[IP] more on mac viruses and quote and apple pie
Begin forwarded message:
From: David Magda <dmagda@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: May 20, 2005 10:47:17 PM EDT
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [IP] more on mac viruses and quote and apple pie
Reply-To: David Magda <dmagda@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[This reply ended up being longer then I intended. Feel free to edit
it if you feel it's too long. It's also a bit like two separate posts
in one: my 'rant' and some pointers to articles by John Gruber.]
On May 20, 2005, at 20:34, David Farber wrote:
And MACs are not exempt. Your readers who are
proud of the fact they run no antivirus applications, and don't
maintain
their firewalls on their MACs are victims in wait.
While technically you are correct that OS X is possibly vulnerable to
attack, the fact of the matter is that it has not been seriously
attacked to date. So why not use a computing platform that is less of
target? Isn't that the sane thing to do? I find it silly to go out
and choose a course of action that will bring you pain in the future.
If you have particular needs which are only met by using Microsoft
Windows then by all means use it. But if you can get by using a Mac
then there's not much of a reason not to do so (especially with the
relatively inexpensive Mac mini now available).
I have a PowerBook and recently bought my sister an iMac; I
administer Unix boxes at work. Neither Mac runs any kind of anti-
virus software (nor do any of my Unix machines). This is not because
I think they are invulnerable (I keep up with security updates), but
because at this point in time I feel that the cost-benefit of me
purchasing anti-virus software isn't worth it. When (or if?) threats
for OS X emerge it will hit the news web sites very quickly, and the
vendors will release an update to detect it. At that point a
measurable risk will be present and it may be worth it to buy some
software (or use ClamAV which is open-source and can run on Unix-like
systems (including OS X)).
Until then it isn't worth the money IMHO. Anti-virus programs are
like insurance: they are a cost that will hopefully pay for itself if
something bad happens. If the odds are low that the event will occur
why pay the premium? If you live in Florida you protect yourself
against hurricanes, not earthquakes. Vice versa in California.
As an aside, last year John Gruber wrote about the discrepancy
between Windows users getting various malware and the rest of the
computing population not getting any. Worth reading (as is just about
all of Mr. Gruber's posts):
What’s remarkable is this: Crapware is a problem of epidemic
proportions on Windows, but it is almost completely non-existent on
the Mac.
[...]
We all benefit from the fact that the Mac community has zero
tolerance for vulnerabilities. Not just zero tolerance for security
exploits, but zero tolerance for vulnerabilities. In fact, there is
zero tolerance in the Mac community for crapware of any kind.
http://daringfireball.net/2004/06/broken_windows
With a follow up article a couple of months later:
The reasons why are subject to argument. But you can’t argue about
the net effect: Windows users, especially with their home
computers, are plagued by insidious malware; everyone else is not.
http://daringfireball.net/2004/09/for_whatever_reasons
And a related article on the scourge of malware through Outlook:
Microsoft’s Outlook has been exploited by virus authors so
frequently and so effectively that I dare anyone to dispute that
it’s the worst email client ever, anywhere. The worst. But yet it
is also the most popular.
http://daringfireball.net/2003/08/good_times
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/