Why are you still talking? Why are you topposting? Why does it matter to the world at all what your one random friend does? And the standard: What does this have to do with OpenBSD?
On 9/17/07, The One <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Apple will, undoubtedly, implement some of these basic techniques for > "Leopard". > > But market share has completely NOTHING to do with "OS X"'s security. > > Apple always has and will be 100 % when it comes to their software for > OS X and OS X itself. > > Only time will tell. "Leopard"'s release will solve every Mac user's > concerns and PC fanboys idiocy! > > Even my friend, who uses a PC, is considering the purchase of a Mac. I > told him to wait until October, which is very near, to buy one. That > way he will not have to pay extra for "Leopard"! ;) > > On 9/5/07, Nick Shank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The One wrote: > > > But how would it spread? There have been 2 OS X viruses, yet they > > > spread terribly. > > > > > > And Apple has already fixed the issue. :) > > > > > > -The One > > > > > > On 9/2/07, Kennith Mann III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >> On 9/1/07, The One <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > > >>> On 3/23/07 2:53 AM, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > >>> > > >>>>> Symantec have been trying to demonise OS X for a long while. > > >>>>> > > >>>> And it is going to work soon. > > >>>> > > >>>> Because OS X has no Propolice-like compiler stack protection, nor > > >>>> anything like W^X which makes parts of the address space > > >>>> non-executable, nor anything like address space randomization which > > >>>> makes certain attacks very difficult, especially with the previous two > > >>>> techniques. > > >>>> > > >>>> So when they have a bug, it is exploitable just like bugs are on any > > >>>> other powerpc or i386 machine running some other operating system. > > >>>> > > >>>> These days even operating systems like Vista have the above 3 security > > >>>> technologies. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>> First of all, "bugs" and "viruses" are two different things. > > >>> > > >>> Second, OS X does not need third-party "protection". All of the > > >>> protection is built into the OS! > > >>> > > >>> If Vista is so secure, then why does one need to download > > >>> "virus/spyware protection" when it can simply be built into the OS? > > >>> > > >>> -The One > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >> I don't have "virus/spyware protection" and I've been fine before with > > >> Vista and XP. > > >> > > >> Perhaps you mean to say "why do users who install things they > > >> shouldn't need virus/spyware protection?" which I would argue that the > > >> OS doesn't matter. I could write a script that asks for rootly > > >> permission in OS X and start nuking stuff with the promise of prettier > > >> icons for their desktop or IM client. > > >> > > >> If you were to argue for worms and things of the like, then I would > > >> agree. The only virus I will probably ever catch is some zero-day that > > >> hits the world and gets in my work network (won't happen at my house > > >> -- I live alone....) > > >> > > > > > > > > Here we hit the heart of the issue. The virus and spyware detection > > software for Windows isn't really to protect to the OS. It's to protect > > the user from themselves.
