Hacker: Apple's Snow Leopard Protections Weaker Than Windows 7's

[koriwhat]

If you try to hack a server, there is a much greater chance that you will be unsuccessful and traced.

so basically, you're talking out your ass? yep, that's it!

[ElNono]

There are hundreds of millions of individual computers in the world, usually with only one user on it, who typically has little knowledge of what's happening to his or her computer. The number of individual servers in the world is smaller by several factors. Most mainframes have their own personnel monitoring net traffic and ensuring that they are secure.

So basically, you try to hack a PC, you probably can.

If you try to hack a server, there is a much greater chance that you will be unsuccessful and traced.

Actually, hacking servers normally has a much higher reward ratio.
Take spammers, who are a good chunk of the people trojaning machines these days. Servers are much more likely to be on a very good network connection, along with being expected to send loads of mails everyday.
Or take credit card thieves. If they manage to hack into, say,an Amazon server they can potentially compromise millions of cards, as opposed to get a couple off a PC.

Thus the reason servers are much more heavily monitored.

And BTW, the tracing part is quite relative. We have daily hacking attempts that we traced all the way to China and Russia. Finding the people behind those addresses is a completely different ballgame.

[Cry Havoc]

Actually, hacking servers normally has a much higher reward ratio.
Take spammers, who are a good chunk of the people trojaning machines these days. Servers are much more likely to be on a very good network connection, along with being expected to send loads of mails everyday.
Or take credit card thieves. If they manage to hack into, say,an Amazon server they can potentially compromise millions of cards, as opposed to get a couple off a PC.

Thus the reason servers are much more heavily monitored.

And BTW, the tracing part is quite relative. We have daily hacking attempts that we traced all the way to China and Russia. Finding the people behind those addresses is a completely different ballgame.

Which is the point of the thread.

In the past, hacking UNIX based servers has been much more difficult than it was to hack PCs running Windows.

However, that balance has shifted, at least as far as the consumer market is concerned. Hacking a PC running Windows 7 is not an easy task at all, and it may now be as easy or easier to hack a Mac.

[koriwhat]

Which is the point of the thread.

In the past, hacking UNIX based servers has been much more difficult than it was to hack PCs running Windows.

However, that balance has shifted, at least as far as the consumer market is concerned. Hacking a PC running Windows 7 is not an easy task at all, and it may now be as easy or easier to hack a Mac.

blah blah blah...blah blah blah

[ElNono]

Which is the point of the thread.

In the past, hacking UNIX based servers has been much more difficult than it was to hack PCs running Windows.

However, that balance has shifted, at least as far as the consumer market is concerned. Hacking a PC running Windows 7 is not an easy task at all, and it may now be as easy or easier to hack a Mac.

Depends. Things like this seem pretty straightforward. As mentioned in the article, this same delivery system was used to build a Mac botnet, so YMMV.

[Cry Havoc]

Depends. Things like this seem pretty straightforward. As mentioned in the article, this same delivery system was used to build a Mac botnet, so YMMV.

I just meant relative to the security it's had in the past. Any hacker worth his salt can blow through a standard computer's defenses.

[ElNono]

I just meant relative to the security it's had in the past. Any hacker worth his salt can blow through a standard computer's defenses.

The problem with the Windows platform in general (and not the OS in particular), is that if you buy a new machine you get a boatload of third-party junk pre-installed, most of them with basically root access, and the user had absolutely no say whatsoever as far as granting said access. So you end up with a much larger attack vector through those programs. As an example, I give you the Sony rootkit, or all those 'Dell assistant' programs.
Any power user knows how to and can easily 'clean up' all that junk, but most of the average users do not.

[Cry Havoc]

The problem with the Windows platform in general (and not the OS in particular), is that if you buy a new machine you get a boatload of third-party junk pre-installed, most of them with basically root access, and the user had absolutely no say whatsoever as far as granting said access. So you end up with a much larger attack vector through those programs. As an example, I give you the Sony rootkit, or all those 'Dell assistant' programs.
Any power user knows how to and can easily 'clean up' all that junk, but most of the average users do not.

I'll agree with that, but that's not necessarily a reflection of Windows. Vendors have long since been packaging a ton of BS with Windows programs to encourage the consumer to be more dependent on said vendor.

A clean install of Windows Vista/7 is a pretty solid OS as far as consumer security goes.