Safety in numbers

Published 4/24/06

Retraction (4/25): As Paul Glover points out in the commentary, there’s good reason to think this list isn’t accurate. (I’m not saying it isn’t; I’m saying it very well may not be.) Stupid me for not researching it further. My apologies.

I’ve always assumed, thanks to the media (among others), that Windows was a much more vulnerable operating system than Unix-based ones (e.g., Mac OS X, Linux flavors, etc.). Of course, I argued that it’s fairly simple to protect your system; there’s plenty of good and free anti-virus and anti-Trojan and anti-whatever software.

But that was still the conventional wisdom. After all, Windows users have become familiar with Microsoft’s never-ending updates and patches.

Funny thing. It turns out that perception and reality are two different things.

According to the good folks at US-CERT, the U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Team (the people on the front lines of protecting systems from hackers, crackers, data thieves, and so on), in 2005:

There were 5198 reported vulnerabilities: 812 Windows operating system vulnerabilities; 2328 Unix/Linux operating vulnerabilities; and 2058 Multiple operating system vulnerabilities.

The deuce you say. Why, yes — there were more than two and a half times as many vulnerabilities in Unix-varient systems than in Windows. You can read the list yourself.

Not surprisingly, the list of Windows vulnerabilities stemming from Microsoft products is long. But perhaps this snippet from the Unix list will surprise you:

# Apple Mac OS X AirPort Card Automatic Network Association
# Apple Mac OS X AppleFileServer Remote Denial of Service
# Apple Mac OS X ‘at’ Utility Information Disclosure
# Apple Mac OS X ‘at’ Utility Information Disclosure (Updated)
# Apple Mac OS X Default Pseudo-Terminal Permission
# Apple Mac OS X Finder ‘DS_Store’ Insecure File Creation
# Apple Mac OS X Font Book Font Collection Buffer Overflow
# Apple Mac OS X Java Update
# Apple Mac OS X Kernel searchfs() Buffer Overflow
# Apple Mac OS X Multiple Arbitrary Code Execution Vulnerabilities
# Apple Mac OS X Multiple Vulnerabilities
# Apple Mac OS X Multiple Vulnerabilities
# Apple Mac OS X Multiple Vulnerabilities
# Apple Mac OS X Multiple Vulnerabilities
# Apple Mac OS X Multiple Vulnerabilities (Updated)
# Apple Mac OS X Multiple Vulnerabilities (Updated)
# Apple Mac OS X NetInfo Setup Tool Buffer Overflow
# Apple Mac OS X NetInfo Setup Tool Buffer Overflow (Updated)
# Apple Mac OS X ‘parse_machfile()’ Denial of Service
# Apple Mac OS X Perl Privilege Dropping
# Apple Mac OS X Security Update
# Apple Mac OS X Security Update
# Apple Mac OS X Security Update
# Apple Mac OS X Vulnerabilities
# Apple MacOS X Vulnerabilities
# Apple Mail EMail Message ID Header Information Disclosure
# Apple QuickTime Quartz Composer File Information Disclosure
# Apple QuickTime Quartz Composer File Information Disclosure (Updated)
# Apple Safari Data URI Memory Corruption
# Apple Safari Dialog Box Origin Spoofing
# Apple Safari IDN Implementation URL Spoof
# Apple Safari IDN Implementation URL Spoof (Updated)
# Apple Safari Input Validation
# Apple Safari Input Validation (Updated)
# Apple Safari Open Windows Injection (Updated)
# Apple Safari Web Browser HTTPS Denial of Service
# Apple Safari Web Browser JavaScript Remote Denial of Service

Translation: Don’t believe everything you hear.

Add to del.icio.us Digg it! Add to Technorati Add to Furl Add to reddit Stumble it!

The Fray


--billm-- says:

Give it up already! You are not going to convince anyone that OS X is more vunerable than Windows. Why dont you do a comparison of the Windows and Apple problems and then publish your list.

Obviously, Microsoft is paying you far too much. If they arent, then you obviously have something against Apple.

I still challenge you to use an OS X based Mac for 1 year. Then we shall see what you think. Of course, I doubt you would accept the challenge. (If you choose to, let me know. You know where to find me.)

April 25th, 2006 at 2:05 AM

Paul Glover says:

This list was published months ago (early January) and has been widely discussed, dissected and *discredited* already. See http://blogs.zdnet.com/Murphy/?p=501 for one breakdown of this; there are plenty of others if you do a little research.

The numbers don’t break down into what’s an OS flaw or a problem with a third party application. They don’t make it clear how severe the flaws are, or how quickly they were addressed. Some of them are duplicates of the *same flaw* (including the ones in your snippet which have “(updated)” beside them.)

I appreciate you’re trying to make a point in the face of some *extremely* hateful Mac zealotry, and I don’t blame you for wanting to do that, but this CERT list definitely wasn’t the best choice of weapons to carry into the fight.

April 25th, 2006 at 9:50 AM

gnomic says:

Among others, I hold 4 professional security certifications and have 30 years of experience in everything from CPM to Z/OS.

The facts are:

No OS is safe. Until recently, commercial operating systems were even tested (more than superficially) for security flaws. And if the OS allows the applications to create new vunerabilities - shame on it. The system isn’t safe.

None can claim the high ground as being better in security than others based on vulnerabilities.

No OS in inherently superior than any other based on performance, security, features, costs (TLC), or any other aspect. Best is a subjective (in most cases, very subjective) assessment based on specific needs at a point in time.

I’ve used (and supported) both MACs and IBMs and other systems - for more than a year. I’ve got nothing against of for any of them. I find I like AVid (video editing) more on the mac, but prefer photoshop on windows. Go figure.

Tor those of you that have made any application, platform, or OS your golden idol, you have a rude awakening coming. They all come and go in the long run.

Besides, real geeks write in assembler and don’t use an OS. Among others, I hold 4 professional security certifications and have 30 years of experience in everything from CPM to Z/OS.

The facts are:

No OS is safe. Until recently, commercial operating systems were even tested (more than superficially) for security flaws. And if the OS allows the applications to create new vunerabilities - shame on it. The system isn’t safe.

None can claim the high ground as being better in security than others based on vulnerabilities.

No OS in inherently superior than any other based on performance, security, features, costs (TLC), or any other aspect. Best is a subjective (in most cases, very subjective) assessment based on specific needs at a point in time.

I’ve used (and supported) both MACs and IBMs and other systems - for more than a year. I’ve got nothing against of for any of them. I find I like AVid (video editing) more on the mac, but prefer photoshop on windows. Go figure.

Tor those of you that have made any application, platform, or OS your golden idol, you have a rude awakening coming. They all come and go in the long run.

Besides, real geeks write in assembler and don’t use an OS.

April 25th, 2006 at 8:31 PM

Weigh in

Yer name:

Yer e-mail (to be notified of responses or I can respond privately -- never ever shared):

Yer Web site (if you like):

What you have to say (Be civil, or it might be removed; comments with links
might be held for moderation, just so you know):




Site created with

and


Blog run by