yellow said:
Well, which is it?
There aren't enough Macs and Mac users out there to count as anything, or they're all smug and worthy of a slap in the face?
People can't have it both ways.
Actually, I would say it's the easiest thing in the world to have it both ways in this case, because the scenarios you describe aren't mutually exclusive. Remember, the hacker world is not monolithic. While the majority of hackers may consider mac users a waste of time, it only takes one with some time on her hands and a beef against (smug) Mac zealots to write a virus for OS X, and that's that. I can tell you as someone who works with hackers (half of my buddies are at BlackHat this week) that OS X is NOT inherently secure, and that there are plenty of vulnerabilities that surface on it that are
well-known in the "hacker" community long before they are made "public," and also long before they are also repaired by Apple.
OS X is definitely inherently more secure than Windows, but the near-complete lack of viruses/use of other exploits for them is definitely not because they are ironclad in terms of security. That should be
abundantly clear from a cursitory reading of the kbase article on the latest security update. Many of those fixes were to
rootkit holes! As in, god-sized sized security holes...
I'm not trying to rant or anything, but I've definitely realized in the last few months of my internship that OS X is not nearly as secure as I'd previously assumed, and also that there are a growing number of hackers that are pissed off--or at least find it amusingly laughable-- that Apple and followers are so brazenly smug about security. I hate Symantec just as much as the rest of you for their shameless plugs of their USELESS mac software, but that doesn't mean that OS X is anywhere near impenetrable, especially if you use simple word passwords--and you bet your butt the average mac user does this, if he even sets a password at all.