Buy mac solely for security?


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, nekrosoft13 said:

then don't use apple hardware... hackintosh works fine.

 

 

except that's not officially supported and is a pain to setup most the time (from personal experience and I consider myself fairly knowledgeable)

Just now, Brandon H said:

except that's not officially supported and is a pain to setup most the time (from personal experience and I consider myself fairly knowledgeable)

And doesn't feature the added security of Apple's UFI and T2 chips. 

14 minutes ago, nekrosoft13 said:

i got the best solution...

 

if you want to be 100% secure, turn of the PC/Mac/Linux/Phone etc.. unplug it, smash it with a biggest hammer you can find, drill some holes though it, and burn the rest in backyard, bury the remains.

Or just not connect it to the internet, that would work too. Machine wouldn't be as functional but there you go.

10 minutes ago, dipsylalapo said:

Or just not connect it to the internet, that would work too. Machine wouldn't be as functional but there you go.

that still not secure, someone can break in and steal it.

  • Haha 1
17 minutes ago, Brandon H said:

except that's not officially supported and is a pain to setup most the time (from personal experience and I consider myself fairly knowledgeable)

first time I did it was 5 years ago or so, used it for a while, didn't like it, and didn't bothered with it since.

I just did it again 2 weeks ago, was bored, 5-10 minutes on google, found two tutorials, and bam clover and it works..... still don't like the mac gui, running mavericks. everything seems assbackwards even more screwed up then Linux.

5 minutes ago, nekrosoft13 said:

first time I did it was 5 years ago or so, used it for a while, didn't like it, and didn't bothered with it since.

I just did it again 2 weeks ago, was bored, 5-10 minutes on google, found two tutorials, and bam clover and it works..... still don't like the mac gui, running mavericks. everything seems assbackwards even more screwed up then Linux.

yeah I think part of my issues is it didn't like the hardware I had but that's a discussion for a different thread; been like 6 or so years since i've attempted as well myself so things could have changed

4 hours ago, fusi0n said:

Let's clarify some misinformation in this thread. 

 

1. Using MacOS or Linux isn't "Security by Obscurity". 

  • MacOS is more secure by design. The architecture it uses is a security first approach (thanks BSD). 

 

What utter bollocks. https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT209139

"Impact: A sandboxed process may be able to circumvent sandbox restrictions"

"Impact: A malicious application may be able to elevate privileges"

"Impact: An application may be able to read restricted memory"

"Impact: A malicious application may be able to access local users AppleIDs"

"Impact: An application may be able to execute arbitrary code with system privileges"

"Impact: A malicious application may be able to elevate privileges"

"Impact: An application may be able to gain elevated privileges"

"Impact: Processing a maliciously crafted text file may lead to arbitrary code execution"

"Impact: An application may be able to read restricted memory"

"Impact: An application may be able to execute arbitrary code with system privileges"

"Impact: An application may be able to execute arbitrary code with system privileges"

"Impact: Parsing a maliciously crafted iBooks file may lead to disclosure of user information"

"Impact: An application may be able to read restricted memory"

"Impact: An application may be able to read restricted memory"

"Impact: An application may be able to execute arbitrary code with system privileges"

"Impact: An application may be able to execute arbitrary code with system privileges"

"Impact: An application may be able to execute arbitrary code with kernel privileges"

"Impact: A malicious application may be able to execute arbitrary code with kernel privileges"

"Impact: A malicious application may be able to break out of its sandbox"

"Impact: An application may be able to execute arbitrary code with kernel privileges"

"Impact: An application may be able to execute arbitrary code with kernel privileges"

"Impact: A malicious application may be able to leak sensitive user information"

"Impact: An attacker in a privileged network position may be able to execute arbitrary code"

"Impact: An application may be able to execute arbitrary code with kernel privileges"

"Impact: An application may be able to execute arbitrary code with kernel privileges"

"Impact: A sandboxed process may be able to circumvent sandbox restrictions"

"Impact: An application may be able to execute arbitrary code with system privileges"

"Impact: An application may be able to read restricted memory"

 

Now you show me any other OS with so many god damn gaping holes in only a 4 month period since it was released. OSX isn't secure and you are absolutely fibbing yourself if you believe in whatever crap you posted.

 

22 minutes ago, nekrosoft13 said:

first time I did it was 5 years ago or so, used it for a while, didn't like it, and didn't bothered with it since.

I just did it again 2 weeks ago, was bored, 5-10 minutes on google, found two tutorials, and bam clover and it works..... still don't like the mac gui, running mavericks. everything seems assbackwards even more screwed up then Linux.

I could see this, but if you really give it ago to learn the functions of the OS, it can be quite powerful. I use Spotlight for most of my apps and it gets me there quicker than trying to find the icon. Just hit Apple+Space and type a few letters and hit enter. All done under 2 seconds. One of my favorite features of Mac OS is the focus mode. If i'm working on a doc or whatever, just turn on focus and bam. No notifications, 100% full screen and I get stuff done. There is quite a learning curve, but if you've used Windows for 20+ years (like myself) and try to use MacOS like Windows, you're going to have a bad time. 

