Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hell freezes over: Forrester urges IT to support the Mac

tech.fortune.cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 111 posts

Re: Hell freezes over: Forrester urges IT to support the Mac

#101

Post by Samuel_Michon »

WayneDB wrote: post #99
Samuel_Michon wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Why are Banks known for getting robbed more often than Bakeries?" Because of Hollywood movies? It isn't actually true. Of all robberies in the US, only 2.1% targets a bank. Shops (including bakeries) are targeted far more often, 14.3% of the time. Gas stations are robbed more often than banks, and convenience stores are even 2.5 times more likely to get robbed. [1] The number of bank robberies is on the rise, but th…

It may not be true anymore, but that doesn't mean that Hollywood made everything up about that! Ever heard of Jesse James? The point is...thieves go where the money is. Okay, so fine you don't like my analogy. Let's fix it for you then: If you found a large oasis in the middle of a desert, would you pass it by in order to find a smaller one?

"thieves go where the money is."

I'm sure robbers do risk assessment. If a bakery has half the cash a bank has but no security and a better escape route, they will much rather rob a bakery.

"If you found a large oasis in the middle of a desert, would you pass it by in order to find a smaller one?"

Alright, let's use that analogy. Which is the large oasis, Mac or Windows?

Windows has a larger installed base. However, most Windows computers have virus protection and Microsoft puts a lot of effort into improving security.

Mac OS X has a smaller installed base, but practically no one bothers with virus protection and security doesn't seem to be Apple's number one priority.

That's why I think Mac OS X is a lot more interesting to cyber criminals, it's an enormous oasis. And yet, there haven't been any attacks of scale -- if there had been, it would be front page news. Perhaps OS X is safer than you want to admit?

Re: Hell freezes over: Forrester urges IT to support the Mac

#102

Post by cbs »

yardie wrote: post #92
cbs wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Instead of helping them do their job better they dictate and put up roadblocks so IT guy has an easier job. Oh yes, I forgot. IT budgets are infinite and supporting all existing business computing requirements on any foreign device that show up takes zero time.

There is a world of difference between not supported and not allowed. If you don't support it then don't support but there are some places that are actively hostile to anything but windows.

>There is a world of difference between not supported and not allowed.

Allowing any foreign device, even if unsupported, is a serious cost. Not supported but still on the privileged network (or on the guest net and hooking into any privileged resources) is a HUGE security threat. Especially in areas like ours where make or break comes down to our ability to protect our trade secrets. Malware running on a non-privileged account on a personal computer is still a serious data exfiltration vector. Frankly on our network, not supported is the same as not allowed.

>If you don't support it then don't support but there are some places that are actively hostile to anything but windows.

Actively hostile to anything but windows, or actively hostile to anything they haven't prepared for, which just happens to be windows because that's what business needs demand? I've known admins who only support windows because its all they know, and admins who only support windows only because that's pragmatic for their deployment. Theres a big difference, and if its the former and it bothers you, vote with your feet and fucking quit dude.

Re: Hell freezes over: Forrester urges IT to support the Mac

#103

Post by WayneDB »

Samuel_Michon wrote: post #101
WayneDB wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may not be true anymore, but that doesn't mean that Hollywood made everything up about that! Ever heard of Jesse James? The point is...thieves go where the money is. Okay, so fine you don't like my analogy. Let's fix it for you then: If you found a large oasis in the middle of a desert, would you pass it by in order to find a smaller one?

"thieves go where the money is." I'm sure robbers do risk assessment. If a bakery has half the cash a bank has but no security and a better escape route, they will much rather rob a bakery. "If you found a large oasis in the middle of a desert, would you pass it by in order to find a smaller one?" Alright, let's use that analogy. Which is the large oasis, Mac or Windows? Windows has a larger installed base. However,…

No, it's not safer than I'd like to admit just because you don't agree with my analogy. I am relying on empirical evidence, thank you very much.

