Macs' low popularity keeps them safer from hacking and malware

[Renew Deal]

From Windows to Flash to QuickTime and iTunes, malicious hackers target the most popular platforms

For two weeks, I was having a heated discussion with some diehard Mac-only fans in a stock forum. It was one of those self-perpetuating, boring Windows-versus-Mac flame wars, where neither side ends up believing the other. Each side sincerely believes their platform is better and destined to rule the world.

My main debate with the Mac-only fans is over Mac's true security. See, I know that Macs are attacked less than Windows because they are less popular. Pure and simple. Macs contain no special, secret security sauce that makes them more attack-resistant than Windows Vista (which was released in November 2006). Macs and OS X do not contain a single computer defense mechanism that the competitors do not already have or haven't had longer.

If anything, Macs have more known vulnerabilities -- by far -- than Windows and are often patched slower. You can check any independent security vulnerability database you like to see the figures behind my statement, but Secunia has been my favorite for a long time.

Mac-only fans rightfully point out that Windows is successfully attacked thousands of times more than Macs. This is true, which translates to lower overall security risk against generalized, nontargeted attacks. I can't argue with that.

But my contention is that Mac's relatively safety is due to its status as a minority player; if the platform gained significant market share, it would be successfully attacked just as much as Windows Vista or at least in proportion to their growing popularity. The same could be said of any platform out there that hasn't earned as much market share as a more popular rival. Whatever is most popular is successfully attacked the most. If criminals want to make the most money possible, they go after what is popular. I call this theory Roger's Hacking Popularity Corollary.
<snip>

http://www.infoworld.com/d/security-central/macs-low-popularity-keeps-them-safer-hacking-and-malware-138

[DavidDvorkin]

1. I'd recommend this 1,000 times, if I could

But here comes the deluge of apple sauce.

[Gman]

2. I"m not familiar with OS X's security but I am with Linux and

I understand that Mac OS was originally based on Linux. Linux does not need virus software and you will find no real virus software for Linux because malware will never get the permissions needed to run on Linux. I understand it's the same structure for Mac's.

[FailureToCommunicate]

31. Bingo! We have (most of) the answer only a few replies down from the OP...

[Recursion]

35. Mach and BSD, actually

They share a common ancestor with Linux.

[wolfgangmo]

43. Bang - bullseye.

I check the security log. Hackers sniff around the portals all the time, but they get nothing.

The few times they try to insert anything or we browse to an infected site the attacks get stopped cold.

Hackers attack for a few reasons, first for the challenge, but also for the bragging rights. Your basic argument seems to be that no one is attempting a virus takeover of MACs in general. Seems to me that bragging rights on that one would be worth a lot of coin in hacker circles.

And yet no one has done it. While I'm not saying it can't be done, I am saying that it is a more secure platform. Got any more straw men needing knocking over?

[NYC_SKP]

3. I would think that hacker types would feel challenged to attack Macs to prove a point...

...if what the article says is true.

Just puttin' that idea out there.

:shrug:

[FailureToCommunicate]

32. And here is the other point that put's all those "small market share" arguments to

rest. Hackers do what they do to impress (who, I don't know, their mom maybe?) and it would be real cool to boast that you had infected all the cute little macs everywhere... But they can't. Not that they haven't tried,
they just can't.

[onenote]

4. cutting to the bottom line: macs are more secure

Give whatever reason you want, the bottom line is the same: if you are using a mac today, you are less likely to be harmed by a cyber attack than you are if you are using a windows pc.

[FailureToCommunicate]

33. PC users worry and are wrecked by mal-ware,etc. a lot. Mac users: zippo. Whatever the reason

Things just work on a Mac. Spend a couple of hundred bucks more and see. Don't worry, be happy.

[Billy Burnett]

5. A problem especially for people running 10+ year old Macs.

The new operating systems require faster/bigger/better hardware to run, same goes with security software.

Macs just last, and remain functional for far too long for their own good. ;)

My 1998 G3 macs are still running fine, slow compared to new models, but for the jobs assigned to them they are still running great.