15 minutes ago, n_K said:

What utter bollocks. https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT209139

snipped

 

Now you show me any other OS with so many god damn gaping holes in only a 4 month period since it was released. OSX isn't secure and you are absolutely fibbing yourself if you believe in whatever crap you posted.

 

 

You seem quite frustrated. A lot of those fixes have "may be able". Do you know which one of those vulns was mass exploited? 

Also, here you go,

https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-26/product_id-32238/Microsoft-Windows-10.html

 

I never said MacOS was 100% secure. A lot of those patches were proactive. 

 

You should always use caution with any OS. 

 

Also, here is the framework\architecure for the Mach kernel,

https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Darwin/Conceptual/KernelProgramming/Architecture/Architecture.html

 

3 hours ago, fusi0n said:

You seem quite frustrated. A lot of those fixes have "may be able". Do you know which one of those vulns was mass exploited? 

Also, here you go,

https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-26/product_id-32238/Microsoft-Windows-10.html

 

I never said MacOS was 100% secure. A lot of those patches were proactive. 

 

You should always use caution with any OS. 

 

Also, here is the framework\architecure for the Mach kernel,

https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Darwin/Conceptual/KernelProgramming/Architecture/Architecture.html

 

"may be able" is code for "guaranteed to be exploitable unless you purposely do not use the vulnerable commands" and no it was not proactive, those exploits were found by third parties not apple and if the OS wasn't vulnerable they wouldn't have been reported in the first place. It doesn't matter if an exploit is widely used or not, an exploit is an exploit regardless. Would you only care about a vulnerability in a medical device if it was mass exploited if it had the potential to kill you without you knowing? No. Same concent applies here. Yes, all OS's have vulnerabilities and your comment about mac being the most secure was laughable bad.

And a lot of OSX bugs are the same thing with null pointer referencing: https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/39922 https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/woot17/woot17-paper-xu.pdf https://tools.cisco.com/security/center/viewAlert.x?alertId=37112 Always the same thing...

7 minutes ago, n_K said:

"may be able" is code for "guaranteed to be exploitable unless you purposely do not use the vulnerable commands" and no it was not proactive, those exploits were found by third parties not apple and if the OS wasn't vulnerable they wouldn't have been reported in the first place. It doesn't matter if an exploit is widely used or not, an exploit is an exploit regardless. Would you only care about a vulnerability in a medical device if it was mass exploited if it had the potential to kill you without you knowing? No. Same concent applies here. Yes, all OS's have vulnerabilities and your comment about mac being the most secure was laughable bad.

And a lot of OSX bugs are the same thing with null pointer referencing: https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/39922 https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/woot17/woot17-paper-xu.pdf https://tools.cisco.com/security/center/viewAlert.x?alertId=37112 Always the same thing...

You're reading to much of what I'm saying and taking my points very much out of context. Windows also has exploits, please feel free to view the link I sent you. There has been a good bit reported in the last four months.  You made MacOS sound like it is one of the most vuln OSes out there, and that is simply not true. You can continue to laugh at my comments all you want, it doesn't change the fact that MacOS is just as secure if not more than Linux or Windows. 

 

I'm not turning this into a pointless argument of "MY OS IS THE BEST OS".  I use all three daily.  For everyday web browsing and such, you are safer on MacOS than Windows. If there is an APT, then it doesn't really matter, as they will find a way in any OS. 

On 1/3/2019 at 10:09 PM, Gotenks98 said:

Just as the others have said, its not that it is more secure its just isn't worth the effort. Think of it this way. If you leave your door to your home unlocked but you live in the ghetto or you leave your door unlocked and you live in the boonies who is going to get robbed first? Statistically its just less likely the happen in the boonies because its harder to find the target.

Interesting analogy. Makes you wonder why anyone would choose to live in the ghetto... 🤔

If REAL security is your goal then you need to design your own OS from the ground up TBH. Microsoft, Apple, Google and others all have exploits and bugs. Saying you want to use one more than the other because it's more secure is like saying an inebriated 18 year old girl is safer with Bill Cosby than she is with Harvey Weinstein. They're both terrible and both have a chance of doing something horrible, at the end of the day the safest thing to do is to not go to the party. BUT if you want to access websites and internet services with as little chance of infection possible, you need to install Firefox or another browser that lets you whitelist specific domains (via settings or addon) and block all by default. You may have to click "allow" or "temporarily allow" up to a dozen times or more for each website you visit, depending on the domain, but it's literally the only option you have to go where you want and do what you want while simultaneously maintaining as much security as possible. You could get a Chromebook, as someone else suggested... But why would you do that? Printer and driver support on Chromebooks is atrocious and it's pretty much only good for running Google apps

