (25 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Because of fanboys
Mac Fanboys have chronically been some of the most annoying on the net. They have always railed how secure their system is, when in fact ALL systems have vulnerabilities. And, for the record, Apple doesn't have the best reputation in the industry for being timely with their patches, do a little research on what the bug finders/reporters say about their experience with Apple.

All that being said, yes, security patches are a good thing, regardless of your OS.
Posted by bemenaker (438 comments )
Link Flag
It isn't the news story, it's just OS Holy Wars
The actual news about the patches has nothing to do with the arguments here. People just want to trot out their same old tired schtick.

Windows is Evil.
Mac is Godly.

Windows is #1.
Mac is #1.

Nobody uses a Mac.
Everybody uses a Mac.

There's really no point in any of it. You could say the sky was falling and both sides would argue that it's because God didn't patch his OS in time.

I look at it in that all the OS's have good and bad points. If you only focus on the bad aspects, you'll never get anywhere. Educate yourself on what is available, evaluate the options, make an informed decision, and move on. There is no bad choice between them. Both work for what they are meant for. Ignore the OS Holy wars and their fan/soldiers and you'll be fine.
Posted by Vegaman_Dan (6683 comments )
Link Flag
45 patched is better than what MS does - none patched, 45 zerodays...
Why is Apple fixing the security holes being spun to be a bad thing
here?
Posted by gm2net (25 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Because of fanboys
Mac Fanboys have chronically been some of the most annoying on the net. They have always railed how secure their system is, when in fact ALL systems have vulnerabilities. And, for the record, Apple doesn't have the best reputation in the industry for being timely with their patches, do a little research on what the bug finders/reporters say about their experience with Apple.

All that being said, yes, security patches are a good thing, regardless of your OS.
Posted by bemenaker (438 comments )
Link Flag
It isn't the news story, it's just OS Holy Wars
The actual news about the patches has nothing to do with the arguments here. People just want to trot out their same old tired schtick.

Windows is Evil.
Mac is Godly.

Windows is #1.
Mac is #1.

Nobody uses a Mac.
Everybody uses a Mac.

There's really no point in any of it. You could say the sky was falling and both sides would argue that it's because God didn't patch his OS in time.

I look at it in that all the OS's have good and bad points. If you only focus on the bad aspects, you'll never get anywhere. Educate yourself on what is available, evaluate the options, make an informed decision, and move on. There is no bad choice between them. Both work for what they are meant for. Ignore the OS Holy wars and their fan/soldiers and you'll be fine.
Posted by Vegaman_Dan (6683 comments )
Link Flag
Thank you all for proving my point
After reading ALL the negative posts, I want to seriously thank each and every one of you for proving what I said was true. Thank you.

No facts
No reference points
Ignorance of history
Posted by the1kingarthur (47 comments )
Reply Link Flag
But you are no better! (NT)
NT
Posted by Siegfried Schtauffen (269 comments )
Link Flag
Oh Dear
You are mistaking opinion for fact.

Your post is mostly opinion and a tiny bit of fact that anybody could google up in about 10 seconds.

You're a fanboy and you know it.
Posted by macjimlin (6 comments )
Link Flag
RE: Thank you all for proving my point
Ignorance really must be bliss. Educate yourself on the alternatives
available and the risks involved. And most importantly, open your
mind. You might be surprised.
Posted by protagonistic (1868 comments )
Link Flag
Thank you all for proving my point
After reading ALL the negative posts, I want to seriously thank each and every one of you for proving what I said was true. Thank you.

No facts
No reference points
Ignorance of history
Posted by the1kingarthur (47 comments )
Reply Link Flag
But you are no better! (NT)
NT
Posted by Siegfried Schtauffen (269 comments )
Link Flag
Oh Dear
You are mistaking opinion for fact.

Your post is mostly opinion and a tiny bit of fact that anybody could google up in about 10 seconds.

You're a fanboy and you know it.
Posted by macjimlin (6 comments )
Link Flag
RE: Thank you all for proving my point
Ignorance really must be bliss. Educate yourself on the alternatives
available and the risks involved. And most importantly, open your
mind. You might be surprised.
Posted by protagonistic (1868 comments )
Link Flag
If this was Windows...
...there would be several worms/viruses within a week to catch out the people who don't allow auto-patching. But it is a for a computer that has under 5% world market share so who cares?

Market share myth you say? It is not a myth, it is a fact. The proof is in the numbers that Apple fanboys love to repeat. Thousands of Windows viruses, and even a few successful ones. But few care to target Apple. It just isn't worth the bother, even if 45 security holes are patched in a month.
Posted by Siegfried Schtauffen (269 comments )
Reply Link Flag
That's just stupid.
The fact is that there were viruses for Mac OS 9 and earlier
versions of the the Mac OS, each of which had fewer users than
OS X. There are still none for OS X because there is a huge
difference between a vulnerability and an exploit.

A vulnerability indicates that an exploit might be possible. It
says nothing about the degree of difficulty. To get an idea of the
difficulty involved in creating exploits for an OS, you need to
look at the number of exploits. Windows has over 100,000
exploits, indicating that a Windows vulnerability is far easier to
exploit than an OS X vulnerability.
Posted by Macsaresafer (802 comments )
Link Flag
If this was Windows...
...there would be several worms/viruses within a week to catch out the people who don't allow auto-patching. But it is a for a computer that has under 5% world market share so who cares?

Market share myth you say? It is not a myth, it is a fact. The proof is in the numbers that Apple fanboys love to repeat. Thousands of Windows viruses, and even a few successful ones. But few care to target Apple. It just isn't worth the bother, even if 45 security holes are patched in a month.
Posted by Siegfried Schtauffen (269 comments )
Reply Link Flag
That's just stupid.
The fact is that there were viruses for Mac OS 9 and earlier
versions of the the Mac OS, each of which had fewer users than
OS X. There are still none for OS X because there is a huge
difference between a vulnerability and an exploit.

A vulnerability indicates that an exploit might be possible. It
says nothing about the degree of difficulty. To get an idea of the
difficulty involved in creating exploits for an OS, you need to
look at the number of exploits. Windows has over 100,000
exploits, indicating that a Windows vulnerability is far easier to
exploit than an OS X vulnerability.
Posted by Macsaresafer (802 comments )
Link Flag
All this bickering, but does it really matter?
Apple plugged 45 security holes. As in closed them. Isn't the world computing environment a better place for it, in the long run?
Posted by Christopher Hall (1205 comments )
Reply Link Flag
The most intelligent post here
Kudos!!!
Posted by bemenaker (438 comments )
Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.