or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › MAC Defender variant quickly thwarts Apple's Mac OS X security update
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

MAC Defender variant quickly thwarts Apple's Mac OS X security update - Page 2

post #41 of 120
What about requiring code signing? That would put the onus on the companies to ensure that they have a valid signature for apps. It doesn't have to be Apple that does the signing, it could be Verisign too (for non-App Store apps). If an app is found to be bad, the certificate can be revoked and updated immediately, perhaps using a similar process to the signature updates Apple using now. That would prevent the app from launching (no valid signature) and be a big embarrassment to the company that issued the certificate. Apple seem to be pushing this direction in their developer documentation, so I wouldn't be surprised to find this a requirement going forward (10.7.x or 10.8)

In Mac OS X Server, applications can be identified by their code signature for the purposes of allowing them to run on a clients machine using managed preferences, so it is possible for the OS to block apps that are not signed.

For open source and other apps, the user (through some step that only technical people would know - command line or keychain assistant perhaps?) could grant a machine-based signature to an unsigned app (like a key to a building) to allow it to run on the machine.
post #42 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by enjourni View Post

Ha I just googled it, thank you lol!

Ok guys, you win

what a good sport. Im impressed.
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #43 of 120
I like what was said before/above....And at the risk of sounding like a clone, I'll let Apple's PHD's and engineers do the work for me, hence, I will only buy sw thru the Apple App Store from now on!

Best
post #44 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by stenorman2001 View Post

What about requiring code signing? That would put the onus on the companies to ensure that they have a valid signature for apps. It doesn't have to be Apple that does the signing, it could be Verisign too (for non-App Store apps). If an app is found to be bad, the certificate can be revoked and updated immediately, perhaps using a similar process to the signature updates Apple using now. That would prevent the app from launching (no valid signature) and be a big embarrassment to the company that issued the certificate. Apple seem to be pushing this direction in their developer documentation, so I wouldn't be surprised to find this a requirement going forward (10.7.x or 10.8)

In Mac OS X Server, applications can be identified by their code signature for the purposes of allowing them to run on a clients machine using managed preferences, so it is possible for the OS to block apps that are not signed.

For open source and other apps, the user (through some step that only technical people would know - command line or keychain assistant perhaps?) could grant a machine-based signature to an unsigned app (like a key to a building) to allow it to run on the machine.

this would work too. This is what Nokia does..however there is a charge for this signing. Obviously, someone would next argue that it costs to much to sign binaries.
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #45 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

it's not a virus, it's not malware and it in no way harms your computer. it's a phishing scam.

Apple have responded within five days.

You're talking out of an orifice other than your mouth.

Maybe Apple should respond with a solution that is closer to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0YoefS-Mv8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMZ0F0HNGGM

post #46 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

I like what was said before/above....And at the risk of sounding like a clone, I'll let Apple's PHD's and engineers do the work for me, hence, I will only buy sw thru the Apple App Store from now on!

Best

Yup.. with the option to turn this off for people who know what they are doing. However, the default is to go to the App store. I think this would prevent mass infestation and yet satisfy people who know what they are doing and turn off this setting on purpose.
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #47 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by IVK View Post

Maybe if Apple took security a little more seriously, the entire internet wouldn't be laughing at Apple right now over this. OS X, is the most insecure OS. Not Windows, sorry folks but these are facts.

Windows actually does have some good features (browser sandboxing) which OS X should implement (actually OS X supports sandboxing, but only Chrome uses it at the moment.) I believe that Windows also introduced ASLR (which it still does better), signed executables, and no-execute permission for data pages before OS X did.

On the other hand, OS X (and iOS, Linux, Android, etc.) never had things like the Windows Registry or ActiveX, which have been major sources of security issues.

OS X was also way ahead of Windows for many years in terms of limiting the open network ports in a fresh install of the OS. Installing Windows 2000 or XP while directly connected to the internet (i.e. not behind a firewall) was a recipe for disaster. For that matter, buying a new XP laptop and connecting it to the internet was also a recipe for disaster. Basically you need to connect from behind a firewall and get all of the Windows updates before it's safe to connect to the actual internet.
post #48 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by IVK View Post

Maybe if Apple took security a little more seriously, the entire internet wouldn't be laughing at Apple right now over this. OS X, is the most insecure OS. Not Windows, sorry folks but these are facts. Only reason OS X isn't a target is because we have such little market share, security by obscurity is not a good model. Apple needs to stop with the smug attitude, so do it's users.