[emulatorloo]

13. Yes, I am posting on a mac from circa 2000 w 10.5. My windows machine from that year is long gone.

This could explain the supposed "unpopularity" of macs cited in the article; they don't get as replaced as often.

[jmodden]

28. OS X on G3

I am running OS 10.5 on a G3 via X Post Facto.......slowly. But, it can be done.

[jmodden]

29. My 233 G3 was born 2/18/98

[tridim]

6. Go easy on the Macheads, it's the only advantage they have left.

Apparently Apple's unpopularity is worth the ultra-premium price.

[DavidDvorkin]

7. They also still have their feelings of smug superiority

Unjustified but rampant.

[emulatorloo]

12. Weird, because your post is dripping with feelings of smug superiority

I use both, I like both. From my observations, Mac Haters are about the worst when it comes to smugness. To me it is all strange - they are tools. Do people hate hammers?

[DavidDvorkin]

15. The Mac is a crappy tool

whose worshipers think it's a gift from the gods.

Perhaps if I were a carpenter and had to deal with people who acted that way about a crappy variety of hammer, I'd feel the same way I now do about the Mac and the smug, loud ones among its devotees.

[emulatorloo]

17. I still don't get your anger. Let people use and enjoy their "crappy tools" in peace.

Again in my long experience, Mac Haters are the smuggest and loudest of them all.

[emulatorloo]

14. Weird, because the Macbook Core 2 Duo is about the same price as the Sony Core 2 Duo at the Bestbuy

Brand name equivalent spec machines.

You have to shop around just like anything else. Like anything else there are sweet spots.

[tridim]

16. I don't buy retail boxes, I build my own

And consequently save about 50% over pre-built PCs and about 80% over pre-built Macs.

Unfortunately pre-built is your only choice unless you hack the OS, and even then it's a PITA.

PCs are cheaper, by a LOT. Always have been.

[emulatorloo]

18. Then recognize that you are comparing Apples to Oranges. Not everybody is a screw-driver jockey.

[tridim]

19. I'm comparing the entire PC market to the entire Apple market

You're using one name-brand retail PC as the entire PC market.

[emulatorloo]

20. No -- like I said ON EDIT above, not every consumer is a screwdriver jockey or wants to be one.

Comparably spec'd Brand Name turnkey systems are comparably priced.

[tridim]

24. Doesn't matter, it's still a significant part of the market..

Go to Microcenter and check out the homebrew section compared to the retail section.

[wolfgangmo]

42. Micro- what?

Never heard of it.

Must be some small regional specialty store tucked back into some corner somewhere so only geeks can find it. Hmmmm. It seems like you are generalizing a small store to the entire market. Bwahahahahahahaha. Just my 2 cents.

FYI - I use both in our medical practice. The Macs cost less to run and have WAY fewer technical problems. Unless everyone on your staff is a screwdriver packin geek then apples just cost less to run because you don't have to have a geek on staff full time just to troubleshoot. That is just my personal cost benefit analysis but it is based on setting up systems for about 150 companies before I bought into a medical practice and got off the road.

[central scrutinizer]

8. article seems illogical

If Macs have more known vulnerabilities and are patched slower, why would hackers not go for the low hanging fruit? Especially since Mac owners apparently are poseurs who have money to burn, according to other posters here. BTW, I am a proud Mac owner - my ancient G3 finally gave up the ghost and I have a beautiful new iMac.

[harun]

9. Mac inherited better security through a core Unix operating system.

I use both systems (Mac and Win) daily and there are things I like and dislike in both systems.

On my primary home system where I keep the things I want to keep secure, secure I use OS X though. It is much harder for a hacker to write malicious web code, or malicious software that will make its way in to a Unix based system. There are just a lot more open doors on a Windows system.

My Windows systems are more "snappy" for the same amount of horsepower as the Mac. The Mac just does what I need it to do without many problems. The media apps on it are easy to use and do what I need. Gaming is much much better on the Windows system. I can however play games like Starcraft on the Mac just fine.

