Re: New Patch Fixes 43 Flaws In OS X, Many Serious

Daniel Johnson wrote:

"sav" <notthisbitsavage@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:e4d72m$1rf$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I have seen that answer before on this newsgroup, and I think
it means that you have no idea what you are talking about; you
are trying to conceal this fact by referencing a book which you
are confident I won't read. I am then supposed to conclude
that it somehow supports you.


He said, "the answer is too long to post". I found a shorter answer,
that is not so thorough, but I suspect by your ignoring of previous
explanations this one won't do for you either.


Out of respect for your.. concerns about being
ignored, I will reply and not snip any content this time.

But this article *is* irrelevant; it deserves to be
ignored. It does not advance any argument about
Mac OS X having any sort of 'inherent resistance'
to malware.


Well, I will snip the rest as we should ignore the rest as it is totally irrelevant eh?

The answer has to do with how processes are started, inherit permissions from the uid/gid, etc. Everything coming into any UNIX box thru a browser is automatically set to read only. Now you tell me how a foreign program is going to inherit the uid/gid of a user process in order to run or install malware?

<snip>

--
Where are we going?
And why am I in this handbasket?
.