"You should have to take a computer test"
"Common sense tells you blah blah blah"
"Walled gardens are better!"

First of all if you think walled gardens are better, just leave America and move to China because obviously you need someone to hold your hand and think for you. Look at what happens throughout history when you give up rights for a false sense of security, you get screwed. We Americans are learning this since 9/11. Second is Microsoft, for all it's faults, actually does take security seriously. If you look at the alerts, more attacks are done on Windows through Adobe products, why? Because Microsoft started taking security seriously in their software. Apple on the other hand treats it like it's a joke, taking months to respond to issues, something leaving patches wide open. I really, REALLY hope Apple gets a brutal virus to slap the smug out of Steve Jobs mouth. He, and a lot of other Apple users, really make me see why people don't like the stereotypical Apple user.

Is that you Bill? Welcome.
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #49 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by blecch View Post

Hmm, I installed the security update, but the 'open "safe" files after downloading' preference is still there in Safari.

That's because Apple treats security like having sex with a hooker wearing no condom.
post #50 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by blecch View Post

Installing Windows 2000 or XP...

You do realize those operating systems came out over 10 years ago. Can we keep the conversation a little more current please
post #51 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by IVK View Post

That's because Apple treats security like having sex with a hooker wearing no condom.

did you read what you wrote here? sorry if you are a female or gay and what you wrote above is 100% correct.
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #52 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

Walled garden is looking better and better. Maybe give consumer a preference on/off switch that allows block of any install unless it comes through App Store.

Is it in Apple's best interest to do a good job on security, when more money can be made by coercing users to buy "safely" through the App Store?
post #53 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brometheus View Post

There are plenty of people with lots of common sense who get all flustered and make the wrong choice when computers are involved. I know many older people who are quite wise, and just want to use their computer for a few basic tasks like reading email, web browsing, and shopping a bit. When they encounter a PayPal phishing scam they sometimes fail to realize what's happening and make a mistake. Most of us geeks can recognize a phishing scam, but that doesn't mean that a less experienced person lacks common sense or is an idiot.

In any case, even people who are not smart don't deserve to be taken advantage of. I see so many posts that begin with "if you're stupid enough to...then you deserve..." People who can't see a problem with that attitude may lack a moral compass.

Fully agree. As the installed base grows there will be many people with minimal computer experience who, when confronted by a request to install something related to 'security', will not hesitate. They may even think Apple asked them to, or that they 'had to do it'. Why not, Apple is the user friendly, secure computer, right? When an invitation arrives on the screen to protect their computer, why wouldn't they click on the button?
post #54 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post

Is it in Apple's best interest to do a good job on security, when more money can be made by coercing users to buy "safely" through the App Store?

how much money does Apple make from allowing the purchase of so called "Free Virus Scanner" like MacDefender. You think there would be any viruses if you had to pay for the virus before you are allowed to install the software.. with the exception of Microsoft products of course. *joking*
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #55 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

The real problem here is Google's search results being poisoned by black hat SEO's (search engine optimisation), which affect Windows, Mac and other users alike.

Right... The problem is Google
post #56 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by IVK View Post

First of all if you think walled gardens are better, just leave America and move to China because obviously you need someone to hold your hand and think for you. Look at what happens throughout history when you give up rights for a false sense of security, you get screwed. We Americans are learning this since 9/11.

Godwin's law needs to be extended to include disparaging comments about China.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #57 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

Fully agree. As the installed base grows there will be many people with minimal computer experience who, when confronted by a request to install something related to 'security', will not hesitate. They may even think Apple asked them to, or that they 'had to do it'. Why not, Apple is the user friendly, secure computer, right? When an invitation arrives on the screen to protect their computer, why wouldn't they click on the button?

exactly! I can see Steve Jobs saying the roughly the same thing. Bravo!
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #58 of 120
"To help protect your computer, Apple Web Security have detected Trojans and ready to remove them"



Stupid ought to hurt.
A is A
Reply
A is A
Reply
post #59 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

did you read what you wrote here? sorry if you are a female or gay and what you wrote above is 100% correct.

Yes I did, it gave everyone here a good chuckle since we all view it as truth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

Is that you Bill? Welcome.

