BBC Writer Responds To Mac Security Critiques

minimunchkin writes "BBC Correspondent Bill Thompson responds to the flaming he received for an article on the vulnerabilities in Mac security. He knows that there are no Mac OS X viruses in the wild, and he doesn't believe there ever will be." From the article: "However the wider point, that there are exploitable vulnerabilities and sometimes Apple puts them there, remains. Even if I'm careful to apply updates when they are made available, some people might not and their systems could be compromised. And there is always a gap between the discovery of an issue and an available fix, a gap which could be exploited. "

Comments

The Rules

[gbulmash]

To the old rule that one should never argue politics or religion, because there is no way to win, I believe we must add operating systems as a third thing one should never argue.

Add to that the following statement (my own): "Being a Microsoft proponent in an argument about operating systems is like being a white male in a discussion on discrimination."

- Greg

But I Only Meant All Of You

[American AC in Paris]

From Thompson's original article:

Mac users demonstrate an indefensible smugness when it comes to the dangers of having their systems compromised by malicious software and opened up to exploitation by others. It's time they started behaving a bit more responsibly.

Dear Mr. Thompson:

When you accuse several million people of demonstrating "indefensible smugness" based solely on the type of computer they're sitting in front of, you must certainly expect something of a backlash from those of us who do, in fact, take security seriously. When you tell the likes of systems administrators and security experts they should behave "a bit more responsibly", they're rightly going to tell you to go piss up a rope.

On the Internet, we refer to people who make statements such as the one quoted above as "trolls". Engaging in this type of behavior is generally frowned upon. For example, if I were to say "this is the sort of idioctic drivel the world has come to expect from those effete Brits," I, too would be guilty of trolling and would receive untold amounts of well-deserved invective from the readers of this post.

Fortunately for me, I know better than to make such outrageous statements.

Re:But I Only Meant All Of You

[vague disclaimer]

Also from TFA: I believe that security through obscurity is no security at all,

So it's probably just as well that OSX doesn't rely on it then.

All is forgiven

[Anonymous Coward]

We forgive you on one condition: you admit publicly that emacs is the one true editor. Then you won't have to worry about anyone flaming you ever again.

Not a "troll" at all.

[CyricZ]

Please don't misuse the word "troll". Like it or not, he is pointing out a very serious issue that affects all operating systems, be it Windows, Mac OS X, OpenBSD, UnixWare, OS/2, MS-DOS, VMS, or basically any other operating system.

Frequent updates are necessary, especially when it comes to networked systems. Concurrently, many users (even experienced administrators) fail to keep their systems patched and up to date, be it for a lack of time or due to financial constraints.

Remember, Mac OS X is often targetted towards more inexperienced users, or those who just want a system that works. For the most part, that is true of Mac OS X. It does often just work. But likewise, it is necessary to keep it updated.

Now, he isn't a "troll" for pointing out that very real, very serious fact. Sure, it might have angered some people, but that's not his fault in any way.

If your doctor were to diagnose you with AIDS, and you did indeed have the syndrome, he would not be a "troll", regardless of how much you were angered by his diagnosis. In much the same way, this BBC author is not a "troll".

It's not "flamebait".

[CyricZ]

Just because a legitimate, completely truthful opinion angers some, it does not make the opinion "flamebait".

Words like "flamebait" and "troll" are most often used seriously by those who are trying to incite trouble amongst people who are pointing out real, solid facts.

We see this today in the media, where various governments label their opponents as "terrorists". Of course, in many cases those governments are partking in the very same actions that may be construed as "terrorism".

These sorts of labels are useless just because they are misapplied so often, by so many different people and groups.