[Grassy Knoll]

10. This is a great debate for owning a Mac......

I don't get hacked...A+
I don't crash...A++
I don't have to worry...A+++
Sounds like a good idea to spend a little more.
Not saying they are better though.

[Sherman A1]

39. Same Here

no need to add anything to your comments.

[TrogL]

11. Absolutely no proof given

You can check any independent security vulnerability database you like to see the figures behind my statement

The one's I've checked show a brazillion Windows vulnerabilies - one or two for UNIX-based systems.

...but Secunia has been my favorite for a long time.

OK, so show us something besides the front-end to their website. Like maybe an actual report?

UNIX's safety is based upon its design. It was designed from the ground up to be a secure operating system. It had to - there were students on the same server as teachers. It has to run fast and tight and consume few resources. Computers used to cost big bucks.

The other feature leading to high security is that everybody has access to the source code. You can see for yourself if it's secure or not.

Windows was designed as a single-user operating system, with security added as an afterthought. Its memory management is a joke (rumour has it that they finally did something about it for Windows 7 but I'm not holding my breath) and the OS itself is bloated beyond all belief by its monolithic design.

Microsoft should do what Apple did - bolt their GUI on top of a UNIX kernel.

[billh58]

21. Market share tells

the story much better than debating "whose is bigger":

Windows: 88.42%
Mac: 9.61%
Linux: 0.88%

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2342257,00.asp

The OP is correct. There are more hackers going after holes in Windows, because there is more money to be made from the vast majority of Windows systems in use worldwide. The reason that there are more successful attacks on Windows, is that most people do not use computer condoms, and unprotected browsing is dangerous activity.

My three Windows-based computers are on the Internet pretty much 24/7, and I have never been hacked in over 15-years. Attacked? Of course, on a daily basis, but never successfully. I am running a hardware firewall, software firewalls, constantly updated virus protection, constantly updated spyware/malware protection, auto-updates from Microsoft, and I don't open e-mail from an unknown source, download "freebies," or stick strange disks into my computer's tender parts.

The answer to the question of which system is "better," is that they both have their advantages and disadvantages, and either system is well suited to a broad range of tasks and uses. Musicians and artists seem to prefer Macs, while businesses, home users, and gamers prefer Windows. I started out with a Commodore, became a Mac baby when the first Mac desktop was introduced in 1984, and switched to Windows with the introduction of 3.1 in 1992. Why? There were simply more business applications written specifically for Windows.

I believe that the advice I was given way back when still holds true: select the software that you need (or want) first, and then pick a computer that is best suited to run it.

[wuvuj]

41. Vista basic works well for me...

...after shutting off the windows security crap and using a selection of freeware security programs. Vista just about drove me crazy till I shut all the crap down.

[4_TN_TITANS]

22. What a flame-bait thread.

Our Mac never crashes, never gets infected, and we are completely satified with it. By all means, if you are happy with something else stay with it.

[Renew Deal]

23. What a non-sequitur.

:shrug:

[thesquanderer]

25. Misinformation

The article is full of misinformation. Like talking about a Mac virus from 1982 (there were no Macs until 1984). Then saying that Macs had more viruses than subsequent Atari/Commodore big sellers because the Mac folk had the modems. In reality, only a small percentage of any computers had modems in the 80s, and most viruses propogated via floppy disks. The more I read, the less credible the author became, so I eventually just stopped reading.

But to his main point, so what IF Macs are only more secure because they have the smaller market share? I happen to think there are other reasons, but it doesn't matter. If you don't want to have to think about viruses and such, the Mac is the better choice, regardless of the reason.

[era veteran]

26. I guess windows would be ok if it didn't fail/break so much

Two Macs still working great / Six PC's recycled. When you pry the mouse out of my cold fingers. Only spam (I had forgotten the word) is an occasional Netflix.

[mrs_p]

27. i just don't care what computer one uses

to each their own, no?

