Reading mode: Light Dark

PC users switching to Mac for Security

Go to last post
Daniel JS said:
Daniel JS said:
http://wired-vig.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,63000,00.html
Click to expand...
LOL!!! I remember this thing... oy... oh boy.. you know I forgot
about it because it was such a joke. Did you read the entire
article? Read this:
Daniel JS said:
The program can't be spread by e-mail or through a file-sharing network unless it is compressed

using software like Aladdin's Stuffit. Failing to compress the MP3 file before sending it renders the
software inoperative.
Click to expand...
Why is this so? Simple. This "file" is not a flat file that is
common with today's Mac OS X/Windows environments... rather it is a
binary... it contains a resource fork and a data fork that harkens
back to the old OS 9 (and older) era. Consequently, this
signficant clue of the program being knocked out by standard MIME
wrap (with email transport) shows how fragile the old-skool
Macintosh resource fork is. 1.) This is not a virus. 2.) It is
barely a concept trojan. For it to be a viable trojan... it must
transport effectively... if you can't email it easily... then the
concept falls flat.

Remember what I said before? I said that it is technically
feasible to compile malicious code that will affect the Mac... but
getting it to RUN on a Mac.. getting it to WORK on a Mac... that's
a differrent story altogether... and I never see why this would
ever change.
Click to expand...
I never claimed any propagation qualities or that this was a virus. There is one thing I forgot to find out at the time: does it only appear to the user as a document, or does OS X view it as a document as well before it is opened? If the system mis-identifies an application as a document, i would, form my average-user perspective call it a serious matter. If just the user is deceived then this, while not technically a deficiency, is unfortunate. Not a big deal - just a matter of allowing applications have . occur in their names. In a nice OS this could be mitigated by having documents appear in the Finder visually different from applications.
Daniel JS said:
Daniel JS said:
Daniel JS said:
Daniel JS said:
How about Documents for the role of vulnerable directory?
Click to expand...
Yeah.. but what is the tilde referencing? You need a user name to
complete the path.
Click to expand...
OK, I did not realize one needs an actual username instead of ~ in
this context.
Click to expand...
I figured that's the part you were not getting. :-)
Click to expand...
Daniel JS said:
I was getting frustrated when you kept maintaining how something
was possible.. and I knew it wasn't.
Click to expand...
I did not claim it was possible, even less that I knew a recipee for a viable exploit, but I had the impression that someone with better skills than myself might be able to turn the collection of security holes in May '04 into something malicious. If you say this is not so, I will believe you.
Daniel JS said:
Try this... go to the Finger's "Go" menu and choose "Go to
folder..." and type in the patch box " Documents." Yes.. it will
pop open the Documents folder that is COMMON with you as the user.
BUT.. do you think you can use the tilde trick for anything? Try
" Users" and tell me how far you get?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what this is supposed to illustrate. I don't have a Users directory within my home folder.

--
canonballs
 
CptnJustc said:
Not true. Most of the bugs (assuming they're not "I Love
You"-style phishing scams) don't work anymore. A couple have been
found, as undoubtedly they have been found with OS X.
Click to expand...
I Love You was a virus, not a Phishing scam. Many do work on SP2 - they just won't infect you as SP2 turns on the firewall by default.
CptnJustc said:
If you say so. But clearly, the vast majority don't have your high
standards.
Click to expand...
The vast majority do as the vast majority of computer users do not purchase Dell. Only about 30% do. The other 70% are the smart ones.
CptnJustc said:
CptnJustc said:
Just checked IBM's site: R52, 18584MU - 15" SXGA+, DVD, 80Gb,
512MB, 2Ghz Peee-M - $2,249.
Click to expand...
point). When you add in that it's probably more powerful, includes
a $250 extra warranty (which Apple will make you pay $350 more for)
and far longer battery life, it has an advantage.
Click to expand...
The warranty is the same - 1 year IBM vs 1 year Powerbook. The IBM will be a tad faster but you won't notice it in day to day operations.
CptnJustc said:
You can personally prefer whichever system you like, but you can't
say $150 off the price of a computer (even discounting those other
perks) isn't an advantage.
Click to expand...
Not really when you consider the Powerbook comes with $150 more of free software, it's not that bad of a deal. When buying a $2k system, $150 is nothing.
CptnJustc said:
CptnJustc said:
Yeah, XP BLAZES on a De-celeron with 224MB RAM and a slow hard
drive. Been there, done that, glad it wasn't mine.
Click to expand...
Okay, add $50 to give it 512, add $100 to call it an IBM. Heck,
add $50 more to give it 1280. You've now got a clear performance
advantage, and $500 to go.
Click to expand...
A De-Celeron is not a performance advntage over a G4. The De-Celeron is a POS CPU and always has been. And to bump to 1GB would require a 1GB DIMM which are about $200.

You'd need an Athlon-M or Pee4/PeeM to compare to the G4 and, last I checked those notebooks were around $1k+, depending on features.
 
canonballs said:
I never claimed any propagation qualities or that this was a virus.
Click to expand...
True.. but that was what the thread was borne out of.
canonballs said:
There is one thing I forgot to find out at the time: does it only
appear to the user as a document, or does OS X view it as a
document as well before it is opened?
Click to expand...
Its only a visual cue. OS X cannot execute a document.
canonballs said:
If the system mis-identifies
an application as a document, i would, form my average-user
perspective call it a serious matter.
Click to expand...
And you would be right.. but its not the case.
canonballs said:
If just the user is deceived
then this, while not technically a deficiency, is unfortunate. Not
a big deal - just a matter of allowing applications have . occur in
their names. In a nice OS this could be mitigated by having
documents appear in the Finder visually different from applications.
Click to expand...
Ah well.. that's what happens when you go to a flat file structure and abandon meta data...
canonballs said:
I did not claim it was possible, even less that I knew a recipee
for a viable exploit, but I had the impression that someone with
better skills than myself might be able to turn the collection of
security holes in May '04 into something malicious. If you say
this is not so, I will believe you.
Click to expand...
No.. what you pointed to... if given the right circumstance and the right situation could be bad... but it lacks the propogating elements of attachments on Outlook or Outlook Express on a Windows box... and accordingly is much less of an issue... radically less of an issue actually.

-Daniel
 
Believe it is not available for Mac

Put together several pages devoted to all things Tiger:
Very simple but very comprehensive and hopefully useful

http://porg.4t.com/Tiger.html
http://porg.4t.com/Spotlight.html
http://porg.4t.com/Automator.html
http://porg.4t.com/Widgets.html
http://porg.4t.com/MacTips.html
http://porg.4t.com/Security.html

This is just a small part of a much larger

Photoshop Online Resource Guide (PORG)

http://porg.4t.com/Nav.html

Bookmark, enjoy and comments most welcome

Ken Leonard
Old Ashtonian said:
Where do I get a copy
Their web page says
Version 2.5 Trial
For Windows XP, 2000, Me, 98 and 95
Version 2.5.1635 - April 22, 2005
11.41 MB - Approx 28 min
Doesn't mention Tiger OS

--
Old Ashtonian

http://www.tameside.gov.uk/corpgen/webcam.htm

Click to expand...
 
Bob Haverford said:
FYI, the effects of radiation, smoking, exposure to any carcinogen
is always a sigmoid relationship. IOW, you have to reach a
threshold before effects become evident.
Click to expand...
I assume by this you mean it is a statistically progressive relationship. In actual fact, it has nothing to do with averages, means, and modes. The effects of radiation, and smoking is a cumulative relationship. And nobody knows what, if any, tipping point exists in either case. I don't want to get involved in yet another juvenile "the Mac is better", the "PC is better" argument, but this analogy is so far off base, relative to the point, as to be totally ludicrous.

--
Only my opinion. It's worth what you paid for it. Your mileage may vary! ;-}
http://www.dougwigton.com/
 
Hey Bob. Do us all a favor. Don't ever use a Mac. It would be bad for you.
--
Only my opinion. It's worth what you paid for it. Your mileage may vary! ;-}
http://www.dougwigton.com/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top