Kenneth R. van Wyk wrote: > Interesting article, I suppose, but I'm not convinced of its conclusion: > > http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1915923,00.asp > > The article claims that Apple's use of Intel chips will result in more > software exploits because, "'Attackers have been focused on the [Intel] x86 > for over a decade. Macintosh will have a lot more exposure than when it was > on PowerPC,' said Oliver Friedrichs, a senior manager at Symantec Corp. > Security Response." > ... > Am I missing something here? > Security by obscurity. It is lame, but for fending off bulk infections, it works well. I agree with the article that Macs will get more exposure and attack now.
However, Mac OS X (and Linux and *BSD) still hold the major advantage over Windows that it is uncommon to run the mail client as root/administrator, so the infection rate will remain much lower than on Windows. Only when attackers have an actual exploit for the Mac/*NIX can they 0wn the machine. On Windows, they just need a good line and a user dumb enough to click on the attachment. Crispin -- Crispin Cowan, Ph.D. http://crispincowan.com/~crispin/ Director of Software Engineering, Novell http://novell.com Olympic Games: The Bi-Annual Festival of Corruption _______________________________________________ Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L@securecoding.org List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php