Someone defends MS when it's deserved and automatically they're Bill Gates. Cute.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blecch View Post

Windows actually does have some good features (browser sandboxing) which OS X should implement (actually OS X supports sandboxing, but only Chrome uses it at the moment.) I believe that Windows also introduced ASLR (which it still does better), signed executables, and no-execute permission for data pages before OS X did.

On the other hand, OS X (and iOS, Linux, Android, etc.) never had things like the Windows Registry or ActiveX, which have been major sources of security issues.

OS X was also way ahead of Windows for many years in terms of limiting the open network ports in a fresh install of the OS. Installing Windows 2000 or XP while directly connected to the internet (i.e. not behind a firewall) was a recipe for disaster. For that matter, buying a new XP laptop and connecting it to the internet was also a recipe for disaster. Basically you need to connect from behind a firewall and get all of the Windows updates before it's safe to connect to the actual internet.

I'm not denying Microsoft at one point was a security nightmare, one only has to remember a decade ago and the security outbreaks.

That was a decade ago, times have changed. They have come along way and I feel they don't get enough credit for that, I'm not a big Microsoft fan but I will defend them or give them praise when it's due.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

it's not a virus, it's not malware and it in no way harms your computer. it's a phishing scam.

Apple have responded within five days.

You're talking out of an orifice other than your mouth.

Apple responded within five days? I've been reading about MAC Defender for more than five days now man. You must be smoking a lot of pot for time to be moving that slow. Way to completely miss the point anyways. Apple doesn't take security seriously like they should be. Patches are inconsistent and you have no idea when they're going to come. They've taken their time implementing new security measures in OS X since iOS put it on the back burner it seems.
post #60 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

Fully agree. As the installed base grows there will be many people with minimal computer experience who, when confronted by a request to install something related to 'security', will not hesitate. They may even think Apple asked them to, or that they 'had to do it'. Why not, Apple is the user friendly, secure computer, right? When an invitation arrives on the screen to protect their computer, why wouldn't they click on the button?

100% correct. Not everyone is the Terminator with a screen of choices in their brains that pop-up when confronted with a threat. No one should have to be like that to use a computer. Computer use should be no more risk-filled than reading a book or using a calculator.
post #61 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by PXT View Post

Once the software was installed, it could have done anything.

Imagine if it had held the user's photos for ransom, deleting an album per day until they pay, or anything other nasty thing you can imagine.

In some ways, the scariest thing about this malware is its naivety. It means the really experienced scumbags have not yet tried on Macs.

The diligent Mac user has Time Machine activated and recently run. Data loss should not be a problem for Mac owners if they spent the extra $50 for a backup disk and let the OS do it's thing.

Professionals augment this with system imaging tools like SuperDuper or CarbonCopyCloner.

All of these solutions are free and would effectively negate data-hostage situations.
post #62 of 120
What Apple should do is trace down the source and find the people who are behind the malware. If people are being scammed, then their money has to be ending up somewhere in somebody's bank accounts. It can't be that hard to figure out who the culprits are.

Instead of just offering daily updates and checks, solve the root of the problem, kill the scammers. Cut the head off of the snake. Let's say some guy named Igor who is part of the Russian mob is the leader. Go to Russia, kidnap Igor and bring him and his partners back for justice. If he or they resist, then kill them. This would all be done in secret of course.

Some highly skilled mercenaries could solve the minor annoyance that these criminals and scumbags pose. Is it slightly illegal to kill people? Yes it is, but it's worse to scam innocent people than to kill a scumbag in my book.

I recently had a run in with some annoying telephone scammers, and I even ended up contacting the FBI a few months ago. All scammers should be taken out of business, using whatever methods possible. If there was an anti-scammer vigilante that went around and offed these people, I would be rooting for him/her!

They should also shut off parts of the world for all internet traffic and e-commerce. Some countries are just plain garbage.
post #63 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

what a good sport. Im impressed.

He's a lot like Jesse Owens.
post #64 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

What Apple should do is trace down the source and find the people who are behind the malware. If people are being scammed, then their money has to be ending up somewhere in somebody's bank accounts. It can't be that hard to figure out who the culprits are.

Instead of just offering daily updates and checks, solve the root of the problem, kill the scammers. Cut the head off of the snake. Let's say some guy named Igor who is part of the Russian mob is the leader. Go to Russia, kidnap Igor and bring him and his partners back for justice. If he or they resist, then kill them. This would all be done in secret of course.

Some highly skilled mercenaries could solve the minor annoyance that these criminals and scumbags pose. Is it slightly illegal to kill people? Yes it is, but it's worse to scam innocent people than to kill a scumbag in my book.

