[MW Forums]

Hackers can't wait to get their hands on the smart phone unveiled by Apple at last week's Macworld Expo. more

[jhorvatic]

I yes the bragging hackers who still can't break OSX's security and now there already bragging about how they are supposedly going to hack the iPhone. Well good luck kiddies cause you're gonna need it. So far hackers have proven to be totally dumb founded when trying to hack OSX. The only way they have been able to hack it is to cheat and leave out the big details like they had a local account on the system.
Whatever /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Alex_Ibrahim]

Hey now... just because there are no meaningful hacks out there doesn't mean OS X is invulnerable.
Apple has done an incredible job to date.
That doesn't mean you should get cocky. Eventually Apple will slip or one of the "bragging" black hat hackers will come up with some amazing new exploit.
Be ready. Follow safe computing practices, keep backups and test those backups.

[Wings]

Oh yeah, "Hackers" just can't wait, can they? I mean, I've waited through the 5 years that MacOSX has been around and still have not seen ONE single piece of malware that OSX users have been plagued with. Wonder how long we'll have to wait until they penetrate the iPhone? Another 5? 10?
Someone wake me when I have something to worry about.

[WildDenali]

I know the AppleTV is based on an Intel processor, but is the iPhone necessarily based on one as well? OS X can run on both PowerPC processors (G3, G4, & G5) and Intel processors. G3s certainly have enough horsepower to run a cell phone, even with all of the iPhone's features.
With IBM providing so many RISC-based chips to game console manufacturers (Nintendo & X-box consoles) and for other embedded uses in appliances, how much more of a stretch would it be to imagine PowerPC chips in the iPhone? They wouldn't have to be supplied by IBM. Motorola makes them too. And they run much cooler than the Intel chips. Try a top end G4 PowerBook on your lap vs. even a lowly MacBook. You'll notice the difference.
The point is: How many hackers would be interested in hacking "mini" OS X on a PowerPC architecture? Not many, I'd imagine. How do we know the iPhone isn't based on a PowerPC chip? We don't.

[webman2k]

Quote:

---

Oh yeah, "Hackers" just can't wait, can they? I mean, I've waited through the 5 years that MacOSX has been around and still have not seen ONE single piece of malware that OSX users have been plagued with. Wonder how long we'll have to wait until they penetrate the iPhone? Another 5? 10?
Someone wake me when I have something to worry about.

---

Do you know why there are so many attempts on Windows machines and so little to none on MacOS? Market Share. No hacker or malware or virus writer wants to bother with Mac OS X. For one, it would probably take a bit more work that with windows, and second - 3-4% of people "might" be affected.
These writers want to affect as many people as possible, and they simply can't do that with Mac OS X. There's nothing to worry about now because we're still a niche market. If something were to happen, and we became 51% of the market, the flood gates would open. Apple would be working overtime, just like Microsoft, to keep this OS secure.
The iPod is secure because it's completely closed. There's no way to load scripts or programs that Apple didn't intent to run. But the iPhone is different. You can render html, and javascript - which opens up a large window for potential security problems.

[aestival]

Quote:

---

OS X can run on both PowerPC processors (G3, G4, & G5) and Intel processors. G3s certainly have enough horsepower to run a cell phone, even with all of the iPhone's features.

---

Last I checked, OSX wasn't processor-specific -- Apple has a whole world of possibilities.
Also, I completely agree that these 'hackers' are a bunch of blowhards. Given their virtually nonexistent record of breaking OSX, which has a full user interface by design, they'll probably take quite some time to even figure out simple enhancement hacks for the iPhone.

[aestival]

Quote:

---

Do you know why there are so many attempts on Windows machines and so little to none on MacOS? Market Share. No hacker or malware or virus writer wants to bother with Mac OS X. For one, it would probably take a bit more work that with windows, and second - 3-4% of people "might" be affected.

