until they do
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/flashback-malware-exposes-big-gaps-in-apple-security-response/4904

The best part is the second page, where they talk about how Apple doesn't want to issue a press release informing users of the problem, because they probably don't want to announce that Macs have the same security issues as PCs. Even better is how they detail just how much better Microsoft is doing at security fixes and patches.


eat that, fanboys

4/30/2012 6:44:44 PM

yes, Windows machines are clearly more secure.

4/30/2012 6:55:39 PM

at least Windows gets patched.

50 patched security flaws are much more secure than 1 security flaw left unpatched.

[Edited on April 30, 2012 at 7:04 PM. Reason : .]

4/30/2012 7:03:59 PM

Windows is more proactive about fixing security issues, because they've been exposed to them for much longer

This is going to be a long process for Mac

4/30/2012 7:04:07 PM

Quote :

"at least Windows gets patched. 50 patched security flaws are much more secure than 1 security flaw left unpatched."

they've released patches for it.

4/30/2012 7:56:51 PM

They released a patch a day or two after the exploit was discovered.

4/30/2012 8:07:56 PM

uh. no, they didn't. did you even bother to read the article?

Quote :

"Apple’s update that fixed the Java security hole was released April 3, 2012. That’s 49 days after Oracle released Java SE 6 Update 31 for all other platforms."

unless, of course, to you, "49 days" is "a day or two"

4/30/2012 9:05:48 PM

Sounds to me like Oracle is the reason for the security flaw. Does that mean Linux was also vulnerable?

4/30/2012 9:17:04 PM

maybe. but then again, you could have updated on linux as soon as oracle patched it.

4/30/2012 9:18:36 PM

Apple officially killed natively including Java in OS X from 10.7 installs onward specifically for this reason.

4/30/2012 9:22:08 PM

But how long has the vulnerability been around before Oracle patched it? 49 days may be small in comparison.

Additionally, I wouldn't rate an OSes security because some component that's not a part of the OS allowed malware to exploit it. When Apple starts patching the OS, like MS had for years, Apple has a reason to be concerned. But I have a feeling when that happens, Unix users will equally be in trouble.

4/30/2012 9:24:56 PM

That last statement is likely very accurate. For all intents and purposes, OS X is just a bastardized Unix kernel with a facade anyway.

It's probably getting close to lock time for this troll thread isn't it?

4/30/2012 11:45:18 PM

Quote :

"Additionally, I wouldn't rate an OSes security because some component that's not a part of the OS allowed malware to exploit it."

maybe, but when the ONLY way to patch the 3rd party component was through an OS patch, that speaks highly of how jacked up the OS is designed. Then, it took 49 days after the 3rd party component was patched for the OS to release its own patch, and the OS manufacturer won't even admit there was ever a problem because it would kill their marketing claim of "no malware or viruses". yeah. nothing to worry about

5/1/2012 9:30:33 AM

I, for one, am not aware of any tech talk regulars who actually believe that macs have historically had few virus problems because OSX is inherently more secure.

Technology religion is extremely gay, whichever 'team' you align yourself with.

5/1/2012 9:45:08 AM

why does apple get your panties so tightly wadded up aaronburro? i know you hate them, which is fine, but i just don't get why you get so bent out shape over it. everything i notice that you post is just you complaining about them in some way.

just seems like a lot of effort for no real return

[Edited on May 1, 2012 at 10:17 AM. Reason : ]

5/1/2012 10:17:09 AM

i like my mbp mostly because of the aluminum frame not the hardware or software...

hell i actually run ubuntu on it a lot.

5/1/2012 10:42:22 AM

Quote :

"I, for one, am not aware of any tech talk regulars who actually believe that macs have historically had few virus problems because OSX is inherently more secure. "

An OS that sandboxes apps you install with various levels of permissions is just as secure as one that classically let you install and overwrite OS files in any directory? Unix systems are more secure because they were designed from the ground up to support multi-user use cases and networked machines.

Quote :

" Technology religion is extremely gay, whichever 'team' you align yourself with"

Oh and VIM is better than emacs


[Edited on May 1, 2012 at 12:16 PM. Reason : a]

5/1/2012 12:02:41 PM

app sandboxing is certainly great in defending against certain viruses/malware, but that certainly didn't protect systems from the flashback trojan. also most malware is delivered via the browser these days, and while Chrome has sandboxing, Safari doesn't, and isn't exactly the hallmark of secure browsing.

5/1/2012 1:11:39 PM

^ Glad there are options...

5/1/2012 10:07:00 PM