I recently had a run in with some annoying telephone scammers, and I even ended up contacting the FBI a few months ago. All scammers should be taken out of business, using whatever methods possible. If there was an anti-scammer vigilante that went around and offed these people, I would be rooting for him/her!

They should also shut off parts of the world for all internet traffic and e-commerce. Some countries are just plain garbage.

You might have a job in the US government with mentality like that.

Much like the drug trade, killing the scammers won't solve anything, another network will replace it overnight. Go after the banks.
post #65 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

What Apple should do is trace down the source and find the people who are behind the malware. If people are being scammed, then their money has to be ending up somewhere in somebody's bank accounts. It can't be that hard to figure out who the culprits are.

Instead of just offering daily updates and checks, solve the root of the problem, kill the scammers. Cut the head off of the snake. Let's say some guy named Igor who is part of the Russian mob is the leader. Go to Russia, kidnap Igor and bring him and his partners back for justice. If he or they resist, then kill them. This would all be done in secret of course.

Some highly skilled mercenaries could solve the minor annoyance that these criminals and scumbags pose. Is it slightly illegal to kill people? Yes it is, but it's worse to scam innocent people than to kill a scumbag in my book.

I recently had a run in with some annoying telephone scammers, and I even ended up contacting the FBI a few months ago. All scammers should be taken out of business, using whatever methods possible. If there was an anti-scammer vigilante that went around and offed these people, I would be rooting for him/her!

They should also shut off parts of the world for all internet traffic and e-commerce. Some countries are just plain garbage.

When the aliens land and hand me what I refer to as the "Magic Invisibility Belt" then I'm yer man. I've been waiting for them a long, long time. It will happen tho' I'm sure. And when it does some people are going to wake up dead.
post #66 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by r00fus View Post

The diligent Mac user has Time Machine activated and recently run. Data loss should not be a problem for Mac owners if they spent the extra $50 for a backup disk and let the OS do it's thing.

Professionals augment this with system imaging tools like SuperDuper or CarbonCopyCloner.

All of these solutions are free and would effectively negate data-hostage situations.

still not sure why we are suggesting post-problem solutions instead of just avoiding the problem in the first place.

I think not having the headache of ever having to deal with a problem is more desirable then having options of how to deal with the problem after it has already occurred.

It similar to the decision to buy a reliable car in the first place vs buying a car with questionable reliability backed by an extended warranty.
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #67 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by IVK View Post

Maybe if Apple took security a little more seriously, the entire internet wouldn't be laughing at Apple right now over this. OS X, is the most insecure OS. Not Windows, sorry folks but these are facts. Only reason OS X isn't a target is because we have such little market share, security by obscurity is not a good model. Apple needs to stop with the smug attitude, so do it's users.

"You should have to take a computer test"
"Common sense tells you blah blah blah"
"Walled gardens are better!"

First of all if you think walled gardens are better, just leave America and move to China because obviously you need someone to hold your hand and think for you. Look at what happens throughout history when you give up rights for a false sense of security, you get screwed. We Americans are learning this since 9/11. Second is Microsoft, for all it's faults, actually does take security seriously. If you look at the alerts, more attacks are done on Windows through Adobe products, why? Because Microsoft started taking security seriously in their software. Apple on the other hand treats it like it's a joke, taking months to respond to issues, something leaving patches wide open. I really, REALLY hope Apple gets a brutal virus to slap the smug out of Steve Jobs mouth. He, and a lot of other Apple users, really make me see why people don't like the stereotypical Apple user.

Wow, two credible problems since 1998 on Mac platform versus gazillions for Windows. Yeah, I guess that's infection equality. Those who don't run around saying the sky is falling should live under Communism. Love your logic.

It seems that the only people who care about why Macs have virtually no "medical" problems are those who are pissed off that they don't, and dearly wish they did. Your Steve-hater mentality is more to the point.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #68 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by magicj View Post

LOL! Do you honestly believe not installing software you know nothing about is anything more than basic common sense?

For people unfamiliar with computers, it can be hard to tell the difference. My girlfriend's co-worker's Dell just got hit with one very similar to this. Basically it tells you that you've been infected with something, then asks you to install such-and-such to get rid of it. Of course, it's designed to look exactly like an official Windows prompt.

