Whoever wrote:
> Mike Easter

>> In addition, the design and use of OS X is more secure than Win's,
>> altho' not as secure as that of linux in which the majority of users get
>> their apps from certified repositories and install in root/admin or
>> superuser mode.
>>
>> Consequent to the lesser numbers of users compared to Win and the much
>> greater security compared to Win, the sensible/logical malware writer
>> would write for Win rather than the others. Because of the linux/mac
>> difference, there is even less linux malware than mac malware - leading
>> to the paradox 'the more secure you are, the less threats there are'.
>
>
> But to what extent is it the "secureness" of the OS that is driving the
> numbers of exploits written against it? While I have no doubt that it is a
> part of the equation, I often wonder to what degree it actually holds true.
> When one considers that Mac users comprise ~7% of all users and Linux users
> comprise <2%, would it not be at least as valid to say "the fewer you are,
> the less threats there are?" Especially in today's environment where the
> "bad guys" are more interested in making money than in bragging rights. The
> more potential "customers" they have, the larger the potential profit.

I think it is like spam. You do what works, for whatever reason.

It doesn't matter whether the spamreader opens your spam because it is
the stupidest spam subject they've ever seen or because they find the
girl's name in the From appealing.

If you make windows exploits they work and so you make some more. They
work because there have been a lot of insecurities in XP and IE6 and
there are a lot of people using them.

If Win7 is more secure and there are less people using it than XP, you
spend more time making XP and IE6 exploits than Win7 and IE8 and even
less time making Mac ones and even less making linux ones.

I don't think the question is so useful. I do this because of reason A
and reason B. Yes, but it is *more* because of reason A or reason B?
What difference does it make, they are both good reasons.


--
Mike Easter