---

This is the stupidest, most poisonously wrongheaded logic -- there were plenty of viruses, worms, etc. for OS9, and there are precisely zero (real ones) for MacOSX. Hackers would love the cachet of breaking the supposedly impenetrable MacOSX -- the real reason is that Apple has a far more solid kernel and is far more responsive (admittedly easier for them, given their control over core hardware). The truth is, the only people who seem to want anyone to be concerned about MacOSX malware are increasingly desperate security-software peddlers and juvenile hackers. Windows was not designed for modern network environments, but unix/OSX was -- unix adapts (40 years of in-use testing and refinement), Apple adapts (changing OS, processor), while Microsoft stagnates with incremental changes and an absolutely fixed processor.

[hgwells]

Aestival, I think you may be overreaching by saying there were "plenty" of viruses, etc. for OS 9. Sure, there were some, many of which were inconsequential. But we are generally making comparisons to that "other" platform and, based on that comparison, there were still relatively few viruses (etc) for OS 9. Even then, the Mac OS was known to be more secure.

[webman2k]

Quote:

---

This is the stupidest, most poisonously wrongheaded logic -- there were plenty of viruses, worms, etc. for OS9, and there are precisely zero (real ones) for MacOSX. Hackers would love the cachet of breaking the supposedly impenetrable MacOSX -- the real reason is that Apple has a far more solid kernel and is far more responsive (admittedly easier for them, given their control over core hardware). The truth is, the only people who seem to want anyone to be concerned about MacOSX malware are increasingly desperate security-software peddlers and juvenile hackers. Windows was not designed for modern network environments, but unix/OSX was - unix adapts (40 years of in-use testing and refinement), Apple adapts (changing OS, processor), while Microsoft stagnates with incremental changes and an absolutely fixed processor.

---

OK, let's start here: http://news.zdnet.co...22-6046197.html
An excerpt...
In January, security researcher Neil Archibald, who has already been credited with finding numerous vulnerabilities in OS X, told ZDNet Australia that he knows of numerous security vulnerabilities in Apple's operating system that could be exploited by attackers.
"The only thing which has kept Mac OS X relatively safe up until now is the fact that the market share is significantly lower than that of Microsoft Windows or the more common Unix platforms...If this situation was to change, in my opinion, things could be a lot worse on Mac OS X than they currently are on other operating systems," Archibald said at the time."
I could find plently more articles like this. Hackers don't care about OS X right now. They want to cripple corporate networks, bring down the Internet - big scale things. The more damage you do, the better. This can't be acheived targeting Mac users.
Yes, Mac OS X is by nature a more secure beast, but there are extremely smart hackers out there too. Thinking that there are no major problems effecting Mac OS X because they CAN'T is just stupid.

[darkelf]

Quote:

---

Oh yeah, "Hackers" just can't wait, can they? I mean, I've waited through the 5 years that MacOSX has been around and still have not seen ONE single piece of malware that OSX users have been plagued with. Wonder how long we'll have to wait until they penetrate the iPhone? Another 5? 10?
Someone wake me when I have something to worry about.

---

hubris. it's what's for dinner!

[Martian]

Those who hack and write malware for profit will naturally go for the big numbers and easy targets Windows and ignore Macs.
But those who do it for bragging rights geek version of laying out on the bar to see who is biggest can be heroes only if they hit the hard targets...Macs and UNIX.

[leicaman]

People some who are afraid to say their real names sit around asking questions that can't be answered. Hackers who pretend to break OS X, then promise to release their code in a few days still haven't months later, and the OS X bug a day people who reveal so-called nulverabilities in OS X without telling Apple first.
Yeah, that's a credible bunch. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[danmusician]

Quote:

---

there were plenty of viruses, worms, etc. for OS9, and there are precisely zero (real ones) for MacOSX.

---

All I know is my own experience. I began using Macs in 1991 or 92 with Version 6. I was a late adopter of OS 10. (I think I finally switched at 10.2.8) I never ran virus protection the entire time I ran OS 6 through 9. In those 10+ years, I never saw anything that remotely resembled a virus. No other Mac user I've ever known has seen a virus.
The only people I ever hear talk about getting a Mac virus are people are folks trying to sell me protection software.