3 hours ago, Whistlesix said:

If REAL security is your goal then you need to design your own OS from the ground up TBH. Microsoft, Apple, Google and others all have exploits and bugs. Saying you want to use one more than the other because it's more secure is like saying an inebriated 18 year old girl is safer with Bill Cosby than she is with Harvey Weinstein. They're both terrible and both have a chance of doing something horrible, at the end of the day the safest thing to do is to not go to the party. BUT if you want to access websites and internet services with as little chance of infection possible, you need to install Firefox or another browser that lets you whitelist specific domains (via settings or addon) and block all by default. You may have to click "allow" or "temporarily allow" up to a dozen times or more for each website you visit, depending on the domain, but it's literally the only option you have to go where you want and do what you want while simultaneously maintaining as much security as possible. You could get a Chromebook, as someone else suggested... But why would you do that? Printer and driver support on Chromebooks is atrocious and it's pretty much only good for running Google apps

2

Building software\operating systems from scratch for security reasons is the last thing you want to do. 

  • You want something that has been proven and tested
  • Open Source allows more eyes on the code
  • Research HBGary - They are a security firm that got nuked from Orbit with their customized CMS. 

"Microsoft, Apple, Google and others all have exploits and bugs."

  • True, but if you code something yourself, you're also going to have bugs\exploits. No such thing as perfect code. If you're building something, than you are most likely using a framwork of sorts, then you are subject to the security posture of that framework. 
  • Exploits and bugs are part of life. It's how well companies mitigate the risk. I would say all three big players do a great job with that.

"you need to install Firefox or another browser that lets you whitelist specific domains"

  • Someone can change your DNS/hostfile to reroute your domain to a bad actor. 

 

"Saying you want to use one more than the other because it's more secure is like saying an inebriated 18 year old girl is safer with Bill Cosby than she is with Harvey Weinstein."

  • You are comparing a drunk person to an operating system. If an operating system is drunk (infected with malware) and going to a party (websites)  then best practices were more than likely not being used. 
  • You shouldn't talk like that. It's highly inappropriate. 

 

" You could get a Chromebook, as someone else suggested... But why would you do that? Printer and driver support on Chromebooks is atrocious and it's pretty much only good for running Google apps"

  • Chromebooks have great driver support as they use Google Cloud Print
  • If you are not worried about privacy, the Google Apps work great. 

 

If someone wants to browse the internet as safely as possible without going through intense measures you can install Firefox\Chrome in Sandboxie. After that, install an Ad-Blocker, and/or no script if you're using firefox. Disable Java Script and flash. Have your OS Patched and AV up-to-date. This would be a reasonable setup and wouldn't give you much trouble. 

On 1/4/2019 at 5:41 PM, fusi0n said:

Building software\operating systems from scratch for security reasons is the last thing you want to do. 

  • You want something that has been proven and tested
  • Open Source allows more eyes on the code
  • Research HBGary - They are a security firm that got nuked from Orbit with their customized CMS. 

"Microsoft, Apple, Google and others all have exploits and bugs."

  • True, but if you code something yourself, you're also going to have bugs\exploits. No such thing as perfect code. If you're building something, than you are most likely using a framwork of sorts, then you are subject to the security posture of that framework. 
  • Exploits and bugs are part of life. It's how well companies mitigate the risk. I would say all three big players do a great job with that.

"you need to install Firefox or another browser that lets you whitelist specific domains"

  • Someone can change your DNS/hostfile to reroute your domain to a bad actor. 

 

"Saying you want to use one more than the other because it's more secure is like saying an inebriated 18 year old girl is safer with Bill Cosby than she is with Harvey Weinstein."

  • You are comparing a drunk person to an operating system. If an operating system is drunk (infected with malware) and going to a party (websites)  then best practices were more than likely not being used. 
  • You shouldn't talk like that. It's highly inappropriate. 

 

" You could get a Chromebook, as someone else suggested... But why would you do that? Printer and driver support on Chromebooks is atrocious and it's pretty much only good for running Google apps"

  • Chromebooks have great driver support as they use Google Cloud Print
  • If you are not worried about privacy, the Google Apps work great. 

 

If someone wants to browse the internet as safely as possible without going through intense measures you can install Firefox\Chrome in Sandboxie. After that, install an Ad-Blocker, and/or no script if you're using firefox. Disable Java Script and flash. Have your OS Patched and AV up-to-date. This would be a reasonable setup and wouldn't give you much trouble. 