People who write on Apple forums are probably already quite familiar with technology matters, but that's obviously not the case for everyone. Your auto mechanic and physician probably think YOU have no common sense either, in terms of their areas of specialty.
post #69 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by IVK View Post

You might have a job in the US government with mentality like that.

Much like the drug trade, killing the scammers won't solve anything, another network will replace it overnight. Go after the banks.

I don't work for the government, and I would never want to. I enjoy freedom and smoking weed far too much to be working for any government.

You're right about the banks though. The primary banks that are facilitating and helping the crooks should be shut down and the people behind the banks should be prosecuted. I imagine that the banks are outside of the US though, so maybe a massive, continuous, cyber attack could be launched against the guilty banks, rendering their daily operations useless.
post #70 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

Wow, two credible problems since 1998 on Mac platform versus gazillions for Windows. Yeah, I guess that's infection equality. Those who don't run around saying the sky is falling should live under Communism. Love your logic.

It seems that the only people who care about why Macs have virtually no "medical" problems are those who are pissed off that they don't, and dearly wish they did. Your Steve-hater mentality is more to the point.

Do you have selective reading? Even if an vulnerability isn't exploited, Apple still leaves it open and slowly patches these problems. Stop being so defensive about Apple, it's healthy to admit they could take security more seriously. For a company that claims to have the most "secure operating system" they really don't if you look at the whole picture. Is that hard to comprehend?
post #71 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I don't work for the government, and I would never want to. I enjoy freedom and smoking weed far too much to be working for any government.

You're right about the banks though. The primary banks that are facilitating and helping the crooks should be shut down and the people behind the banks should be prosecuted. I imagine that the banks are outside of the US though, so maybe a massive, continuous, cyber attack could be launched against the guilty banks, rendering their daily operations useless.

I was joking about the government job.

You might check this article out about banks and the spammers.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...ansactions.ars
post #72 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

Fully agree. As the installed base grows there will be many people with minimal computer experience who, when confronted by a request to install something related to 'security', will not hesitate. They may even think Apple asked them to, or that they 'had to do it'. Why not, Apple is the user friendly, secure computer, right? When an invitation arrives on the screen to protect their computer, why wouldn't they click on the button?

You've pretty much described why I moved to Macs in the first place.

I have plenty of common sense, a good engineering degree, the sort of job you only get if you are switched on, but I just can't be arsed worrying about keeping my computer running efficiently. As far as I'm concerned it should do that for me.
post #73 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by IVK View Post

Do you have selective reading? Even if an vulnerability isn't exploited, Apple still leaves it open and slowly patches these problems. Stop being so defensive about Apple, it's healthy to admit they could take security more seriously. For a company that claims to have the most "secure operating system" they really don't if you look at the whole picture. Is that hard to comprehend?

I think we are all wasting our time... and IVK is right.
IVK has convinced me..

That does it.. I am getting rid of all my iPods, iPhones, iPads, iMacs, Macbooks, PowerMacs and Powerbooks. I am going back to running Windows 7 Ultimate on a Netbook and I'm gonna move to the land that has no government just complete freedom of choice..and thus a government which can not be criticized.

In addition, I'm going to go join some Microsoft Windows forums and defend Windows from all the Apple trolls who come to the Windows forums to kick the sand in to the eyes of fearless Windows users.

Thank you IVK for showing me the light. You were right all along.
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #74 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Isn't that what new Security Update has done?


That's a shortsighted and ignorant comment. Do you really expect people not to use PCs until they are experts at using PCs?

Apparently, Microsoft does. You have to practically be a Microsoft Certified Engineer to use a Windows PC. And yes, if you let your family use Windows, you are effectively the IT guy for the household. Ever try explaining Windows Safe Mode to grandma?

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #75 of 120
wow.. you must be a mind reader.. Im impressed. I have to admit.. I don't know much about you.
All I know is you are wise and have great motivation to come to an Apple forum tells us how great Microsoft Windows is and how bad Apple products are. Thanks for the enlightenment. Mission accomplished.

Still trying to figure out what would motivate a person to do this.. oh great Microsoft Crusader. Maybe I can learn from you oh wise one.
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #76 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

wow.. you must be a mind reader.. Im impressed. I have to admit.. I don't know much about you.
All I know is you are wise and have great motivation to come to an Apple forum tells us how great Microsoft Windows is and how bad Apple products are. Thanks for the enlightenment. Mission accomplished.