Are you one of those people who thinks that the Mac has fallen first at Pwn2Own because it's a "nicer" computer that all the hackers want? Because that's not the case at all. It's been shown a number of times that OS X can be rooted more easily than Windows.

So, no I don't think it's "safer" because of anything technical either. Even if it were though, that wouldn't matter. Windows is safe, yet it can be hacked much like any OS.

The only remaining possibility must be true: Hackers don't pay little attention to OS X because too few targets are using them to make it worth the effort.

Windows is the larger oasis (quite obviously to the non-obstinate reader). This is because even with virus protection, you can't protect users from themselves and more users means more chances to try. If a malprogrammer can get you to run a binary, you're done. If OS X were the more popular OS and it were being run by almost every business in the world that utilize computers, then I have zero doubt that it would have the same problem as Windows in that regard.

I don't think that it will ever be a problem though for Apple since I doubt OS X could ever reach the same market penetration within the highly hacker-targeted business and enterprise market. So, people can go on believing what they want I guess.

Re: Hell freezes over: Forrester urges IT to support the Mac

#104

Post by Samuel_Michon »

WayneDB wrote: post #103
Samuel_Michon wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"thieves go where the money is." I'm sure robbers do risk assessment. If a bakery has half the cash a bank has but no security and a better escape route, they will much rather rob a bakery. "If you found a large oasis in the middle of a desert, would you pass it by in order to find a smaller one?" Alright, let's use that analogy. Which is the large oasis, Mac or Windows? Windows has a larger installed base. However,…

No, it's not safer than I'd like to admit just because you don't agree with my analogy. I am relying on empirical evidence, thank you very much. Are you one of those people who thinks that the Mac has fallen first at Pwn2Own because it's a "nicer" computer that all the hackers want? Because that's not the case at all. It's been shown a number of times that OS X can be rooted more easily than Windows. So, no I don't t…

Wow, so much to respond to...

I'll limit it to what I think is the core of your message:

Why would cyber criminals be more interested in breaking into some empty business desktop, if they can break into a personal desktop filled with personal information like credit card numbers and iTunes/Paypal/Bank logins?

Re: Hell freezes over: Forrester urges IT to support the Mac

#105

Post by WayneDB »

Samuel_Michon wrote: post #104
WayneDB wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not safer than I'd like to admit just because you don't agree with my analogy. I am relying on empirical evidence, thank you very much. Are you one of those people who thinks that the Mac has fallen first at Pwn2Own because it's a "nicer" computer that all the hackers want? Because that's not the case at all. It's been shown a number of times that OS X can be rooted more easily than Windows. So, no I don't t…

Wow, so much to respond to... I'll limit it to what I think is the core of your message: Why would cyber criminals be more interested in breaking into some empty business desktop, if they can break into a personal desktop filled with personal information like credit card numbers and iTunes/Paypal/Bank logins?

Why don't you just tell me why you think the Mac is safer despite empirical evidence the says otherwise?

That'd probably be quicker than me trying to explain to you why the Mac is worthless target. (Actually a no explanation is typically needed for that since the market share numbers don't lie. I just think you're being extremely obstinate at this point, so there's no way you'll see that. You might as well attempt to prove _your_ point to me since there's obviously no way you'll accept _my_ point.)

Re: Hell freezes over: Forrester urges IT to support the Mac

#106

Post by Samuel_Michon »

WayneDB wrote: post #105
Samuel_Michon wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, so much to respond to... I'll limit it to what I think is the core of your message: Why would cyber criminals be more interested in breaking into some empty business desktop, if they can break into a personal desktop filled with personal information like credit card numbers and iTunes/Paypal/Bank logins?