HBGary went and tangoed with Anon, let's be real here, that's why they are no more. IF one were to write code from the ground up (not using open source material) you could maintain your own security standards in your own OS, assuming you had the time and knowledge necessary to do so. DNS can be rerouted regardless of your particular OS or security measure, and there are exploits that can cross the sandbox/VM barrier and access system memory as well. As for your attempted guarding of Chromebook... Let's be honest, if you have a spreadsheet you want to make and you don't care about privacy or working offline or customization then sure, you could settle for it. Then you finish your post with the same suggestion I finished mine with, with the addition of using a sandbox/VM (and other more obvious choices like AV up to date and OS patches). As for the "You shouldn't talk like that. It's highly inappropriate." quote, I think you missed the analogy. The party is the internet and the drunk girl is the end user, it's a dangerous place out there and almost every domain (Cosby and Weinstein) out there wants a piece of their end users in some form or fashion. To end this post, I will talk however I like and abide by the ToS of the forums I participate in, and you shouldn't try to be the verbal police.

10 minutes ago, Whistlesix said:

HBGary went and tangoed with Anon, let's be real here, that's why they are no more. IF one were to write code from the ground up (not using open source material) you could maintain your own security standards in your own OS, assuming you had the time and knowledge necessary to do so. DNS can be rerouted regardless of your particular OS or security measure, and there are exploits that can cross the sandbox/VM barrier and access system memory as well. As for your attempted guarding of Chromebook... Let's be honest, if you have a spreadsheet you want to make and you don't care about privacy or working offline or customization then sure, you could settle for it. Then you finish your post with the same suggestion I finished mine with, with the addition of using a sandbox/VM (and other more obvious choices like AV up to date and OS patches). As for the "You shouldn't talk like that. It's highly inappropriate." quote, I think you missed the analogy. The party is the internet and the drunk girl is the end user, it's a dangerous place out there and almost every domain (Cosby and Weinstein) out there wants a piece of their end users in some form or fashion. To end this post, I will talk however I like and abide by the ToS of the forums I participate in, and you shouldn't try to be the verbal police.

Stopped reading at “maintain your own security standards”. 

 

They arent standards at that point. 

3 minutes ago, adrynalyne said:

Stopped reading at “maintain your own security standards”. 

 

They arent standards at that point. 

So are you saying you don't hold yourself to your own personal standards? What?! A 'standard' is a baseline, it's standard for YOU if they are YOUR standards. I wasn't referring to "industry accepted standards" as it appears you assumed I was.

1 hour ago, Whistlesix said:

HBGary went and tangoed with Anon, let's be real here, that's why they are no more. IF one were to write code from the ground up (not using open source material) you could maintain your own security standards in your own OS, assuming you had the time and knowledge necessary to do so. DNS can be rerouted regardless of your particular OS or security measure, and there are exploits that can cross the sandbox/VM barrier and access system memory as well. As for your attempted guarding of Chromebook... Let's be honest, if you have a spreadsheet you want to make and you don't care about privacy or working offline or customization then sure, you could settle for it. Then you finish your post with the same suggestion I finished mine with, with the addition of using a sandbox/VM (and other more obvious choices like AV up to date and OS patches). As for the "You shouldn't talk like that. It's highly inappropriate." quote, I think you missed the analogy. The party is the internet and the drunk girl is the end user, it's a dangerous place out there and almost every domain (Cosby and Weinstein) out there wants a piece of their end users in some form or fashion. To end this post, I will talk however I like and abide by the ToS of the forums I participate in, and you shouldn't try to be the verbal police.

 

"HBGary went and tangoed with Anon, let's be real here, that's why they are no more."

  • They were using a custom CMS. This was the attack vector anon used to gain access to production systems.

" IF one were to write code from the ground up (not using open source material) you could maintain your own security standards in your own OS, assuming you had the time and knowledge necessary to do so"

  • You're Going to Miss Things
  • You're going to run into similar issues as other Operating Systems
  • New software is always prone to more bugs\exploits that are more severe than software that has been teste through out the years,

"maintain your own security standards"

  • Having your "own security standards" is pointless. 
  • This is why you have organizations such as NIST and Gartner. 
  • You can make up your own security policies and methodologies if you want.. it doesn't make it safe

 

"DNS can be rerouted regardless of your particular"

  • I never said otherwise. However, if you are sandboxed or in a VM, the attack will be limited to sandbox or VM, assuming you've set up everything by best practices. 

 

"Then you finish your post with the same suggestion I finished mine with, with the"

  • What's the point? I'm somewhat agreed with this statement. This isn't a race or a competition? We are here to help others. Calm Down.

"As for the "You shouldn't talk like that. It's highly inappropriate."

  • I understood your "analogy" perfectly. However, it's highly inappropriate and not funny in the least.   

 

"I like and abide by the ToS of the forums I participate in, and you shouldn't try to be the verbal police."

  • I'm just telling you that in general. You shouldn't talk like that, public forum or not. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. 

 

2 hours ago, fusi0n said:

"HBGary went and tangoed with Anon, let's be real here, that's why they are no more."

  • They were using a custom CMS. This was the attack vector anon used to gain access to production systems.

