Indeed, that's what I meant: the likelihood of being attacked on system X.Originally Posted by 'Vyndree',index.php?page=Thread&postID=153956#post 153956
Still I don't see how security through obscurity applies to this. The fact that you're not as likely to be attacked on OS X has nothing to do with a system where its owners believe that security flaws will not be discovered. However, it has everything to do with market importance and virus effectiveness.
Yep. And for a while it should remain so. Even though the market share of OS X might be growing, it's still going to take a while to become big enough to become of interest for virus writers and script kiddies. And even if it gets that far, it's going to take even longer before a big enough virus threat that starts to compare with the current virus threat for Windows computers.So I guess we're in accord: Macs are less likely to be attacked AT THE MOMENT, but that statement should be taken with a grain of salt since we cannot predict the future popularity of various OS'es.
Hahaha, that's absolutely true!I mean, by the very statement "Switch to Macs, Macs are (at the moment) safer" you're undermining your (well, not yours since you don't use it) own security by attempting to gather a large population base. Technically, it's in your best interests of security to prevent people from adopting the Mac OS. ;) Amirite? hehe
Connect With Us