Still trying to figure out what would motivate a person to do this.. oh great Microsoft Crusader. Maybe I can learn from you oh wise one.

I am confident to say I am far wiser than you, because you're taking this way to seriously. You think because I said Apple could be taking security more seriously that I'm saying Windows is so great and OS X is far inferior. False. Grow up. God forbid I have an opinion, I'm sorry I'll make sure to plug into the matrix and think that Apple does no wrong and Microsoft does nothing but evil. Fuck was I thinking? I guess I forgot the motto ignorance is bliss.

I never once said those things, I said Microsoft has done a great job taking security seriously compared to what they used to be, and they have. They've implemented measures that Apple is just now getting around to adding. They patch flaws monthly, they let people/system admins know what is coming. Does Apple? No, they need to change this. This is one of many reasons they never made any dent in the enterprise market with OS X.

Is Windows still attacked? Constantly, but that's the price that you pay for having 90% market share, I can't imagine what our ecosystem would be like if we had 90% market share with the way patching vulnerabilities is handled. We'd probably have an entire market for security software too.
post #77 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by enjourni View Post

I'm sorry to be offensive, but I have a real problem with people giving up their rights in defense of security. It's happens over and over again in history, and the outcome is always bad.

All I'm trying to say is, downloading is a basic right in a free and open internet. There are benefits to using the App Store for downloads, but I would rather apple just implement a basic malware scanner that works system-wide (as it looks like they are trying to do), rather then force people to download through only one method.

Until:

(1) Every mac app is available in the app store
(2) Apple drops the whole commission thing, which is squeezing developers out of the store (like Adobe is going to drop 30% of their profits on photoshop?)

the the app store idea is a poor approach. Maybe at some point it make sense, but we're not there yet.

Who said anything about giving up rights? I think people should have the option of the walled garden approach and the open approach. There are benefits to both approaches. To not acknowledge that is disingenuous. People should have the option of choosing what's best for them and when it's best for them on their mac laptops and computers.
post #78 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Apparently, Microsoft does. You have to practically be a Microsoft Certified Engineer to use a Windows PC. And yes, if you let your family use Windows, you are effectively the IT guy for the household. Ever try explaining Windows Safe Mode to grandma?

1) Several years ago I implemented a strict no more Windows policy among family and friends that relied upon me for support. All current Windows-based systems were grandfathered in but all new PCs had to Macs. Despite ample moaning everyone is happy with the change.

2) I was in a UPS store today and the Win7 PC was so bogged down that IE took minute(s) to load a pages despite the internet being a commercial "high-speed connection. I had one PDF from Shure to print! I was going to offer my services for a free mail box since I'm a box holder but I was so frustrated with the experience that I'm only now remembering.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #79 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by IVK View Post

I am confident to say I am far wiser than you, because you're taking this way to seriously. You think because I said Apple could be taking security more seriously that I'm saying Windows is so great and OS X is far inferior. False. Grow up. God forbid I have an opinion, I'm sorry I'll make sure to plug into the matrix and think that Apple does no wrong and Microsoft does nothing but evil. Fuck was I thinking? I guess I forgot the motto ignorance is bliss.

I never once said those things, I said Microsoft has done a great job taking security seriously compared to what they used to be, and they have. They've implemented measures that Apple is just now getting around to adding. They patch flaws monthly, they let people/system admins know what is coming. Does Apple? No, they need to change this. This is one of many reasons they never made any dent in the enterprise market with OS X.

Is Windows still attacked? Constantly, but that's the price that you pay for having 90% market share, I can't imagine what our ecosystem would be like if we had 90% market share with the way patching vulnerabilities is handled. We'd probably have an entire market for security software too.

No, I think you are great actually.. You are a Saint on a Crusade to educate all those who are ignorant.. like myself. I can not thank you enough for your selfless motivations and persistence to educate others and bring them up to your level of wisdom and enlightenment. Bless you.
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #80 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

Who said anything about giving up rights? I think people should have the option of the walled garden approach and the open approach. There are benefits to both approaches. To not acknowledge that is disingenuous. People should have the option of choosing what's best for them and when it's best for them on their mac laptops and computers.

exactly.. for people who do not know what the right decision is for them, don't care, or trust Apple to make the safe choice for them.. the default should be to only allow App from the App store unless this setting is explicitly changed by the user via aGUI toggle in "Settings"...

fair?
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › MAC Defender variant quickly thwarts Apple's Mac OS X security update