Difference between mac and pc security

Last week, there was a lot focus on the security of Apple Macs after the Russian security firm, Dr Web, revealed that they had found a botnet comprising over half a million infected Mac computers.

• organize mac menu bar icons.
• just my imagination mac miller!
• unhide row in excel mac.
• create playlist in itunes mac.
• tony hawk underground 2 free download mac.
• Microsoft Windows 10 vs. Apple macOS: 18 security features compared | CSO Online.
• proanimator para after effects cs5 mac.

Macs were becoming infected with Flashback malware after users were redirected to a rogue website from a compromised site. JavaScript code was used to load a Java-applet which exploited a vulnerability since patched. Apple has traditionally marketed its systems as being more secure than those running Microsoft Windows, but how true is that?

If you began your career using Unix, as I did, one of the things you come to value is that Unix and hence Mac OS has always had a security model built into the operating system. The concept of Read, Write and Execute for various executables and data, as implemented in Unix, is simple to understand and has stood Unix systems in good stead for many years.

Unix has other simple features, such as storing executable code and data in separate folders. When you install a program in Unix, you typically predict which folders the executables and data will reside. The corollary of this is that it is easy to completely remove an installation. But is it in fact just tidier? Fundamentally, there is no reason why Macs should not be targeted using malware in the same way that viruses, Trojans and worms are built to target Windows systems.

You might run, for example, a piece of JavaScript that steals credentials, or a keylogger, without necessarily attacking the operating system. Likewise, you might exploit a vulnerability in a third party application, as happened recently when a backdoor Trojan embedded inside boobytrapped Word documents successfully ran on Macs. Ten years ago, when Windows gained a bad reputation for security, Microsoft responded by introducing its Trustworthy Computing Initiative.

However, Microsoft took a long look at the threat and made a conscious effort to evolve their operating systems to counter it. Initially, one of the biggest threats was considered by Microsoft to be buffer overflow. This is where regions of computer memory that should not be used for executing code are misused by rogue software.

As well as preventing developers inadvertently building this into their applications by adding safeguards to the compilers, Microsoft also introduced memory protection mechanisms within their operating systems. For example, since Vista was introduced in , Windows has had address space layout randomisation ASLR which is implemented so as to obscure most of what an attacker needs to conduct, for example, shell code injection attacks. I think what all of this exemplifies is two populations of users Mac OS and Windows that have developed very different attitudes to security.

Those using Windows have been aware for a long time that their systems have vulnerabilities, and so they are much more likely to use some form of protection such as anti-virus software. Windows users also typically update their software when an update is released by Microsoft; they know updates mean that vulnerabilities may have been found, and it is safer to update than be exposed. Those using Mac OS have, perhaps, been lulled into a false sense of security. A Mac OS user is less likely to be attacked than a Windows user, but that is nothing to do with the level of vulnerability in the operating system.

Those building malware would rather attack the vast majority of the users. They get a bigger bang for their buck, to borrow a phrase from the military. Apple has its part to play by releasing updates rapidly in response to known vulnerabilities, and users need to make sure they implement those updates as well as installing security software to protect against the coming threat. Image credit: Follow NakedSecurity on Twitter for the latest computer security news. Macs safer, no. Having said that in the last 20 years of using a Mac I have been infected 0 times had 0 malware installed and feel safe.

When running a competing product, it never found anything on my system. There were numerous reasons that it exposed me to potentially more vulnerabilities than it could have ever found. By default am antivirus system must download and install updates. It will generally do that silently to avoid constantly nagging the user.

At that point you are trusting the security measures of the vendor to protect your system from infection through their software. Anti virus software is a personal choice and not always needed. The performance hit from most as well as the way they prevent real work from occurring at times leads me to believe I can rebuild my system once every 2 years with less disruption than installing AV software. Never, ever use your own example of being virus-less for X years as a proof your system is secure. I have run windows 95 without anti virus for more than 10 years without virus of any kind.

It was evidently only because I was prudent, as when my father get the same computer, the system became infected beyond repair in less than ten minutes. Most of the time the anti-malware program has not stopped the infection and cannot remove it though Malwarbytes is pretty good in this respect, but not infallible. HOW is this situation better than Mac users thinking they don't need protection??? In both cases the user lives with a false sense of security but in the Windows case they have paid for it. So what I am getting out of this is the best combination is your computer being a Mac and your user being intelligent and diligent about putting antivirus and updates on their machine.

That gives you an OS that is targeted less frequently and a user that knows they are not invincible and updates their machine and AV software regularly. I have nothing against Windows PCs as I have to use them every day, it's because of that I know how unrelenting the updates and patches are: You are getting it wrong dumbass. Macs also have viruses.

It's actually more or less because PCs have the market share that the viruses target them. But don't worry my dear little Mac fanboy, you're getting yours.

Microsoft Windows 10 security

People are eating up that supply of Macs, along with the supply of B. Apple feeds you. You know what that means, right? Yeah, you're now worth targeting since there are enough of you. But here's the kicker my friend, the part that makes it the sweetest for me, Apple products are considered "Status Symbols," because they're so over-priced, so all the more reason to attack you, you have more money to steal.

