Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

OT: Microsoft security..


Phait

Recommended Posts

'Computer security experts issued a joint report on Wednesday saying that the ubiquitous reach of Microsoft Corp.'s (MSFT.O) software on desktops worldwide has made computer networks a national security risk susceptible to "massive, cascading failures."'

 

- AMEN!

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 11
  • Created
  • Last Reply

AMEN is right! I think it should be mandated that everyone move to Macs immediately!

 

Oh, wait... but then the hackers will spend their time and efforts attacking Macs. Um... hmmm... give me a minute here, and let me think this through... :eek:

 

Pardon my tongue-in-cheek reply. The threats *are* serious, but I happen to be one of those odd people that like PC's *and* Macs. Oh, I used to like Ataris too! Oh, and Commodore 64's, and the old Apple II, and... (I better stop before I mention mainframes!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice oxymoron, Phait. Actually, everybody moving to Macs would attract some more hackers, but it's also an OS that's inherently more secure.

The White House cybersecurity expert used to be head of security at Microsoft, and he hasn't ruled out banning Microsoft from government use if they don't clean up their act.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, again I say it. Computers suck. Why can't I build my own system and put OS X on it? Now I have to fork over 2000+ euros for that G5... Or build that great performing and cheap PC desktop and get stuck with Windows... Double f**k!

http://www.bobwijnen.nl

 

Hipness is not a state of mind, it's a fact of life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by dementia13:

Nice oxymoron, Phait. Actually, everybody moving to Macs would attract some more hackers, but it's also an OS that's inherently more secure.

Coming from someone that likes both, I believe that the only reason people judge the Mac OS as "inherently more secure" is that the hackers have not focused their attention on the Mac.

 

In the hypothetical case of everyone moving to Macs, it wouldn't attract "some more hackers", it would attract ALL hackers. We'd be in the same boat that we're in today, except everyone would be complaining about Apple instead of MS, and advocating that we move to the "inherently more secure" Linux! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Linux is more secure because there are literally thousands of people all over the world continuously betatesting and fixing Linux, making it run smoother and more securely with every new release.

 

Problem is, no one wants to write audio software for Linux.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Darkon the Incandescent:

If you are running Red Hat Linux you might be pleasantly surprised :)

 

Creating an audio workstation in Red Hat Linux

 

Darkon the Incandescent

I stand corrected!

 

Time to wipe my 2nd boot drive and start experimenting...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coming from someone that likes both, I believe that the only reason people judge the Mac OS as "inherently more secure" is that the hackers have not focused their attention on the Mac.

Coming from someone that uses both, I don't think that's quite correct. The Mac OS is based on BSD, which has a long history of being used in servers, and was designed to be a secure environment. Being related to Unix and Linux, it's likely that any security issue they might be vulnerable too might affect OS X as well. But, since it's an OS that was built from the ground up for security in a way that Windows never was, you're starting from a stronger base. Many of your hackers are going to be working from Linux, and understanding Linux is going to give them better insight into the Mac OS. But what you thwart are the "Script kiddies", who don't necessarily understand computers but get hold of scripts that they run to try to go do some damage. The type of vulnerabilities that they, and the e-mail and macro virus writers typically exploit, are a result of insecurities that MS purposely builds into their product as features: in their rush to include new features and integrate their products together, they create wide open holes and opportunities for rogue programmers to do things that MS didn't intend. A Unix level of security is a big safeguard against processes doing things they're not authorized to do.

Damn, you made me miss breakfast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Microsoft does not send out antivirus patches via e-mail. Ironically, a new Virus shows up in your Inbox disguised as a security patch. To think anyone would open the email thinking Microsoft is now taking a proactive role in security for end users!

 

A number of the security patches on the Microsoft site are actually corrupted files (I ruled out download issues). In a very real sense Microsoft is doubly guilty - first for releasing software products with so many holes and then having poor quality control for their after-the-fact fixes.

 

Another recent virus was written by an 18 year old. Why can't Microsoft hire a team of 18 year olds to do what their engineers apparently cannot. Sheesh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...