[Fearless]

30. Oh let the preening and posturing continue...

:eyes:

[jasmeel]

34. Thank you for pointing this out! This argument drives me nuts!

This line is good "Macs contain no special, secret security sauce that makes them more attack-resistant than Windows Vista" HAH!

[magcat]

36. How 'bout a few facts?

A recent survey revealed 85% of Mac owners also own a PC-so largely they know at least a little when they say Macs are better...
Market share is determined by new sales and indeed Macs are used much longer than PCs,web surveys of actual sign on data indicate a much higher market share (sorry no ref)
In my own home we have 5 PCs (all home built) and 2 Macs but we use the Macs for everything but gaming and work (windows required) but "technically" we are therefore "71%" PC

I have never had an serious issue with my Windows machines with any kind of malware but the constant expense and constant downloading of patches etc drives me nuts..

I also don't like having to rush out and stop my family and friends from buying a new PC because theirs has become unusable with all the crap and malware its collected-I am guessing that that senario is a good third of all new PC sales-most "normal" people can't deal..nor should they have to btw..

Its absurd to say Macs have less "defense mechanisims" than PCs-the base system of Unix is inherently multi user -it doesn't need a thousand arsse covering patches for gaping holes that the assumed single user (or protected sub net) Windows does

"low popularity" is ass covering spin endlessly promoted by the PC drones...

[billh58]

38. Those who argue

incessently, and subjectively, about which computer is "better," and develop an emotional attachment to a tool, have many more problems than just the fear of being hacked...;-)

[magcat]

40. tools

Whole thing has nothing to do with what is the better tool. Its a proxy for the ongoing culture wars.....

Curious why you think that having a fondness for ones tools is a marker for "many more problems"-never had a favorite car,a great tool that brought a smile ?
In fact, I think true mastery starts when you start making/improving the tools of your vocation


You said:
"I am running a hardware firewall, software firewalls, constantly updated virus protection, constantly updated spyware/malware protection, auto-updates from Microsoft, and I don't open e-mail from an unknown source, download "freebies," or stick strange disks into my computer's tender parts."

me too, I don't have any problems either -but it is a pain in the ass

[billh58]

44. The "tools"

remark was directed at those who insist that a Ford is "better" than a Chevy, or that a Mac is "better" than a PC running Windows. And no, I have never had a favorite car, nor a particular tool that brought a smile, and I'm a licensed aircraft mechanic. The things that have brought a smile to my face, however, have been arriving at a destination, and admiring a job well done.

I understand the feeling of having a subjective "preference" for a particular knife, gun, car, or computer, and that some "special" tools are designed to accomplish specific tasks better than others. FWIW, I prefer Snap-On to Craftsman, but that doesn't make Snap-On a "better" tool. I have also been a witness to the Mac vs. PC flame wars for many years, and they're still as silly and juvenile as they ever were.

Peace...:toast:

[magcat]

45. Thanks-I learned something

Thanks Bill-I get what your saying -its indeed not the tool, its the "admiration of a job well done" (in this case the toolmaker)
Perhaps sometime after closing up the panel on a particularly good job have you ever wondered if a mechanic you will never meet will open it up and see it?
I think it's like a communication of values,that its not always about just "good enough" to get a paycheck

be well

[billh58]

46. Like a good haircut,

a repair job "well done" should not be apparent to others...;-)

[democratdoug]

37. Hackers can hack whatever they want... nothing to do with mac or pc

when I worked in graphic pre-press we used macs and pc's. We used pc's for servers and RIP's, and mostly macs to send files over. I'm glad macs don't get hacked as much and hope Apple stays small enough to avoid becoming a target for hackers. Both pc and mac are tools. I use whichever one I need to get a particular task done efficiently... although my gf, who is a programmer, really likes the superb quality of the keyboard on my powerbook. I do think macs are hacked less because of their small numbers, but I consider that a positive thing. Neither one is safe from attacks in my opinion...hackers will hack pc's and macs, just thankfully less for macs.