" IF one were to write code from the ground up (not using open source material) you could maintain your own security standards in your own OS, assuming you had the time and knowledge necessary to do so"

  • You're Going to Miss Things
  • You're going to run into similar issues as other Operating Systems
  • New software is always prone to more bugs\exploits that are more severe than software that has been teste through out the years,

"maintain your own security standards"

  • Having your "own security standards" is pointless. 
  • This is why you have organizations such as NIST and Gartner. 
  • You can make up your own security policies and methodologies if you want.. it doesn't make it safe

 

"DNS can be rerouted regardless of your particular"

  • I never said otherwise. However, if you are sandboxed or in a VM, the attack will be limited to sandbox or VM, assuming you've set up everything by best practices. 

 

"Then you finish your post with the same suggestion I finished mine with, with the"

  • What's the point? I'm somewhat agreed with this statement. This isn't a race or a competition? We are here to help others. Calm Down.

"As for the "You shouldn't talk like that. It's highly inappropriate."

  • I understood your "analogy" perfectly. However, it's highly inappropriate and not funny in the least.   

 

"I like and abide by the ToS of the forums I participate in, and you shouldn't try to be the verbal police."

  • I'm just telling you that in general. You shouldn't talk like that, public forum or not. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. 

 

I certainly hope I didn't offend anyone with my analogy, apologies if anyone was offended. We can agree to disagree about the security benefits of designing your own software because it's only as strong as you make it, it's definitely possible to miss something that industry standards don't, but it's equally as possible to think of an attack vector that industry standards HAVEN'T (properly) protected - Just my opinion on the topic, humans are fallible.
To the point of custom software being innately insecure and your example of HBGary, HBGary publicly threatened Anon and was running an active campaign to expose the identity of Anon members - I'm sorry, but it doesn't matter what software you are using, Anon will find an attack vector to get the job done, that's too many people on too many fronts working against you at that point. As I'm sure you've heard in the security industry "It's not a matter of if, but when"  But I think we've both digressed from the OP, I merely responded because each of the points you made seemed to be contradictions for the sake of contradiction, which was odd because you finished with a point that very much agreed with mine. I hope the OP can find what they are looking for and settle for something that will fit the best of both worlds, security and ease of use.

With each version of macOS & newer models, they are locking things down more with new security feature's.

 

  • T2 Security Chip
  • APFS File System
  • More Isolating / Protecting Core OS Files
  • Previous file hacking / tricks  now have to done use Profiles
  • Some settings can only be done (like remotely set / enable remote management) if device is in Apple's Device Enrollment Program, connected to an MDM such as jamf.

 

With 10.14 Mojave, they even added phone like app permissions - ex. X software wants permission to access the camera | Allow / Don't Allow.

 

As other people pointed out, it's a lower target due to it's % of machines in use compared to windows.

 

If your considering AV, the best free AV seems to be Avast, however if your paying money, Sophos comes up a lot.

https://www.macworld.com/article/3263722/software/best-antivirus-for-mac.html

6 minutes ago, Whistlesix said:

I certainly hope I didn't offend anyone with my analogy, apologies if anyone was offended. We can agree to disagree about the security benefits of designing your own software because it's only as strong as you make it, it's definitely possible to miss something that industry standards don't, but it's equally as possible to think of an attack vector that industry standards HAVEN'T (properly) protected - Just my opinion on the topic, humans are fallible.
To the point of custom software being innately insecure and your example of HBGary, HBGary publicly threatened Anon and was running an active campaign to expose the identity of Anon members - I'm sorry, but it doesn't matter what software you are using, Anon will find an attack vector to get the job done, that's too many people on too many fronts working against you at that point. As I'm sure you've heard in the security industry "It's not a matter of if, but when"  But I think we've both digressed from the OP, I merely responded because each of the points you made seemed to be contradictions for the sake of contradiction, which was odd because you finished with a point that very much agreed with mine. I hope the OP can find what they are looking for and settle for something that will fit the best of both worlds, security and ease of use.

1

HBGary did threated Anon (well, kinda). As I've mentioned in my other post, if you have an APT coming for you, there isn't much you can do. Anon would be the APT in HBGary's case. You're right, we will have to agree to disagree, and there isn't anything wrong with that. I come to these forums to help others and to learn. Having good debates is a great tool for learning. 

 

I wasn't purposely contradicting, and if I came off that way, that wasn't my intent. Yes, I did agree with one of your points. I'm not sure what the big deal is.. We are having a discussion :) 

a mac hacker made this analogy a while ago in a pwn2own convention when comparing mac security to windows security (I am paraphrasing a bit being that I don't remember the exact quote):

 

Apple security is like having a house in a open field.  The house has no windows, no doors, and can be entered by anyone who knows where the house is.  

 

Windows security is like having a house in the worst part of town. The house has barred bullet proof windows and doors are made of steel and have 15 locks.  It is very hard to enter but all the criminals know where it is.

