[MW Forums]

Are Macs impervious to malicious software? No. Have Macs been the subject of catastrophic attacks? No again. Should Mac users be vigilant anyway? Of course. more

[durandal343]

but instead you need to double-click the System Preferences icon in the Dock, then double-click the Sharing icon in the Internet & Network section.
I'm pretty sure these are single-clicks. Not to nitpick /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Good article. I, too, think that if osX becomes more popular Mac users are going to have to be more aware of security.

[jmincey]

It's not really a nitpick. Well, it is on one level -- especially if it's just a typo -- but it casts doubt on just how experienced the author is with Macs. Imagine if I were to write an article on Windows security and I spoke of "control-clicking" on an icon instead of right-clicking.

[durandal343]

You do have a point there.

[OM_user]

I stopped reading the article when I hit that line too. Sorry, but the credibility of the author went down the tubes when I saw that. Anyone writing a serious article about security better damn well know how to use OS X. If they are double-clicking stuff that only requires a single click (and has NEVER required double-clicks in all of OS X's life) then they have no business writing articles about this IMHO.
That may sound overly harsh, but that one line shows an amateurish understanding of OS X on a very basic beginner level. This is the kind of silly stuff I deal with at work with complete beginners.

[shoaf]

I agree. When I see someone double-clicking EVERYTHING, they lose a lot of credibility in my eyes. It's not really a Windows- or Mac-thing; it's a computer thing.
It was almost comical on a couple of occasions when I was trying to "teach" someone how to click only once on an icon. It took them several tries to get the hang of a single-click. Yet before his 4th birthday, my son easily had the understanding of when you should click, and when you should double-click.
Thankfully, I'm glad the Mac OS allows for a double-click to do the same function as single-clicks in instances like the ones mentioned in the article. Seems that much software (and web sites) is/are not as "newbie-proof" and will create two instances of the one you were trying to accomplish. (Like buying 2 items when you meant to buy one, or simply spawning 2 new windows instead of one...)
Whew, I'm really making a big deal of this, huh? /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[nmjim]

I have observed so many Windows users not knowing what requires a single-click and what requires a double-click. Even people I know who work for Intel I see double clicking everything -- double-clicking links in the browser even. In my opinion it's because Windows is so unintuitive.
Buttons and browser links are single-clicks. Icons (files, folders, aliases [shortcuts]) are double-clicks.

[durandal343]

Whew, I'm really making a big deal of this, huh?
Not at all. This also frustrates me to no end. How hard is it really to click once? In my limited experience it is very hard for some people. They just do not understand and run around doubble-clicking everying they can find. Very frustrating. I was trying to get someone to change the name of a file. This takes a single click on the name of the file. They ended up opening the file 3 or 4 times before getting it right.
I like the idea of the article. And we must keep in mind that it is an "opinion article" and as such is not meant to be overly technical. I agree with the opinion of the author but also agree that an oversight such as this in something like the "dock" that has been in OSX from the beginning and is used every day multiple times by anyone using OSX is hard to excuse.

[TheBoyKen]

If they are double-clicking stuff that only requires a single click (and has NEVER required double-clicks in all of OS X's life) then they have no business writing articles about this IMHO.
Whilst I wholeheartedly kind of (!) agree with you - and I too sighed when I read this line - I think the author makes an interesting point... that is, newbies / PC switchers still need to know how to protect themselves just as much as more experienced users (granted they may need more help but they have the same need).
Writing the article as if one were a security expert, with the single/double click faux pas is probably not wise, but I'm not sure the author was doing that (even though that's what I expected when I clicked the link to the article) - she said she was asking security vendors and just wondering how important it all is etc. and sounded more like a concerned end user than a security expert.
So as I say, I think it's important (a) that the experienced user can tell if their system is secure, and if it isn't, has a way of securing it adequately and (b) that inexperienced mac users can do the same.
Even if people think "those people don't deserve to use computers", they'll still be potentially passing around virii etc. if their systems are unprotected. And as we all know from the various big PC virii, that at the very least can knock out our ISPs / local networks, even if our systems are (seemingly) bulletproof, which will still have the desired effect of p1ssing us off...
Just being the devil's avocado.