Wow, Sophos continues its "scare the mac users into buying unecessary security software " campaign. I loved the bit about "backdoor Trojan embedded inside boobytrapped Word documents "! This most recent Mac Flashplayer virus was therefore still technically a zero day attack no patch available on Macs, 42 days after the vulnerability was patched on "buggy and insecure" Windows. Apple originally did their own JVM when Sun basically told them it was not worth their effort to support the platform. Perhaps the two parties should get together and remedy this situation.

Yes, because Sophos really are trying to get people to buy their software. Their free software. Their software that they give away for free. That they don't in fact sell at all. That makes perfect sense. Certainly more sense than the idea your beloved fanboi OS could have any security issues. The "free"software is a classic bait lol. Certainly my beloved OS has lots of security issues, but it is beloved because it works reliably and is easy to use.

It is of course peoples perrogative to stick their head in the sand and ignore the warnings from Sophos who, you could legitimately argue have a potential vested interest in scaring MAC users although their MAC AV product is presently free for home use!

However, there are similar warnings coming from many other independent sources and many incidents being reported to support the proliferation of MAC attacks. It is my understanding that MACs are definitely now becoming a focus of attention for the authors of malware exactly because they know that they are surrounded by this invulnerability culture and often left unprotected and so they can use them as carriers to inject malware into networks and other systems.

By being in denial, I feel you potentially put others as well as yourself at risk. I will not dispute the merits of MACs over PCs especially in the area of security but neither they nor Apple are perfect and I strongly recommend all MAC users to start taking this issue seriously. Ha finally someone is talking about the insecurities of the Apple OS, how safe can you be if you leave your house unlocked? Even if there are no known thieves in the area?

Three weeks ago I looked at a clients personal Mac, infected files, she was very surprised and said "but Macs don't have viruses" A very expensive mistake. I still dispair at the number of people who ignore simple security basics, regardless of the OS you use, you should have a decent AV system. There are no decent AV systems though.

Apple - USE TAG

The performance of AV systems is dismal. You didn't mention what the files were infected with. What was it? I bought a new PC and went online without virus protection. In less than 1 hour I was infected by a malicious site. I would never keep a computer — whether Mac or Windows — without virus protection. To do so is to play roulette. Have to agree with City-Support — although he omits to say whether the infected files had windows viruses in them which would not affect his client's Mac! Have used Sophos for about 15 years on a mixed Mac and PC network we are a Printer and have not had an issue.

Even Mr Cluley's occasional barbed stabs at Macs have only been mildly irritating when it is obvious that not running a "decent AV system" in a business environment is just plain stupid. Like G Dean, the "charms" of MicroSoft elude me, but as long as the machines are protected and the only worry is the convoluted logic behind the operating system — I can live with them — albeit with having to pay for "professional" help which is not needed on the Macs.

Mac OSX is just as vulnuerable, and this latest Trojan proves that. On my MacBook I have auto log on disabled, and I have the firewall enabled and stealth mode on. I also have Sophos Anti-Virus installed on my Mac for protection. I do checks for updates at least once a week, and I keep Sophos Anti-Virus updated. Patching any vulnerabilities will ensure that such drive-by attacks will be nullified.

However, keep in mind that nothing is perfect, so be very careful of which websites you go to. You sound just like what PC people went through 10 years ago. I'm glad there is a reasonably minded, logical Mac person. People hack in CIA, DOD, Pentagon computers routinely and, amazingly, there are plenty of Mac user hang onto this notion that Macs "safer" and that "it doesn't get viruses" etc. I was just speaking person working for one of our govt departments and despite incredibly sophisticated computer security, almost every single one of the computers have been hacked.

Wake up Mac users. Incidentally I also have a laptop with I take it you mean Alan Woodward. I should have used a different name. Anyway, I take a go at answering. Thank you for responding, Alan. See http: IMO, mac owners should be very concerned. NT was wriiten from the ground up by Dave Cutler who was hired away from Digital. Once the product is launched, Apple uses a very subtle yet strong approach. Its advertising is always understated and the company relies on enthusiasts to promote its products by word of mouth. To what extent do you think that the discussion about Mac vs PC is not so much a case of which is better, but rather about your needs as a user and what you primarily need a laptop for?

Whenever anyone asks me for advice as to which PC or Mac they should buy, I always ask: Apple has a very strong brand identity. How much of the appeal of Macs do you think has to do with marketing and with its desirability as a brand, a status symbol? It has everything to do with marketing and branding, but also the fact that its products are great. Apple is very clever and deserves a lot of credit for resurrecting a company that was struggling in the mids.

People buy into the marketing but they then add to it by evangelising the products. When someone has a Mac, they generally tell people about it and promote it either by word of mouth or by writing about it blogs, Twitter, Facebook. Do you think the higher price is justified? It says a lot about you if you spend money at the higher end, and if you save up for something, you tend to feel more of a sense of achievement when purchasing it. A Mac is considered to be the trendier and cooler laptop option. How important do you think style and design are to its popularity?

