<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.techrepublic.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on Black Hat 2011 update: Macs in the crosshairs, Kaminsky on BitCoin ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-05-24T18:52:32-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Security via obscurity, I agree]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011-3509167]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[And I've grappled with pundits who say that anti-malware (including firewall) isn't necessary on Macs.  *facepalm*I've ran Intego's software on mine, but might migrate to Kaspersky as I'd read they are coming out with Mac support, as their track record for Windows is top notch.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011-3509167]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[HypnoToad72]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 09 Oct 2011 15:44:31 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[proprietary source code]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011-3482803]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I've always thought the main difference was between open and closed source code. With the latter, eg Mac and Windows, you naturally have fewer people both designing and testing/fixing the code. If there's some standard like &quot;glaring security errors per developer&quot; percentage, obviously the fewer people with access to the code would make such errors more likely in the proprietary world.I know this argument chases it's own tail, but I've always thought it was less &quot;security through obscurity&quot; and more a matter of the number of minds being applied to the task.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011-3482803]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[pgit]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2011 06:30:39 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Macs in the workplace.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011-3482758]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I have been using Macs longer than most people. It is not that Mac users think that their computers are immune from viruses or spyware, etc... it is the fact that the OS is designed in such a way that none can be interacted into the system unless you have the administrator password. Unlike windows in where you are pretty much given the ability to turn off the administration warning, because it acts like the boy who cried wolf ad nauseum, and people ignore it. Apple's Administrator warnings come up when the app comes up and says, hey... this is trying to access something, or install something that needs administrator rights to do so.Which means that whatever you install is your own fault, the same goes for web sites you go to.  Any idiot can go to a website, an informed person (an administrator) can make sure that your computer is safe on the network. As for your home computer, that is where the greatest threat is... it is probably time for Apple to start introducing iFirewall an app and/or hardware that's sole purpose is a firewall, or put an update into the Airport Extreme to work as a true hardware firewall, instead of what it is. Apple has a chance to get ahead of hackers, instead they are doing what IBM and MS did... having the wait and see approach.  The only way you are going to protect your mac is by knowing what is going on yourself.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011-3482758]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Cyberpawz]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2011 04:27:00 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[So much for security through obscurity ...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011-3482318]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I too regularly use both Mac and Windows systems in my business.For years I used to take flak from Mac fanatics when I'd say that security through obscurity was no real protection from malware attacks. The MacHeads would scream that there was no such thing, and that Macs were somehow intrinsically immune from malware problems because, well, Macs just are.It's cold comfort to actually win that argument. And if all these MacHeads didn't whine about it so much and expose themselves as easy targets, maybe they'd still be blissfully free from malware attacks.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011-3482318]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Randy Hagan]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 11 Aug 2011 06:36:31 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[please!]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011-3481552]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I want to hear Kaminsky talk about both of these topics! If anyone can come up with a link to a video  pu-leeeze post it here, thank you.I searched for 10 minutes using plus signs and quotes trying to find any video of this year's blackhat. Nothing.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011-3481552]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[pgit]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2011 06:21:57 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Macs Immunity]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011-3480809]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Anyone who EVER thought that Macs were &quot;immune&quot; to a virus attack was deluding themselves.  Macs were not &quot;immune,&quot; they were &quot;ignored.&quot;]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011-3480809]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Raymond Sirois]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2011 12:55:56 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[This was inevitable with Mac's]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011-3480615]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[As both a PC and Mac user I could see the day when Mac's would become the focus of malware. Its certainly nowhere near as bad as Windows. But I remember back when Windows was not targeted and all of a sudden people's computers were crashing and locked up because they never heeded the warnings. The same seems to be happening to Mac users. Apple made a huge mistake convincing Mac users that OS X was immune to the rath of viruses and malware that plagued Windows.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011-3480615]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jscott418-22447200638980614791982928182376]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2011 06:03:52 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[talks available for download]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011-3480334]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Anyone know if video or audio of talks will be made available for download by the Defcon folks?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347011-3480334]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Neon Samurai]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 04 Aug 2011 11:00:20 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

