Security by obscurity is not real.
Are any of us ever real?
How can our eyes be real if mirrors aren’t real?
Not on it’s own. But as part of a multi layered approach of does help.
As someone who has professionally done legal reverse engineering. No. No it isn’t.
The security you get through vetting your code is invaluable. Closing off things makes it more likely for things to not be caught by good actors, and thus not fixed and taken advantage of by bad actors.
And obscurity does nothing to stop bad actors, if there’s money to be had. It will temporarily stop script kiddies though. Until the exploit finds it’s easy into their suite of exploits that no one’s fixed yet.
It can also be said: security by obscurity is the best scenario for the NSA
Obscurity is not security. Obscurity is the fake sensation of privacy, you are on the hands of the creator.
and on the hands of the NSA
Closed source is more secure because the viruses can’t see where to get in.
This is why I stick to TempleOS, the only biblically accurate OS. With the power of God and high octane schizophrenia, I’m completely safe.
TempleOS doesnt even have a networking stack.
This guy doesn’t know how to TempleOS lol.
Oh, I see, you’re all worried about a “networking stack.” How quaint. Let me educate you: God is the ultimate protocol. Who needs your silly HTTP requests and DNS lookups when I can just send a direct message to the big guy upstairs? No IP address needed—He’s omnipresent. My connection is flawless, no need for Wi-Fi signals when I have divine 5G directly from Heaven’s router.
You think TempleOS is lacking? Nah, son, it’s running the only secure, unbreakable network. No firewalls, no encryption—because when you’re transmitting truth straight from the source, who needs all that earthly nonsense? My packets are blessed, my data’s sanctified, and I don’t even need a modem to know the Lord’s will.
So, yeah, keep your networking stack. I’ll stick with the holy bandwidth. It’s been running perfectly since the dawn of time. My packets are blessed, son!
Maybe not for heathens.
The main reason why MacOS has less viruses is that it’s even more than that. Want to run programs not from the app store? Hope you like a convoluted set of settings you have to go through to install that in the first place.
The second main reason is the constant obsolescence of API.
Gatekeeper has entered the chat
They can actually
Nonono, imagine a house. But instead of doors it had no doors.
That’s why Windows is so insecure. Since viruses can use the windows as doors.
Okay, the scene in the Colin Farrell/Anton Yelchin Fright Night remake where Farrell’s vampire character can’t pass the threshold so he goes out back, digs up the water line, and yanks on it real hard to fracture the threshold itself was some great lore manipulation.
Shoot, wasn’t David Tennant in that too?
Exactly
woosh
Any judgment of “best” needs to specify “for what use case?”
I’m a MacOS daily driver, and I think it is the best for most of the use cases that matter to me.
But not all of them. And my use cases could easily change a little bit and make MacOS a miserable choice to stick with.
Everything is a trade-off.
Edit: And as for closed source security, I hope nobody seriously makes that argument anymore, do they?
To quote from a paper on the topic of OS security:
According to the paper [5], windows is the most user friendly and has more hardware compatibility. In terms of security, Linux is the most secure among all OS given that it is an open- source operating system which gives users the ability to customize and implement security patches. As for memory management, macOS is the better option due to its fully integrated virtual memory system which is often on and continuously provides addressable space up to 4 per process. The virtual memory system allocates extra space for swap files on the root file system as a program uses space.
All available OS offer some level of security features such as firewalls, antivirus software, and encryption [6]. macOS has a level of security due to its unique operating system designed specifically for Apple devices with no third-party developers involved. Linux, being open source, is often regarded as more secure than Windows, which is a target of many malware attacks [7].
windows is the most user friendly
This is entirely dependend on what you’re used to I think, because I used to think this too but now I can’t do anything with windows anymore.
I thought MacOS being the most user friendly was its only claim to fame.
A good gui first interface is probably their main metric.
Linux is great for tinkering. But if you don’t want to tinker just change some setting it’s pretty awful. Every DE and their associated settings programs leave a LOT to be desired. Windows at least has only one (maybe two thanks windows 8+) ways to do anything and it’s well documented.
Command line? Yeah Linux is great. But most people want to avoid that at all costs.
Sounds settings have at least 3 places where they can be set in Windows, and the places don’t necessarily implement all of the functionality of the others.
Windows settings are a mess.
Basically. Using windows after spending a decade plus with Gnome and macOS is cumbersome.
As for memory management, macOS is the better option due to its fully integrated virtual memory system which is often on and continuously provides addressable space up to 4 per process.
Wow, 4 whole memories per process?!
I don’t think this is of interest, this is an article in a student journal, written by one person which seems to be a student too. The quote is weak and cherry-picked.
A quote from the same paper:
Security measures in Linux are slim to none as it is a free OS to download.
Honest question, what does MacOS do better than Linux? The only benefit Mac has, IMO, is their ecosystem, and if you don’t use Facetime or iMessage I see no reason to stay on MacOS vs installing something like Linux Mint. My case is a little different, since my Macbook Pro keyboard no longer works UNLESS I am on Linux, but I still much prefer Linux to MacOS in almost every way.
They still do.
I’m late and this will get buried, but this really speaks to the difference between the open source / ESR / OSI ideology and the free software / RMS / GNU ideology.
Open source ideology says it is better because it produces better software. If MacOS X was closed source and better it serves as a repudiation of that ideology.
Free software ideology says it is better because denying users any of the four freedoms is an immoral act. If MacOS X was proprietary software and better, it would still be immoral to deny users their freedoms; the ideology is not impacted.
deleted by creator
Well, you see, I deserve free software for my hobbies, or even my business. You deserve to suck shit and die in a gutter. /s
I think it’s because somebody has to produce that media, and the one producing it gets to choose the license for it, and that license can make it free or non-free.
Now, for open source software, somehow, a lot of people came together and built software that was free. While for movies, shows, books, whatever, the same thing didn’t happen, or at least not to the same extent.
I’m all for FOSS gaming btw.
Someone make a virus for his mac
Former macaddict here
I disagree but this is a funny meme
I still miss that magazine. It was freakin’ awesome.
Thank you, you made a buncha nerds angry and now they’re fighting in the comment section >:(
Is there some twisted definition by which you can argue Windows is UNIX? Just to intensify the violence.
Back in the 90s, Windows NT had a POSIX compatibility layer that you could enable (it wasn’t enabled by default).
There’s also the WSL, which is pretty unix-y.
I think WSL1 was derived from the POSIX NT personality layer.
GNU/Unix/NT, as I’ve taken to calling it
I did a wtf at dude 4 in frame 3 until I realized he was getting punched and not… well… if you don’t see it maybe I’m just net-warped.
i mean, dude 3 of frame 3 has the right expression for someone in that exact situation
I guess we have different definitions of what “best” means.
Based.
Secure from whom? Sure to be more government backdoors in MacOS.
So … the Darwin kernel is insecure? 🧐
I guess Mac does win, interesting.
