[X Newbies] Apple and all of these viruses?

[Steven Rogers]

On Saturday, August 23, 2003, at 07:55 AM, Florin Alexander Neumann 
wrote:

> Randy offers the cool voice of reason and common sense, but I think 
> he's still somewhat naive. The chief reason for absence of Mac viruses 
> is neither better security, nor a better quality of users. It's simply 
> that Apple has less than 5% of the market share, and that less than 5% 
> percent is not in any crucial area.

This is probably the #1 PC user's wisdom on virus distribution. It 
makes sense, but its not right. Its not even a logically sound 
argument. I'm not talking so much about this specific post, but this 
line of reasoning in a global sense. I'm sure we've all heard it dozens 
of times.

The first step of this argument is to assert that Unix/Macs are no more 
secure that PCs - yet no evidence whatever is offered for that. The 
argument then points out that virus writers want to be famous, and 
offers evidence that attacking Unix/Mac systems will not provide the 
fame that virus writers want. The argument distracts you away from its 
primary unsubstantiated point with a secondary issue. The appeal of the 
idea that "virus writers want notoriety" distracts you from the fact 
that "Macs are not more secure than PCs" is just a bald unsubstantiated 
assertion.

There are two problems with this. First, anything that explains a 
widespread phenomena using group psychology is questionable. Are we to 
think that no virus writer has ever had the motivation to knock the 
smiles off these arrogant Mac users who don't even *have* virus 
protection?  Second - a widespread Mac virus would certainly attract 
big press. If the Mac were as good for viruses as the PC, one good 
virus should be able to cripple a substantial portion of Mac users. And 
given the way the press likes to pounce on any Apple foible, that would 
certainly be huge headlines.

If you look at virus propagation methods on the two platforms, its 
obvious the two systems are not equivalent with regard to providing 
ways to spread viruses. Mac users have opened themselves up to this 
argument by saying that the absence of viruses shows that the Mac is 
more secure, which is a bad argument for the same reason. The way to 
prove which system is more secure (or more securable) is to look at the 
consistency of design and the kinds of tasks a typical administrator 
must perform to make and keep the system secure. If you compare the PC 
and Unix/Mac, you can see why security (and *all* maintenance and 
administration tasks) will always be more of a headache for Windows.

Of course, the average person doesn't have fiirst hand knowledge of 
this stuff. They have to rely on experts to tell them the answer. And 
since most of the "experts" are PC users, the subject will always be 
controversial.

SR