Why don't you just tell me why you think the Mac is safer despite empirical evidence the says otherwise? That'd probably be quicker than me trying to explain to you why the Mac is worthless target. (Actually a no explanation is typically needed for that since the market share numbers don't lie. I just think you're being extremely obstinate at this point, so there's no way you'll see that. You might as well attempt to…

"Why don't you just tell me why you think the Mac is safer"

I'll let Pwn2Own winner Charlie Miller answer that for me:

"I'd say that Macs are less secure [...] but are more safe because there simply isn't much malware out there. For now, I'd still recommend Macs for typical users as the odds of something targeting them are so low that they might go years without seeing any malware, even though if an attacker cared to target them it would be easier for them."

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pwn2own-mac-hack,2254-6....

Re: Hell freezes over: Forrester urges IT to support the Mac

#107

Post by WayneDB »

Samuel_Michon wrote: post #106
WayneDB wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why don't you just tell me why you think the Mac is safer despite empirical evidence the says otherwise? That'd probably be quicker than me trying to explain to you why the Mac is worthless target. (Actually a no explanation is typically needed for that since the market share numbers don't lie. I just think you're being extremely obstinate at this point, so there's no way you'll see that. You might as well attempt to…

"Why don't you just tell me why you think the Mac is safer" I'll let Pwn2Own winner Charlie Miller answer that for me: "I'd say that Macs are less secure [...] but are more safe because there simply isn't much malware out there. For now, I'd still recommend Macs for typical users as the odds of something targeting them are so low that they might go years without seeing any malware, even though if an attacker cared to…

Thanks for proving my point. It's not _technically_ safer. It's security by obscurity.

Re: Hell freezes over: Forrester urges IT to support the Mac

#108

Post by Samuel_Michon »

WayneDB wrote: post #107
Samuel_Michon wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Why don't you just tell me why you think the Mac is safer" I'll let Pwn2Own winner Charlie Miller answer that for me: "I'd say that Macs are less secure [...] but are more safe because there simply isn't much malware out there. For now, I'd still recommend Macs for typical users as the odds of something targeting them are so low that they might go years without seeing any malware, even though if an attacker cared to…

Thanks for proving my point. It's not _technically_ safer. It's security by obscurity.

A 58 million Mac installed base, more than 250 million iOS devices sold, and you're still arguing obscurity? That's commitment.

http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/04/250-million-ios-devices-sol...

Re: Hell freezes over: Forrester urges IT to support the Mac

#109

Post by WayneDB »

Samuel_Michon wrote: post #108
WayneDB wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for proving my point. It's not _technically_ safer. It's security by obscurity.

A 58 million Mac installed base, more than 250 million iOS devices sold, and you're still arguing obscurity? That's commitment. http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/04/250-million-ios-devices-sol...

Oh please. Compared to over a billion PCs worldwide? If you are going to build a bot-net, would you really target the Mac? Gimme a break dude.

Considering the vast difference between Windows and OS X APIs; it's quite clear why mal-programmers don't waste their time with OS X. You would have to spend MORE than half your time attacking the Mac for less than 10% of your total attack surface.

The only other argument that has been made in the face of this fact is from Gruber who said: If Macs have 10% of the market, why don't they have 10% of the viruses? That's like saying because I am Nth the size of the sun, I should have Nth the power of the sun. Reality does not work that way. Everything does not have to be proportional and in this case it's crystal clear why it is not proportional.

Would you please kindly concede this point now?

Re: Hell freezes over: Forrester urges IT to support the Mac

#110

Post by Samuel_Michon »

WayneDB wrote: post #109
Samuel_Michon wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 58 million Mac installed base, more than 250 million iOS devices sold, and you're still arguing obscurity? That's commitment. http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/04/250-million-ios-devices-sol...

Oh please. Compared to over a billion PCs worldwide? If you are going to build a bot-net, would you really target the Mac? Gimme a break dude. Considering the vast difference between Windows and OS X APIs; it's quite clear why mal-programmers don't waste their time with OS X. You would have to spend MORE than half your time attacking the Mac for less than 10% of your total attack surface. The only other argument that…

So by that logic, as long as the Mac market share isn't as high as Windows market share, the Mac platform will always be safer.
Post reply on HN