[HumanJHawkins]

In reply to:

---

it casts doubt on just how experienced the author is with Macs

---

I would cut the guy some slack... You used to have to double-click on just about anything. And even though a single-click is all that is needed, a double click still works.
So, if anything, this indicates that this guy has been using Macs forever and just hasn't broken his double-click habit.

[TheBoyKen]

Turning on OS Xs firewall is a no-brainer, but finding it isnt. I looked for this control under the Security heading but instead you need to double-click the System Preferences icon in the Dock, then double-click the Sharing icon in the Internet & Network section.
Aside from the double-clicking / single-clicking comments of other readers, not everyone keeps their System Preferences in their Dock (or can accidentally drag it off etc.), whereas it's always found in the Apple menu.
Also, you're making a valid point that some of the security settings aren't contained within the 'Security' System Preference, which seems a bit unnecessarily difficult to locate them. If you're using Tiger (Mac OS X 10.4) though, you can perform a Spotlight search, to help locate things. So if I fire up System Prefs, and start typing 'firewall' into the search field at the top right of the window, then by the time I've typed 'fir...', it's whittled down the search results to just the 'Sharing' and 'Startup disk' system preferences. In addition it gives a list containing 'Firewall advanced settings', 'Turn firewall on or off for services', as well as 'Target disk mode' (which is why it considers the 'Startup disk' preference to be relevant. (Single) Clicking on either of the two results in the list that contain 'firewall' opens up the relevant section of the relevant System Preference - in this case, the Sharing preference.
Granted that may not be the most obvious way of finding it, but you have to admit it's pretty simple. I'm not sure 10.3 allowed searching in System Prefs (I think it only came about with Spotlight, i.e. 10.4).
Ken

[OM_user]

I can see the point you're making here, and somewhat agree. I understand that this was not intended to be a technical article on real security. But I would hope that anyone writing articles on using a computer or computer service, whether it be Windows based or a Mac, would take some time to learn to properly use the system. Talking about double-clicking dock and SysPref icons in an article aimed at beginners on security does nothing but perpetuate the notion that double-clicking everything they see is the way to use a computer.
We need journalists to make sure they have at least basic computer use in their grasp, so they aren't spreading misinformation around.
Also, don't these articles get proofed before getting posted to MacWorld? I find it hard to believe that if any of the editors so very familiar with the Mac even casually perused this article they wouldn't have seen this glaring error and corrected it. Or at least contacted the author to have them correct it.
This only makes me wonder if there is any proofing process that happens here at all before an article is published.

[thebiggfrogg]

I concur about the old school double-clicking habit being a possible reason for the author's faux pas. Pushing 4O now, it was only about 9 years ago I realized I did not need to double space after a period in a sentence in a word processing document--a habit that I learned using typewriters (?!?) in high school.

[Nobody]

While this article may have been targeted to the 'Mac innocent', I feel it quite possibly may have done a disservice to what many feel is a stalwart Mac utility in Little Snitch (Objective Development -- also the maker of LaunchBar, a favorite of Mac users.) I think it deserves a thorough review, as opposed to a summary execution without benefit of anything remotely resembling a description befitting its capabilities.
Not only is what it does unique (Intego now offers similar functionality built into NetBarrier) as far as utilities for OS X go, but it only stands to become much more useful in the future, as mindshare of OS X increases. I don't know what email program the author uses, but Apple's Mail is installed as a Little Snitch 'allowed' factory default. In fact, Little Snitch comes with many defaults configured so that system operation and normal internet access can proceed as usual, without any user inconvenience; and if your email app is, say, Entourage, remember that all good third-party preference panes actually have useful options/tools within their Mac-like interfaces! /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif That includes Little Snitch - you can manually configure it so that it allows processes based upon server, port and protocol. Really, it might take all of 10 minutes to manually (and permanently) allow all the usual suspects?
While I understand this article wasn't meant to be a review, I didn't necessarily find it to be straight talk on Mac security either.