Apple products are seen to be premium products and the style and design is part of that image. The functionality is great but, as I said before, Apple relies on people to promote the product. The fact that these products look great makes people want to show them off. Dell has tried a similar tactic with its latest line of laptops coming in an array of colours and even going as far as getting designers and artists to contribute.

Apple has always understood the need to sell good-looking technology, dating back to the original iMac. Is it possible to say if a Mac or PC is more secure and, if so, why that is? A Mac is definitely more secure due to the fact that there are few viruses that can infect Macs. What do you personally use, PC or Mac, and why? Personally, at home I use a PC but at work I have to use both.

For my personal life, a PC is more than enough, but at work we manage the website mainly using PCs and put the print magazine together using Macs, due to the graphic and design applications available. Please check the box if you want to proceed.

IT leaders are using AI to take security to the next level. But how much security can AI provide? David Petersson examines where Implementing RPA requires planning and coordination between multiple parts of the business to be effective. Execs at IBM Think Discover some of the best multifactor authentication products currently on the market based on target industry and main features Google this week attributed security improvements in Google Play to both automated processes and human reviewers.

Cybereason's Nocturnus Research team has discovered a new strain of the Astaroth Trojan that attacks antivirus software to steal But the market Learn how they work and how an IT manager can use them to assess Cisco earnings and revenue show customers are putting aside global uncertainties and buying into the company's shift toward a Vendors tout hyper-converged infrastructure as a plug-and-play offering, but before you install anything in your data center, be As data centers become more software-based, admins should prepare themselves by learning about the cloud, containers, DevOps and Newcomer Carbon Relay has introduced two products that use artificial intelligence to help IT pros manage data center efficiency.

The Presto engine arose as an alternative to Hive for big data queries. Now, the Presto Software Foundation has formed to promote Real-time data integration isn't like traditional data integration -- "it's moving, it's dirty and it's temporal," cautions one StoryFit data scientists employ machine learning algorithms to gauge film script scenarios' prospects. They use Import.

Mac VS. PC Security | Kaspersky Lab US

Faisal Alani. This was last published in October The value of unified endpoint management PCs shape up for the digital workplace Businesses need to equip staff with the tools to do the job What will office desktop computing look like in ? Logitech K keyboard: How does it affect your web application security testing? Load More View All Opinion. Surface 2 family reboots desktop The first solar-powered internet cafe in Kenya Instantly boost PC performance Photos: Video review: All-in-one thin client Video: Login Forgot your password?

Forgot your password? No problem! Submit your e-mail address below. We'll send you an email containing your password. Your password has been sent to: Please create a username to comment. There are not enough characters in the alphabet - any alphabet - to answer this question. In fact, it's not a question that should have been posed the way it was. To fully examine what platform and related device is a better choice, we need to know what options are available, what existing infrastructure is and how adamantly people adhere to the type of computer versus something else - how important getting the work done is.

If it's really a matter of productivity I love my Apple devices. They work for what I do. But if they didn't work, I would find something that did. It's that simple. Faisal went about this question in a backward manner. He should have asked what device would be the best choice to get the work done. With more and more people are using mobile devices like smartphones and tablets, Mac OS X is just another PC operating system alongside Windows and Linux. Thus it is the user that gets the virus on it, mac users tend not to want to mess with preferences.

I think that Windows PC were so much more mainstream. That is why their security was exploited more. You had a much larger target. The second part there was much more software available for the Windows OS. Lastly the Mac systems tended to be more costly.

10 Differences Between Macs and PCs

Those differences have faded over the years and are harder to distinguish. I still tend to see many more corporate environments using the Windows platform. After reading this very false notion, I stopped reading: Also, with some work you can get macOS to run on a PC Maybe this guy is confused. If you're a casual computer user emails, bills, word, shopping, powerpoint, etc cheap macbooks are your best bet in my opinion.

For years I swore by Dell laptops only because "Macs are too expensive".

Mac vs. PC: Here are the Real Differences

After listening to my Apple-cheerleader-friends, I took a chance on a Macbook back in and never looked back. Just recently had to replace it battery failed and was too expensive to replace, wasn't worth it in a 9 year old machine. Below are reasons: Ran like a new machine to its very last day just slow on startup. Every PC I had: I had to reformat at least twice because they slowed to a hault and were nearly unusable. No more buying a security update anually.

On my PCs I would always go through a lengthy installation process. With the macbook, I plugged a rickety old HP printer in and in 30 seconds, an icon appeared in my dock which was a picture of the exact printer with model and a message pop up that said "found HP printer, ready to print". Bottom line, you will pay more for an Apple product, but you get what you pay for: In I purchased a Macbook Pro a product.

At the beginning of my problems began. First I changed the keyboard, thinking a small water spill might have caused damage to the keyboard. It turned out the keyboard needed cleaning but was otherwise not damaged. The price for cleaning was slightly higher than a new keyboard, so I opted for a new keyboard and asked for the old one back, but it would have cost too much why I left it.

A couple of months later, I brought the computer back to the auctorized MAC dealer.