 

 

Essentially, the hacker was able to exploit Macs and get his prize money every year.  Every time he looked for something, he was able to find something.

 

You want to see how secure Macs really are, read through the last few years of Pwn2Own results.  It may be very eye opening.  Compare the results to the windows results and see how many times hackers have been able to get in and see how deep (if you have an understanding of deep) they got into the operating system core os/root access being essentially the deepest allowing the hacker full control over the system (biggest security vulnerability possible).  

 

https://www.macrumors.com/2018/03/15/macos-safari-exploits-pwn2own-2018/

https://phoenhex.re/2017-06-09/pwn2own-diskarbitrationd-privesc

https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2017/03/16/hacking-competition-uncovers-previously-unknown.html

 

 

Root access is not a good thing to have...essentially they can control the os with root access.  This is a common theme among the MACOS year after year (there isn't a big prize amount to get root access, it is an expectation).  This is not a common thing with the Windows OS, they do get small pieces, but they don't get to the core.

 

 

9 minutes ago, sc302 said:

a mac hacker made this analogy a while ago in a pwn2own convention when comparing mac security to windows security (I am paraphrasing a bit being that I don't remember the exact quote):

 

Apple security is like having a house in a open field.  The house has no windows, no doors, and can be entered by anyone who knows where the house is.  

 

Windows security is like having a house in the worst part of town. The house has barred bullet proof windows and doors are made of steel and have 15 locks.  It is very hard to enter.

 

 

Essentially, the hacker was able to exploit Macs and get his prize money every year.  Every time he looked for something, he was able to find something.

Look how many times Safari has been hacked in those competitions. 

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • On the topic of being locked out of a service. Recently two different friends of mine got locked out of their Google accounts. Both were hack attempts and one of them is waiting 30 days before he can get back in. He had backup codes and MFA but not a passkey. It was a browser token hack. Anyhow he has to wait 30 days for the dispute or whatever to end. The other person only had a password and is screwed losing all of the email, docs and years of photos. Google won’t help her at all. Her fault because she had no backup/recovery setup. Enable passkeys if possible. Also do NOT use browser based password managers. If using a cloud service make sure it is one you can fully sync to one of your devices so you can back it up. Like a PC or Mac with some backup drive plugged into it. Google is the worst to use IMHO. You can’t sync your photos at all. You have to use the “Take Out” service which is manual and takes days. That service strips the meta data from your photos. Also Google Docs synced to a device are useless without a Google accounts. MS Office/Libre Office is not going to open a link to a Google doc to a dead account.
    • Why you need to take back control of your synced passwords and how to go about doing that by Paul Hill Credit: Pixabay Last month, when Google decided to introduce daily and weekly caps for Gemini, it reignited an anxiety of mine, that you can’t really depend on service providers to maintain features forever, and it got me looking into free software (as in freedom) in other areas too. One app I quickly came across was KeePassXC on desktop and KeePassDX on Android as an alternative to password manager lock-in within the Chrome or Firefox ecosystems. I personally like to switch around with browsers, and using either password manager is inconvenient, so something like KeePassXC was interesting to me. The main issue with it now is syncing; I was not sure how to do that. After a bit of research, I came across Syncthing, a tool I was vaguely familiar with but had never used because it seemed complicated. However, I was completely wrong, and honestly, I think everyone should use it if they use multiple devices. It essentially lets you share folders peer to peer across all of your devices, no cloud services that you don’t control necessary! And it was fairly simple to set up, if not a bit clunky. Since setting it up, I’ve also started using Syncthing to back up other apps too, so don’t think it’s limited to just saving password databases. You can use it for pretty much anything you use Dropbox or Google Drive for. Before continuing to talk about those apps a bit more, let’s walk back a bit and talk about browser sync. Ever since the late 2000s and early 2010s, really, since we have been using smartphones, browser sync has been a necessity of life. I don’t know about you, but I have hundreds of passwords saved. For the most part, they’re all unique, so I don’t remember them and rely on software to manage them for me. Until recently, I’ve relied on password managers in Chrome and Firefox, but what I always found annoying was that it can be hard to transfer them between browsers. Sure, on Windows it is simple enough, but on Linux, exporting bookmarks has been temperamental. It works OK nowadays, but not too long ago, Chrome required you to enable exporting passwords in chrome://flags. The situation is even worse on mobile; there is no exporting or importing of passwords of any kind. You literally have to do it on a desktop, which is incredibly annoying in our mobile-first world. Sync also lets us take out bookmarks, history, tabs, and autofill data easily. To enable sync, it’s just a matter of signing into the browser once, and it handles the rest. It’s nice and easy. Obviously, all this has some issues, including those I’ve outlined above about it being hard to transfer data between browsers, but also things such as account suspension, lost account passwords, and other lock-in mechanisms, such as passkeys, being tied to a specific browser. On a sidenote, I have just removed all of my passkeys because they can make it harder to move browsers. I think the biggest threat to your synced passwords, especially if doing this with Google, is having your account suspended. I don’t ever expect mine to be suspended, but you do hear horror stories on Reddit where people lose access to their Google accounts. Imagine if you have hundreds of passwords, then suddenly lose access to them because Google froze your account, what would you do? So yes, it can be nice to use these syncing services for their convenience, but they also have risks. You may have seen me going on about free software quite a bit in my editorials. It’s essentially a concept championed by the Free Software Foundation. It’s software under particular licenses that grant you four freedoms: run the program for any purpose (0), study and change the source code (1), redistribute copies to others (2), and the freedom to distribute modified copies to others (3). For example, if there is an app I use and one day it gets abandoned by the developer, I can keep running it or even clone the software and continue developing it. Look at the myriad of cool services Google has run over the years before killing them. You can’t take the source code for those because they are proprietary, for the most part. Both KeePassXC and Syncthing are free software, so I get the freedoms listed above. In my use case where I’m syncing a database full of my passwords, I also get proper ownership over my data, there is no losing access to the database due to a frozen account, I can access the code of the tools I’m using, and I can get support from real people online if I run into issues, rather than having to consult a vague help page from an opaque company. With the KeePassXC password manager, you create a .kdbx file, which is what will be synced between devices. KeePassXC has cross-platform apps and also has browser extensions so that the browser can fetch passwords from the database once it is unlocked. Meanwhile, Syncthing is a peer-to-peer file sync tool where you can select folders to sync between your devices. Just pop files in the folders you choose, and then they will be available across your other devices whenever they come online. Syncthing is resilient as it works over both LAN and the internet and only ever sends content between your devices, never to a third-party server somewhere else. By combining these two pieces of software, you can essentially replicate the browser sync functionality. I have had a weird, conflicting issue where a new file is appearing, but it doesn’t seem to be impacting my main password database, which is updating between devices just fine. If you want to get a setup similar to what I have, you will need to go here to download KeePassXC for your computer. Once you have that, you will need to download your passwords from your web browser to a CSV file. In Chrome, you can type chrome://password-manager/settings into the URL bar, and you should see an option to download your passwords under Export Passwords. This will give you the CSV file you need for importing into KeePassXC. If you use a different browser, just use a search engine and type “browser-name export passwords” and muddle along. In KeePassXC, you’ll want to press Import File from the home screen, select the CSV file, and create a new database from it. On one of the screens of the wizard, there will be a Title field with a drop-down selected to none. Change this to Title and continue. You’ll select a name for the database, the encryption level (the defaults are fine), and then you will pick a password. I would choose four unrelated words that are easy for you to remember, as you’ll be typing them fairly often to access your passwords. When you have all your passwords in your new database, you will want to set up the browser extension so that your browser can fetch passwords from KeePassXC. Rather than explain how to do that here, refer to KeePassXC’s guide on how to set it up properly. Once you’ve got that set up, you want to install KeePassDX on Android. You can grab it on the F-Droid store and the Google Play Store. For iPhone users, there are other .kdbx-supporting apps, but I haven’t tried any of them, so have a look around and use what suits you. Once you have that done, you will want to install Syncthing on your computer and find a third-party app for your mobile device. On Android, I use an app called BasicSync; there are also options for iOS, but again, I’ve not tried these. Once you’ve got SyncThing, you’ll want to set it up and connect all of your devices together and share a folder between your gadgets. PCWorld has a good tutorial on setting up a synchronized file between your devices using SyncThing. Once you’ve set it up, congrats, you’ll never have to touch that stuff again except for adding or removing devices. I’ll be honest, I didn’t particularly like setting up Syncthing. It didn’t take me a massive amount of time, but I think I had to check online because I found it a bit confusing. That said, I’ve had it running for several weeks now and never need to touch the Syncthing settings, so that’s very nice. I also mentioned a conflicting file. I’m not sure why this is appearing, but the main .kdbx file seems to be updating and syncing just fine. What’s nice is that both KeePassXC and Syncthing are free software, so they won’t just vanish one day; you can take the code and fork the project or use a range of alternative implementations that others have made. It’s also nice that it works over LAN, so even if your ISP is having problems, your passwords will still sync. One area where you will want to be a bit more careful with this setup is if you only have one device. I am OK because I have a computer and two phones, all synced up. If you just have one device, you will probably want to store a backup of your .kdbx file somewhere else. Obviously, you’ll also want to remember your password really well, too. If you get locked out, it's game over. Overall, if you want to take back control of your computing from big tech, taking control of your passwords is an important part of this. You don’t need to immediately clear out your browser’s password manager; try running KeePassXC and the password manager concurrently for a while to see if you run into any problems. If you do try this out, let us know some other creative ways to use Syncthing. I haven’t really come up with a solution about what to do with my bookmarks, for example.
    • If the price was a dollar, someone would complain "Why isn't it free?" If it was free, someone would complain they weren't being paid to play it.
    • That lens of history will burn if you hold it at the right angle... Warn users too late: Shame, Microsoft! That extremely minor update to an obscure Control Panel widget required 2 years of warning. Warn users too early: Shame, Microsoft! We've got better things to do. Pipeline and process be damned, we'll just always be disappointed, eh?
    • Microsoft Paint used to be my favorite Windows app as a kid, and it's still pretty good by Usama Jawad I have been using Windows since the early 2000s, when I was around 10 years old or so. I vaguely remember playing around with Windows 98 and Windows 2000, but that may have been on school PCs which had old operating systems installed. My main OS on the home PC, and the one I recall spending most time with, was Windows XP. At that time, I used the home PC to create Word and PowerPoint documents for school, but a lot of the time, I simply used it to play games. My dad would bring game discs which we would try and install on the PC, sometimes unsuccessfully, and sometimes, we would rely on flash games in the browser, like Bubble Trouble on Miniclip. However, the problem with the latter approach was the internet speed. On a good day, our dial-up internet would offer us speeds of 56 kbps, but on most days, it was closer to 33 kbps. This did not facilitate online gaming as I would often have to wait minutes for a game to load or "draw" on the screen, and trying to download pirated games wasn't simple either. I remember getting tired of waiting for online games to load and just downloading simulator games from the Big Fish Games website instead, only to be disappointed after finding out that I was just being given access to trial versions of the title, and I needed to fork out money to pay for the full version. All of this is to say that it wasn't very easy to find entertainment options on the home PC when I was a kid, due to a number of reasons, mostly outside of my control. This situation pushed me towards a rather unconventional ally: Microsoft Paint. Whenever the internet wasn't working as good as I expected, I would simply spin up Paint and draw complete rubbish on the canvas. Of course, that wasn't always the intention, but it usually happened when I messed up drawing a straight line or something, and then I would give up on that particular piece and simply draw a random collection of objects. Microsoft Paint was extremely accessible and easy to use. Even if you weren't an artist, you could quickly understand the tools at your disposal and how to leverage them on a canvas. The absolute breadth on offer ensured that each painting was truly unique, as you could utilize various combinations of tools like the pencil, paint, spray paint, and more to truly personalize your creation. Since I wasn't particularly good at drawing both on digital screen or a physical screen, I remember that my main style of art would be to insert a bunch of randomly intersecting lines and then fill them with random colors through the paint can. I have trying to replicate that art style in the latest version of Paint below, and as you can see, it's truly Pablo Picasso-esque. The human imagination truly knows no bounds Microsoft Paint kept me occupied for hours and was my best friend when video games on the home PC were inaccessible for one reason or the other. There was no academic or professional reason for which I would need to use Paint, but I still loved using it in my personal time, even if what I created wasn't worth being shown to anyone. It was simply fun. Fast-forward to today, and the situation is mostly the same. Now that I am almost 29 years old, and I still have no reason to use Microsoft Paint in a professional capacity. In fact, I don't even use it in a personal capacity, except to dabble with it from time to time, just to see if core functionalities are still intact. And I'm happy to say that I think Microsoft Paint still offers the same accessibility and inviting experience that it did to me a couple of decades ago, even though its UX has been refreshed and it's been integrated with Copilot features. Interestingly, things could have been a lot different, had Microsoft had its way. Microsoft Paint was marked for deprecation with the Windows 10 Fall Creators Update in 2017, and even began displaying a product retirement alert, urging customers to shift to Paint 3D instead. Fortunately, after consumer backlash, Microsoft reversed course on this decision, and Paint continues to be a native app inside Windows installations that can also be updated quite frequently through the Microsoft Store. Instead, Paint 3D ended up on the chopping block, which is for the better, I think. I have intermittently played around with Microsoft's refreshed Paint experience in the past few years, and I do think it has received worthwhile upgrades. the UI and the UX has been modernized while retaining core functionality, and the app is still fairly easy to use. It doesn't meet any of my use-cases, but I've never really had any use-cases ever, as described previously. Of course, the elephant in the room is the Copilot integration. Personally, I believe that this is one place where Copilot does make sense, environmental concerns aside. I know that a lot of creatives use AI to generate images, and while some may be using professional alternatives, Paint still offers a decent casual experience, with the power of Copilot. Of course, you do need to have a valid Microsoft 365 Copilot license and available credits to use it, but even if you don't, you still get the big Copilot button in the toolbar, unfortunately. All in all, I am glad that Microsoft Paint continues to be a native feature in Windows 11, and a piece of software that has evolved to meet modern needs without cutting off its own roots. It's just an iconic piece of Windows history that was an essential part of my childhood, and while I don't use it anymore, I'm just glad it is still there.
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      513
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      88
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      73
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!