Shared publicly  - 
Is Apple 10 years behind Microsoft on security?
Julio Rodriguez's profile photoLeslie Hernandez's profile photoCory Evans's profile photoMilica Maricevic's profile photo
Microsoft sure don't show it with Internet Explorer. :P
Doubtful premise. Microsoft left so many holes that there is little cheese left. The Mac is at least based on *nix, so is ages ahead. Best security is still in Debian-based OS's, last I read.
Haha...Where are the MAC lovers now? As Apple products become more popular, so will the hackers. MAC has gotten a free ride for over a decade; there...shoot yourselves...
as marketshare rises for Apple users, so will the exploits - the mac lovers will nay say that idea to death until it's too late. For the sake of sanity for the Apple user-base, I hope they're not a decade behind, but their response time to the last security/virus problem was a joke & they need to speed that up 10 fold if they want to keep people happy
Sorry t bust your bubble +Robert Worstell the "Nix it is based on has as many holes as swiss cheese too. The difference my friend is that the NIX are mostly backend and yes, they are hacked daily. Every bank use them and where's the security for your credit cards? It is only a figment of the imagination the leads many to believe Linux is secure or Unix for that matter. Wait, oh wait until they are as popular as Windows and bang, holes like a strainer.

The same goes for Windows; it's not that aren't secure, it's the Admins and users that leaves the holes. Take a new PC for example, how many people make sure the Administrators password is set and hardened? How many people create a new user and profile without full admin rights and use a hardened password? Surely not many.

They turn on the PC and it goes right into their desktop, without a password and they blame MS for their own laziness.

Shocks, even hell can be broken if left less secure, so is Linux, Unix any and all flavors. Windows gets hit because of user ignorance and laziness.
@Otto, Sorry but you are wrong according to the latest report by Coverity (a public-private non-profit originally founded by the Dept. of Homeland Security dedicated to discovering flaws in open and closed source software). They found only 0.45 defects per 1000 lines of code in open source software compared to 0.64 defects per 1000 lines of code in proprietary software. These defects, along with errors made by the IT 'pros' setting up the networks, are what hackers use to compromise security. This proves what we have said all along, open source is better and more secure. "More eyes=better code"
+Robbie Campbell +Chris Topher Neither of you guys are wrong. +Robbie Campbell remember that Linux was not written to be used for and by the everyday Mom and Pop. Only serious people (yourself) use Linux, No gaming, no GUI and the click here, there crap that makes Windows easy for even the blind. Yes, the blind use it too.
Linux is similar to Unix and that my friend has been around from the old days on MA-Bell, Xerox etc and why should it not be far more secure? Shocks, every major college MIT use it and improved it and that should not compare as most people want us to believe.

Surely MS products are secure (My take) and I have not had viruses or any major incidents and yes, I administer major networks using Windows products.
+Chris Topher There are far less Windows Fan boys than there are MACs and Linux and I would not call Linux guys fan boys; they are above average geeks who are good at coding, scripts etc.
Certainly, as a products becomes more popular...people will go after it and if Linux did catch on as they wanted over a decade ago and Windows faded as Novel did, hackers would have a field day with Linux too.
Isn't it customary for journalists to use more than one source for articles? Am I supposed to be surprised that the CEO of Kasperski wants Mac users to buy his company's products? This is a glorified press release, +CNET
Any Mac user who has been surprised by this hasn't been paying attention. It only makes sense that as Mac OS X gains in market share, it will gain more and more attention from hackers. Deal with it. Load up some anti-virus software (I've been using ClamXav for a few years;, be cautious of strange emails and websites, keep your system up-to-date, and go on about your lives. Yes, Apple needs to get more serious about this, but until they figure things out, there is a lot the user can do to protect themselves. 
Finally this has been brought to light. Just because its Apple it doesn't mean it has a big giant shield protecting it. People need to focus more on specs rather than brand name.
Well, I would say that the CEO of a security firm is perfectly poised to say things that encourage the need for his security services. Would you do anything else?
+Otto Holland Your right 0.20 something fewer errors don't mean much: if Mom&Pop don't turn on UCF/iptables, or AppArmor they are just as insecure. Although Ubuntu is trying to make it easier for Mom&Pop to install and use, though in my opinion Opensuse does a better job at making things 'just work' but without the recognition. It always amazed me that my friends and fam always had probs with their Winboxes, until I watched them use it...they normally postpone updates because it slows down their browsing. If they go black in June (when the FBI turns off their seized servers) they will turn to me, or pay someone else, to fix it. I agree that windows is fairly secure, if kept updated. When I did use windows, I only had one problem, a zero day exploit. That is the reason I am (openly and admittedly) a Linux fan-boy is that I got support from the Linux forums for a Windows issue, without having to pay anyone! They showed me it was a software issue when windows paid support insisted my ethernet card was bad. So I switched. It helps me learn too. After all, I am an RN, not a hacker, white or black hat!
PS: You taught me something today: use the + not the @ when replying, and for that, my new friend, you get added to a circle! Peace.
First, one comment for people who want to communicate clearly, or at least from a place of knowledge...

MAC != Mac

MAC - Media Access Control address (or expensive makeup)

Mac - short for Macintosh

I worked at Apple for about 10 years, and they do take security seriously, even then. Many things have been done in the OS at all levels to make it "inherently" more secure than Windows of 10 years ago, but it's not perfect.

But Apple does need to continue to make this a priority and react/communicate faster, but that's a much easier task than dealing with ActiveX/.Net derived exploits. :-).
+Jaafar Skafi You don't believe in security, okay then give me your credit card number...or explain that post a bit better please, LOL.
But how many of those malware files where Windows based? And out of those, how many will actually run on or affect the Mac OS?
hummmm ..... it´s interesting ... Mac's growing in number and those "security" software companies are beginning to scare people .... Aren´t they smeling easy money? I say do not buy illegal software and be smart surfing the web and you will be fine!
I would say that the biggest problem right now for the Mac is Apple's slow response to issue OS Security Patches, or Java ones when these kind of threats arise. Don't get me wrong Mac OS X is a good operating system and I use it everyday in my College laptop, but Apple's slow response in both the MacDefender and Flashback debacle raise the question on how effective Apple will respond to future security threats. I feel that if this debacle would have happened in Windows it would have had a smaller spread rate since the Java applet in IE asks the user first to run it; in contrast, Java applets in Mac OS X 10.6 (and 10.7 before the Java 2012-003 Update) run in Safari without any user input.
Add a comment...