Quantcast
PCWorld.com is upgrading some back-end systems. Some site features, such as user registration, may be temporarily unavailable.

Blogs

Making Sense of the Snow Leopard Security Debate

Tony Bradley, PC World

Snow LeopardSnow Leopard is out and users seem generally satisfied with the latest version of the Mac OS X operating system. The release hasn't come without some controversy though, part of which has been the debate over the malware protection features Apple included in Snow Leopard.

The bottom line is that both sides of the debate are correct to some extent. The fact is that there are hundreds of thousands of threats and exploits circulating in the wild that target Windows and only a couple for the Mac. The threats that do exist for the Mac are almost more proof-of-concept, just to show it can be done, than actual attacks.

That doesn't mean there is no reason to be concerned though. Apple is not perfect and the Mac operating system is not impervious. Charlie Miller hacked a Macbook in a matter of minutes to claim the Pwn20wn contest prize at the Cansec West conference earlier this year. Granted, he exploited a flaw in the Safari web browser to accomplish the goal, but the bottom line is that there was nothing within the Mac operating system that prevented him from doing so.

Without even starting a debate about whether Mac OS X is more or less secure than Windows, let's just agree that it is not 100 percent secure. That is all that is relevant to the debate about whether or not Snow Leopard needs malware protection.

Apple Mac OS X users are very proud of the perceived security of their operating system and they're not shy about letting others know. Don't believe me? Just bring up any comparison of the Mac and Windows operating systems and count the seconds before someone points out the millions of viruses that plague Windows as some sort of validation that the Mac operating system is just inherently more secure.

The other prevailing point of view though is that the lack of attacks against Mac OS X systems is a function of market share more than the security of the operating system code. In other words, the debate over which operating system is more secure is rendered irrelevant by the fact that the Mac operating system doesn't have enough market share to be worth attacking. Essentially, there haven't been enough Mac systems for the criminal underground to justify the business case and maximize the return on investment for dedicating time and effort to exploit it.

But, that is changing. Apple has a strong, loyal...and growing audience. Mac OS X will not dominate the enterprise desktop anytime soon, but is steadily scratching away at the desktop OS market share. It has captured the hearts of consumers and is slowly becoming a viable system for business use as well.

So, yes- its true that there are infinitely more threats targeted at Windows systems than Macs, but no- it is not because (at least not entirely- remember, not trying to flame an irrelevant debate here) the Mac is impervious to attack.

Increased market share will draw the attention of the Internet criminal underground at some point. If Apple and/or malware vendors don't begin to address the issue proactively, Mac users will get caught with their proverbial pants down when an attacker does decide to take aim at the Mac OS X platform.

It is a good thing that Apple has recognized, no matter how tacitly, that malware is an issue that needs to be addressed. The malware protection included with Snow Leopard offers little in the way of protection though and has rankled security vendors like McAfee and Symantec.

I think at this point all parties agree that the bullseye on Apple's back is getting bigger and that there is a growing need for malware protection of some sort. The question of whether Apple's efforts are worthwhile, or whether Apple or third-party security vendors are better equipped to handle the issue will play out over time. Regardless of how the malware protection is done and who provides it, the Mac OS X operating system has been successful enough in claiming market share that users need to start being more paranoid about securing it.

Tony Bradley is an information security and unified communications expert with more than a decade of enterprise IT experience. He tweets as @PCSecurityNews and provides tips, advice and reviews on information security and unified communications technologies on his site at tonybradley.com .

  • Recommend this story?
  • 0 Yes
    0 No

"Making Sense of the Snow Leopard Security Debate " Comments

 

Deal Breakers

Special Offers for PC World Users

People who read this also read:

BizFeed

  • Hacked Climate Change E-mails Highlight Security Concerns In the heat of the climate change debate sparked by hacked e-mail messages, there has been little discussion of how the e-mails were leaked. In a connected world, security and privacy are both more important, and harder to come by.
  • Five Reasons the Google Chrome OS will Flop The Google Chrome OS is generating excitement, but it doesn't seem to be compelling enough to be worth the hype. Here are five reasons Chrome will ultimately fail to impress.
  • Confessions of an Office 2010 CTP Tester Microsoft released the public beta of Office 2010 yesterday, but I have already been using Office 2010 for the past four months. Here are my thoughts on the new Office.
  • Google's Chrome May Shift the OS Landscape Google is providing a sneak peak at the Chrome OS today. Maybe the Google Midas touch can succeed where decades of Apple and Linux have failed--denting Microsoft’s OS dominance.

All PC World Blogs

Sponsored Links