Windows vs Mac Security

sdhorne writes "There is a good technical discussion over at InfoWorld on the merits of launchd and what is lacking in a comparable Windows secure solution. It is a throw back to the UNIX vs Windows security discussion that has been hashed out for many years." From the article: "it always traces back to Microsoft's untenable policy of maintaining gaps in Windows security to avoid competing with 3rd party vendors and certified partners. Apple's taking a different approach: What users need is in the box: Anti-virus, anti-spam, encryption, image backup and restore, offsite safe storage through .Mac, and launchd. Pretty soon any debate with Microsoft over security can be ended in one round when Apple stands up, says 'launchd', and sits back down."

Comments

Both are unusable

[SleeknStealthy]

Lets see a goofy bar at the bottom of your screen that acts as a terrible task manager (OSX). I mach kernel and freebsd kernel combined to give extra slow performance(OSX)

Or spyware, memory hogging anti-virus software and overall fisher price ugliness with an evil registry(Windows)

I don't know which one is worse, secure or insecure; however steve jobs has been mentioned as a possible candidate for the anti-christ (I think david hasselhoff is a better candidate though).

but what do I know I compile all my software like a lunatic...I have tried to switch from gentoo, but they put something in my water...I enjoy it too much..

here we go again

[Enrique1218]

Read the sig you know where I stand. But at least this is not another security through obscurity piece. He does do a decent analysis of Mac OSX unix sub-system and makes a good argument of how it is inherently more secure.

Make a car or just a tire.

[n2art2]

Machintosh/Apple makes a "car." A complete package. It comes bundled with pre-installed "tires" (OS X - to get you around in it, of course you can shoose to install something different.) It comes bundled with a stereo, headlight bulbs, mirrors, seats, carpet, you name it (ie: think software options.) All of which can be taken off of the car and something else replace it with ease.

Microsoft makes "tires," that "car" manufactures (Dell, HP, . . .) install on their cars. However the "car" manufactures where being strong armed by the "tire" company in also include a particular stereo, bulbs, mirrors, seats and carpet, that where required to also be bundled, without modification.

I know not a great analogy, but you get the idea. Let the critics eat me alive is they so choose. Karma-shmarma.

Wrong answer

[blueZ3]

You have got to be kidding, right?

You've made the classic blunder of using the MS-fanboi rallying cry of "there are millions more Windows users" followed by the only slightly less-well-know Big Lie that "If OSX had that kind of a market share..." Apple would have an equal number of OS flaws.

If you don't think that there's are hackers out there who wouldn't give their eye-teeth for the fame that will come from writing the first successful Mac virus, you're on crack. Not only is there the notoriety, but you'd have spam-kings and Russian mofia dons beating down your door with fistfuls of money. 10% of 300 million computers is still a significant number by anyone's standards.

I'm typing this on a Windows PC, but from your post (despite the disclaimer) I think it's unlikely you have much experience with Mac OS.

Re:UNIX and viruses

[prockcore]

It's not faked to appear like UNIX, it is actually UNIX.

No it isn't. It's not even POSIX.

Re:But what if Microsoft offered it all together?

[tirnacopu]

So Apple allows Dell to sell custom-designed hardware and bundle Firefox with their OEM version of OS X?

I'm sick of IE accusations/crying

[CDPatten]

This board is filled with jokes, sarcasim, and crying about IE being bundled in Windows. MS bundling IE and not allowing the engine to be uninstalled is the correct solution for Windows. The fact that so many slashdoters continue to harp on this is dishartening...

The IE engine is just important to many Windows devleopers as the winsock controls, button, image, or even the media controls. Windows is the #1 OS because of developers making software for the OS, and they do that because MS makes it easy for them. You can use visual studio to just drop a browser engine on the form... virtually no coding, and for many ISVs it means the difference from having a full featured app and not having one at all.

And for the record, you CAN remove/uninstall IE's shortcuts and icons from the OS (for many years now). Once removed, and for all practical purposes, IE is not available to the end user. The engine stays because it is not just for the blue IE icon on the desktop, its used in Help files, its used by developers, etc.

So PLEASE, stop your F*ing crying and get over it... IE is bundled in windows, and it has been GOOD for Windows software development. And incase you hypocrites forgot, Safari is bundled in OSX and can't be removed fully either.

current TPM implementation on all Apples

[cyberbian]

leaves much room for speculation as to the true 'security' of this system.

While it's all well and good to discuss system security from the standpoint of the software, it is a moot point in light of an insecure hardware implementation.

'I don't want to get on a rant here but...'

The Trusted Computing Group (the industry group responsible for TPM (previously known as Palladium, TCPA etc.))has posted their best practices and principles for the use of TPM.

You will note (if you bother to read these) that the aims of the TCG are to:

i. preserving privacy, backward compatibility, and owner control
ii. promoting ease-of-use
iii. designing the technology so that it is interoperable
iv. ensuring that the user's data, while secure and protected, remains portable and accessible as needed in alternative modalities

Is it me, or is it curious that Apple is not a member of the TCG, nor have they implemented the TPM Control panel that is requisite with its implementation? There is NO end-user control or validation of the settings of the TPM. Therefore, no-one, save your remote Cupertino overlords will know who it's set up to trust! How cool is that?

Given the properties of transitive trust relationships, I'm sure you ALL want to trust Apple, and hell, while you're at it, ANYONE they trust (No Such Agency comes to mind here) How cool is that?

At least with all of the Windows based offerings, as flawed as their software implementation is, they give you the OWNER of the PC hardware the respect of letting you see how it's set up. That makes me feel a damn sight more secure than what Apple is currently foisting on an unsuspecting public.

With an Apple computer it turns out you're not BUYING a PC, but RENTING an EXPERIENCE. Because with the TPM shipping enabled, it's definitely remotely owned.