Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Support > We read the report: Microsoft WIndows is not listed as most secure OS

Reply
Thread Tools

We read the report: Microsoft WIndows is not listed as most secure OS

 
 
Au79
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-24-2007
MacDailyNews - USA

Microsoft's Windows had twelve (12) "severe" vulnerabilities vs. Apple's
one (1) "severe" Mac OS X vulnerability that affected no one ...

<http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/13057/>
--
....................
http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/microsoft/IhateMS.html
http://rixstep.com/1/20040719,00.shtml
http://free.thelinuxstore.ca/
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Jerry G.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-24-2007
I don't want to disappoint you, but I know of people with Apple systems
that have had their share of Trojans and Malwares. Also, the Apple
system is less of a target, because their market is much smaller than
that of the PC market.

--

Jerry G.


"Au79" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:nceNh.23749$(E-Mail Removed)...
MacDailyNews - USA

Microsoft's Windows had twelve (12) "severe" vulnerabilities vs. Apple's
one (1) "severe" Mac OS X vulnerability that affected no one ...

<http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/13057/>
--
....................
http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/microsoft/IhateMS.html
http://rixstep.com/1/20040719,00.shtml
http://free.thelinuxstore.ca/


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Au79
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-25-2007
Jerry G. wrote:

> I don't want to disappoint you, but I know of people with Apple systems
> that have had their share of Trojans and Malwares. Also, the Apple
> system is less of a target, because their market is much smaller than
> that of the PC market.
>


And how do you compare the share of Apple malware to windos' share?



--
....................
http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/microsoft/IhateMS.html
http://rixstep.com/1/20040719,00.shtml
http://free.thelinuxstore.ca/
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jerry Attic
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-25-2007
"Jerry G." <(E-Mail Removed)> said in news:130b2nj1tlh0l11
@corp.supernews.com:

> I don't want to disappoint you, but I know of people with Apple systems
> that have had their share of Trojans and Malwares. Also, the Apple
> system is less of a target, because their market is much smaller than
> that of the PC market.
>


He probably knows but his eyes are shut to the possibility.
 
Reply With Quote
 
elaich
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-26-2007
"Jerry G." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:130b2nj1tlh0l11
@corp.supernews.com:

> I don't want to disappoint you, but I know of people with Apple systems
> that have had their share of Trojans and Malwares. Also, the Apple
> system is less of a target, because their market is much smaller than
> that of the PC market.
>


Jerry G & Company?

--
A: Because it disturbs the logical flow of the message.
Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Fuzzy Logic
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-27-2007
Au79 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:nceNh.23749$(E-Mail Removed):

> MacDailyNews - USA
>
> Microsoft's Windows had twelve (12) "severe" vulnerabilities vs. Apple's
> one (1) "severe" Mac OS X vulnerability that affected no one ...
>
><http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/13057/>


Of course this doesn't take into account the OS X 10.4.9 update which included numerous patches for critical
vulnerabilities many of which were brought to light by the month of Apple bugs project. More here:

http://www.sans.org/newsletters/risk...&rss=Y#widely1

As usual the press gets it wrong and tries to distill a complicated subject (computer security) into a simple
sound bite. This is stated at the end of the article:

This whole thing would be laughable if it weren't for the fact that this piece of FUD will now get picked up and
regurgitated by media types who like a good headline regardless of facts and/or who won't read the actual
report and/or who lack the ability to spot deception and spin.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Au79
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-29-2007
Fuzzy Logic wrote:

> Au79 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:nceNh.23749$(E-Mail Removed):
>
>> MacDailyNews - USA
>>
>> Microsoft's Windows had twelve (12) "severe" vulnerabilities vs. Apple's
>> one (1) "severe" Mac OS X vulnerability that affected no one ...
>>
>><http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/13057/>

>
> Of course this doesn't take into account the OS X 10.4.9 update which
> included numerous patches for critical vulnerabilities many of which were
> brought to light by the month of Apple bugs project. More here:
>


The article just points out that Apple is more secure than windos by design.
The 12 to 1 ratio of holes found is typical of windos.

> http://www.sans.org/newsletters/risk...&rss=Y#widely1
>
> As usual the press gets it wrong and tries to distill a complicated
> subject


Not complicated at all. Stop using windos and you will never have to worry
about viruses, trojans, spyware, BSOD, slow-downs, and freezes.

> (computer security) into a simple sound bite. This is stated at
> the end of the article:
>


Just the facts.

