Recently I came across a discussion on a Mac forum with some people discussing how shocking it was that Apple had been recommending that its Macintosh customers consider using anti-virus software. This is a discussion that has always raised my ire, as the supposed superior security of the Mac has always been an issue of numbers.
No operating system is perfect, they’re all designed by people and are full of flaws as a result. It’s important to keep in mind that one of the reasons that Mac OS X has had precious few problems with viruses and other nasties is market share.
Writing viruses is much like sending out mailers for advertising your new business. The more people you reach with your message (or malware) the more people you’ll connect with (infect).
If you want to infect lots of people, you write your malware for Windows.
Five years ago the market share of the Mac was in around the 5% mark, meaning that if you wrote a virus for the mac and distributed it to 20 million computer users you’d infect 100 people (at a rate of 1 in 10,000). If you write for Windows and infect people at the same rate, you’ll infect 1900 people.
With the market share of the Mac increasing, so does the surface area for attacks. Many Mac owners have become complacent over the years believing that they are safe because they use a Mac. As a result the infection rates of Mac systems could be much higher than Windows-based PCs if malware authors decide to target the Mac platform.
Food for thought.
Here’s a clip of a post I did over on the AGP Blog about the acquisition of Sandy & Stikkit by Twitter. It’s going to be very interesting to see what Twitter decides to do with the newly acquired technology, particularly in the wake of reduced services in nearl every country outside the US (read: no more SMS!!!). Here’s a clip from the feature-length version: