Windows more secure than Apples OS-X

[Pistons < Spurs]

HACKS AT ZDNet have made a brave claim that Apple operating systems are much less secure than Windows.

This will almost certainly get a flood of anonymous emails from Apple Fanboys who will shout about how there are no viruses for Leopard. ZDNet has based its findings on all the known security flaws and placed them side by side. The results are fairly compelling.

The vulnerability statistics come from Secunia and ZDNet broke them down by Windows XP flaws, Vista flaws, and Mac OS X flaws.

During 2007 Apple had more than five times the number of flaws per month than Windows XP and Vista in 2007, and most of them were serious. Windows Vista had less flaws than Windows XP.

The article admits that the problems could be much worse. Apple do not admit that it ever has problems with its software until it releases a patch for it. This means that it could be sitting on huge security holes that it has not told anyone about.

So, while there might not be viruses for your shiny Apple computer, there are some fairly juicy security holes for hackers to exploit.

ZDNet admits that all this goes against the conventional wisdom that Apple is somehow more secure than Windows. But since the conventional wisdom is a result of some canny marketing by Apple this is not not really surprising.


http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...windows-secure


See ZDNets results Here

[JsnSA]

Doubts cast on Mac/Windows vulnerability

Sharp criticism is being directed at ZDNet's George Ou for a piece suggesting that Macs are more vulnerable than Windows PCs. Ou compiled a list of Secunia notices from 2007, and noted that while Windows XP and Vista had a total of 44 security warnings issued, Mac OS X had 243, all but two of which were deemed "highly critical." One problem with this, say observers, is that Secunia itself includes a warning on its website, advising people not to use its statistics to compare products against each other.

Another claimed issue is that even flaws which are listed as critical are not necessarily more likely to occur. Mac OS X, for example, was at one point cited as having a tcpdump vulnerability, but many users may have never had to approach the application. Conversely, a DirectX opening in Windows Vista could have been exposed with a WAV or AVI file, something much more likely for the average user.

Moreover, categories for the operating systems analyzed are said to have been biased. Only XP Pro and Vista were counted on the Windows side, whereas all versions of Mac OS X were factored in, including server editions. There are also said to be a number of warnings mislabeled by Ou, ones which either affected all operating systems, third-party software, or Apple programs running on Windows or the iPhone. It is suggested that if all factors were properly weighed, a user of Mac OS X Tiger or Leopard would likely encounter far fewer risks than someone using Windows XP, and possibly Vista. [via ZDNet]

http://www.electronista.com/articles...ty.vs.windows/

[Viva Las Espuelas]

touche

[u2sarajevo]

i thought the main reason why mac is safer than windows was because there are so many more windows users out there that people who make viruses and whatnot would rather go after windows than macos

precisely. Why would a cracker go after a small audience? It may be easier to find a flaw, but it will be much harder to exploit it if you cannot easily find a host.

[Supreme_Being]

HACKS AT ZDNet have made a brave claim that Apple operating systems are much less secure than Windows.

This will almost certainly get a flood of anonymous emails from Apple Fanboys who will shout about how there are no viruses for Leopard. ZDNet has based its findings on all the known security flaws and placed them side by side. The results are fairly compelling.

The vulnerability statistics come from Secunia and ZDNet broke them down by Windows XP flaws, Vista flaws, and Mac OS X flaws.

During 2007 Apple had more than five times the number of flaws per month than Windows XP and Vista in 2007, and most of them were serious. Windows Vista had less flaws than Windows XP.

The article admits that the problems could be much worse. Apple do not admit that it ever has problems with its software until it releases a patch for it. This means that it could be sitting on huge security holes that it has not told anyone about.

So, while there might not be viruses for your shiny Apple computer, there are some fairly juicy security holes for hackers to exploit.

ZDNet admits that all this goes against the conventional wisdom that Apple is somehow more secure than Windows. But since the conventional wisdom is a result of some canny marketing by Apple this is not not really surprising.


http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...windows-secure


See ZDNets results Here

Boo.