Mac's suck?
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: Mac's suck?

  1. #1

    Mac's suck?

    For example, Windows security holes generally receive a lot of press because of the software's popularity, but the statistics show that Windows isn't the subject of significantly more advisories than other operating systems. Windows XP Professional saw 46 advisories in 2003-2004, with 48 percent of vulnerabilities allowing remote attacks and 46 percent enabling system access, Secunia said.


    Suse Linux Enterprise Server (SLES) 8 had 48 advisories in the same period, with 58 percent of the holes exploitable remotely and 37 percent enabling system access. Red Hat's Advanced Server 3 had 50 advisories in the same period - despite the fact that counting only began in November of last year. Sixty-six percent of the vulnerabilities were remotely exploitable, with 25 granting system access.


    Mac OS X doesn't stand out as particularly more secure than the competition, according to Secunia. Of the 36 advisories issued in 2003-2004, 61 percent could be exploited across the Internet and 32 percent enabled attackers to take over the system. The proportion of critical bugs was also comparable with other software: 33 percent of the OS X vulnerabilities were "highly" or "extremely" critical by Secunia's reckoning, compared with 30 percent for XP Professional and 27 percent for SLES 8 and just 12 percent for Advanced Server 3. OS X had the highest proportion of "extremely critical" bugs at 19 percent.
    http://www.techworld.com/security/ne...fm?newsid=1798

    I ususally don't post news links like this, but I felt this would stir up some arguments. I don't mean to be an instigator, but I always like a healthy debate.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,302
    [QOUTE]

    For example, Windows security holes generally receive a lot of press because of the software's popularity, but the statistics show that Windows isn't the subject of significantly more advisories than other operating systems. Windows XP Professional saw 46 advisories in 2003-2004, with 48 percent of vulnerabilities allowing remote attacks and 46 percent enabling system access, Secunia said.

    [/QOUTE]

    *Cough* Bullshit *Cough* That is probably the biggest load of ****, I have ever heard.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    37
    I actually like Mac OS X Panther quite a bit. The Quartz Extreme is amazing too. I also like the fact that it uses FreeBSD commands and uses the Darwin kernel. It even allows you to lock your root dir while you're away (like on vaction) with 128-bit AES. It's got plenty of nice stuff about it. The fast-user switching is great too. My opinion is this OS certainly doesn't suck. The hardware, imo, is a different story. Even dual G5's @ 2GHz couldn't keep up with a single AMD64 proc in some benchmarks I've seen. If anything "sucked" so to speak, it's the PPC G5's and below.

  4. #4
    AO Ancient: Team Leader
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    5,197
    *Cough, Cough Puke"

    *Cough* Bullshit *Cough* That is probably the biggest load of ****, I have ever heard.
    Cite your sources then!!!!!!

    but I felt this would stir up some arguments
    Well..... You were right..... You have at least two "bites" so far..... Anyone even reading this thread should be presented with a warning to wear the flame retardant suit prior to entry......

    /me sneaking back into my dark, dank little corner to watch the fireworks.... Maybe they will light my little corner a little.......
    Don\'t SYN us.... We\'ll SYN you.....
    \"A nation that draws too broad a difference between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards, and its fighting done by fools.\" - Thucydides

  5. #5
    between 2003-2004
    windows xp pro 46 advisories total - 22 remote attacks, 21 system access, 13 of which are "Highly Critical"
    Suse Linux Enterprise Server 48 advisories total - 28 remote exploits, 17 system access, 12 of which are "Highly Critical"
    Mac OS X 36 advisories total - 22 remote exploits, 11 system access, 11 of which are "Highly Critical"

    Just some numbers to throw around.


    edit hmmm now the secunia site says 45.... for xp

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,302
    Well first let's look at Secunia's own site.

    http://secunia.com/product/22/

    Give me a sec, I swear I remember more thatn 46.

    I have a list somewhere of exploits, when I get home, I will check it and see.

    Also wouldn't it be better for this to compare XP Pro, and Home.

    Both are commonly used, I wonder why there are no talks about Home.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    1,199
    The number of flaws exploited on any OS is not an accurate representation of how secure or insecure it is. It simply shows that people using said OS spend more time looking. If I were to write an OS and only I have a copy then no exploits would be found. Windows is the dominating OS on the market, so of corse it will have the highest number of known issues. The less a program is used the fewer exploits will be revealed. I admit that microsoft does have a very high number fo exploits, but if everyone that uses windows switches over to linix, or unix, or any other OS that one will then have the most exploints revealed within months.
    Everyone is going to die, I am just as good of a reason as any.

    http://think-smarter.blogspot.com

  8. #8
    AO Ancient: Team Leader
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    5,197
    Whizz..... Ok Secunia state 49% from remote.... we're talking 1%.... That's well within staistical error.... Keep going.....
    Don\'t SYN us.... We\'ll SYN you.....
    \"A nation that draws too broad a difference between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards, and its fighting done by fools.\" - Thucydides

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    620
    Originally posted here by Soda_Popinsky
    between 2003-2004
    windows xp pro 46 advisories total - 22 remote attacks, 21 system access, 13 of which are "Highly Critical"
    Suse Linux Enterprise Server 48 advisories total - 28 remote exploits, 17 system access, 12 of which are "Highly Critical"
    Mac OS X 36 advisories total - 22 remote exploits, 11 system access, 11 of which are "Highly Critical"

    Just some numbers to throw around.


    edit hmmm now the secunia site says 45.... for xp
    Some more numbers to throw around

    FreeBSD 5.x - 32 advisories total

    LOL at Mandrake 9.x - 202 advisories total

    Windows ME - 19 advisories total

    Conclusion? As XTC46 said, the numbers don't necessarily represent the security of the OS.

    mjk

  10. #10
    Only one remote hole in the default install, in more than 8 years!
    http://www.openbsd.com

    Secunia currently has 42 Secunia advisories affecting OpenBSD 3.x.
    http://secunia.com/graph/?type=cri&period=all&prod=100
    http://secunia.com/product/100/

    This sort of thing confuses me, maybe someone experienced in openbsd can fill me in...

    btw... this secunia site is pretty cool.

    One more thing, I thought ME's reputation was for shoddy stability and installation, not so much security? And keep in mind, this is only 2003-2004

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •