|
Focus on Apple
RE: How Leopard Addresses Security Oct 31 2007 01:36AM Rex Sanders (rsanders usgs gov) (1 replies) Re: How Leopard Addresses Security - New malware alert Oct 31 2007 04:26PM phdevallois (phdevallois intego com) (3 replies) RE: How Leopard Addresses Security - New malware alert Oct 31 2007 06:06PM Todd Woodward (todd_woodward symantec com) Re: How Leopard Addresses Security - New malware alert Oct 31 2007 05:57PM Edward R. Marczak (marczak radiotope com) (2 replies) RE: How Leopard Addresses Security - New malware alert Oct 31 2007 06:26PM David Harley (david a harley gmail com) (1 replies) Re: How Leopard Addresses Security - New malware alert Oct 31 2007 07:33PM Edward R. Marczak (marczak radiotope com) (2 replies) Re: How Leopard Addresses Security - New malware alert Oct 31 2007 08:12PM kjcollins notes cc sunysb edu Re: How Leopard Addresses Security - New malware alert Oct 31 2007 06:13PM Paul Schmehl (pauls utdallas edu) Re: How Leopard Addresses Security - New malware alert Oct 31 2007 04:44PM Dave Schroeder (das doit wisc edu) (2 replies) Re: How Leopard Addresses Security - New malware alert Oct 31 2007 09:59PM Mark Senior (senatorfrog gmail com) (1 replies) RE: How Leopard Addresses Security - New malware alert Nov 01 2007 07:48PM Todd Woodward (todd_woodward symantec com) RE: How Leopard Addresses Security - New malware alert Oct 31 2007 05:52PM David Harley (david a harley gmail com) |
|
Privacy Statement |
position.
> I've seen a few of these since the release of Leopard, so, it
> gets to be a little much.
I don't agree with your position technically. But putting that aside,
someone from Intego posted something, without fuss, which would be
interesting even if it turned out to be purely Proof of Concept, and you
essentially accused him of spreading hype. That's just bad manners.
> And there *is* a problem here:
> hyping minor issues affects us all if and when a real problem
> does crop up. People will just be numb to it, and not take
> *it* seriously.
That's a point worth making. But you're assuming that it -is- hype and -is-
a minor issue. Perhaps it is - I haven't seen much information about it from
other sources yet, and I don't have a sample - but it isn't "professional"
to assume that it's hype just because it's a Mac malware issue, or because
it comes from an anti-virus company.
> >> C'mon - this is an issue of ignorance, not technology.
> >
> > In that case, there is hardly any significant Windows malware. Most
> > malicious software, irrespective of platform, exploits
> human frailty
> > rather than technological exploits.
>
> Well, yes, but this one *requires user interaction*.
Yes. And so does most malware. Irrespective of platform. That point's
already been made at least twice.
> Also, the post to this list could have been a little more
> professional. "Bad news from Britney..."...on a security
> list? No details? Sigh.
The details are in the link.
--
David Harley CISSP, Small Blue-Green World
AVIEN Administrator - http://www.avien.org
Security Author/Editor/Consultant/Researcher
http://www.smallblue-greenworld.co.uk/
New AVIEN book: http://www.smallblue-greenworld.co.uk/Avien.html
[ reply ]