> This whole thing would be laughable if it weren't for the fact that this
> piece of FUD will now get picked up and regurgitated by media types who
> like a good headline regardless of facts and/or who won't read the actual
> report and/or who lack the ability to spot deception and spin.


The fact that windos has never been a secure operating system, always
lagging behind Linux and Mac, is the only laughable thing.


--
....................
http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/microsoft/IhateMS.html
http://rixstep.com/1/20040719,00.shtml
http://free.thelinuxstore.ca/
 
Reply With Quote
 
Fuzzy Logic
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-29-2007
Au79 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:O0HOh.231979$(E-Mail Removed):

> Fuzzy Logic wrote:
>
>> Au79 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:nceNh.23749$(E-Mail Removed):
>>
>>> MacDailyNews - USA
>>>
>>> Microsoft's Windows had twelve (12) "severe" vulnerabilities vs.
>>> Apple's one (1) "severe" Mac OS X vulnerability that affected no one
>>> ...
>>>
>>><http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/13057/>

>>
>> Of course this doesn't take into account the OS X 10.4.9 update which
>> included numerous patches for critical vulnerabilities many of which
>> were brought to light by the month of Apple bugs project. More here:
>>

>
> The article just points out that Apple is more secure than windos by
> design. The 12 to 1 ratio of holes found is typical of windos.


Secure by design means nothing. Good intentions don't necessarily equate to a 'more secure' OS. Again I
will quote the Computer Security article from Wikipedia:

The early Multics operating system was notable for its early emphasis on computer security by design, and
Multics was possibly the very first operating system to be designed as a secure system from the ground
up. In spite of this, Multics' security was broken, not once, but repeatedly.

Source <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_security>

>> http://www.sans.org/newsletters/risk...&rss=Y#widely1
>>
>> As usual the press gets it wrong and tries to distill a complicated
>> subject

>
> Not complicated at all. Stop using windos and you will never have to
> worry about viruses, trojans, spyware, BSOD, slow-downs, and freezes.


Are you a used car salesman? While you are less likely to encounter malware in less common OS's to say
you won't have crashes, slow downs and freezes is laughable. I have many Apple user friends who have
as many if not more problems with their systems as Windows users.

>> (computer security) into a simple sound bite. This is stated at
>> the end of the article:
>>

>
> Just the facts.
>
>> This whole thing would be laughable if it weren't for the fact that
>> this piece of FUD will now get picked up and regurgitated by media
>> types who like a good headline regardless of facts and/or who won't
>> read the actual report and/or who lack the ability to spot deception
>> and spin.

>
> The fact that windos has never been a secure operating system, always
> lagging behind Linux and Mac, is the only laughable thing.


Windows is a secure as YOU make it. I am not sure where you get your 'fact' from?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Gordon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-29-2007
Fuzzy Logic wrote:


> Secure by design means nothing. Good intentions don't necessarily equate
> to a 'more secure' OS.


So why are there are NO Linux viruses in the wild? Because the DESIGN of
Linux makes it very very difficult to infect, that's why.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Aardvark
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-29-2007
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 18:08:13 +0000, Fuzzy Logic wrote:


>
> The early Multics operating system was notable for its early emphasis on computer security by design, and
> Multics was possibly the very first operating system to be designed as a secure system from the ground
> up. In spite of this, Multics' security
> was broken, not once, but repeatedly.
>


Saw a wall once. There was a sign on it saying 'Vandal-proof Paint'. As
well as the sign there was quite a bit of graffiti . as soon as the
hax0rs saw 'designed as a secure system from the ground up' do you think
they hung up their black hats? Nope. Neither do I.

I bought a Thermos flask a few years ago. Told my mate it was unbreakable.
Next time I saw it he was driving his car over it. I forgot to mention
that it was only unbreakable when dropped off a table or some such.


--
Registered Linux User 413057.
Both Mandriva 2007 and Ubuntu 6.06
You can have it all. My empire of hurt.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Secure your digital information assets with Secure Auditor. SecureWindows with Secure Auditor alannis.albert@googlemail.com Cisco 0 04-14-2008 06:53 AM
Secure your digital information assets with Secure Auditor SecureWindows with Secure Auditor alannis.albert@googlemail.com Cisco 0 04-14-2008 06:52 AM
Hell freezes over: Windows listed as most secure OS tom Computer Support 8 03-25-2007 04:20 AM
microsoft.public.dotnet.faqs,microsoft.public.dotnet.framework,microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.windowsforms,microsoft.public.dotnet.general,microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb Charles A. Lackman ASP .Net 1 12-08-2004 07:08 PM



Advertisments