From: William Pociengel (hseldon_at_my.wgu.edu)
Date: Sun Aug 21 2005 - 19:42:12 PDT
Toby Hutton wrote:
> On 20/08/2005, at 12:25 PM, Brian Pearce wrote:
>
<snip>
>>
>>...But if nobody is spending any time finding vulnerabilities, then
>>why would there be Security Updates?!
>
>
> Touche.
>
> It's a matter of volume, of course. Tyler said the Mac's only flaw
> was its human users. This obviously isn't true, it's just my opinion
> it would there would be far more updates required (perhaps on par
> with Windows Update - I installed 14 new security patches yesterday
> to my XP machine at work) if it had a majority market share.
I think I have the attributions corrrect.
If you look at system level vulnerabilities yes market share has a lot
to do with the level of INTEREST in finding exploitable problems. The
complexity of the system defines the scope of the problem, market share
provides the payback.
my AIX system is nearly invulnerable due to the (limited) number of AIX
system programmers. so too is my way old OS/2 machine which has been
happily chugging along for, hmmmmm when did I first start that PC .... 6
years ago?? but it firewalls very nicely ;-)
-- This is the NewtonTalk list - http://www.newtontalk.net/ for all inquiries Official Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/ WikiWikiNewt for all kinds of articles: http://tools.unna.org/wikiwikinewt/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Aug 21 2005 - 20:00:02 PDT