<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Mac Shot First: 10 Reasons Why CanSecWest Targets Apple</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/</link>
	<description>Daniel Eran Dilger in San Francisco</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2012 17:03:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: CanSecWest security competition falsely portrayed, again &#8212; RoughlyDrafted Magazine</title>
		<link>http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/comment-page-2/#comment-25553</link>
		<dc:creator>CanSecWest security competition falsely portrayed, again &#8212; RoughlyDrafted Magazine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Mar 2010 21:48:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/#comment-25553</guid>
		<description>[...] Mac Shot First: 10 Reasons Why CanSecWest Targets Apple Who benefits from CanSecWest?  A primary benefactor of the event, however, is Apple and its customers, who are shielded from any malicious application of the exploits hackers find. That&#8217;s because the people who discover exploits are rewarded by the event itself, while the vendor, in this case Apple, is given information needed to harden its software. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Mac Shot First: 10 Reasons Why CanSecWest Targets Apple Who benefits from CanSecWest?  A primary benefactor of the event, however, is Apple and its customers, who are shielded from any malicious application of the exploits hackers find. That&#8217;s because the people who discover exploits are rewarded by the event itself, while the vendor, in this case Apple, is given information needed to harden its software. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mac security researcher wins Pwn2Own contest with Safari hack &#8212; RoughlyDrafted Magazine</title>
		<link>http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/comment-page-2/#comment-17882</link>
		<dc:creator>Mac security researcher wins Pwn2Own contest with Safari hack &#8212; RoughlyDrafted Magazine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2009 21:56:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/#comment-17882</guid>
		<description>[...] Pwn2Own contest is being presented as a shootout between Mac and Windows browsers. Last year&#8217;s contest also included Linux, but attendees with the ability to crack Linux “didn’t want to put the work [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Pwn2Own contest is being presented as a shootout between Mac and Windows browsers. Last year&#8217;s contest also included Linux, but attendees with the ability to crack Linux “didn’t want to put the work [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Concours de hacking : Ubuntu plus résistant que Mac OS ou Vista &#171; Dionymartial&#8217;s Weblog</title>
		<link>http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/comment-page-2/#comment-16861</link>
		<dc:creator>Concours de hacking : Ubuntu plus résistant que Mac OS ou Vista &#171; Dionymartial&#8217;s Weblog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 21:49:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/#comment-16861</guid>
		<description>[...] cette compétition fait l’objet d’une controverse sur la blogosphère, notamment sur le cas du MacBook Air qui aurait été pris pour une cible privilégiée. Certains observateurs notent également que des [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] cette compétition fait l’objet d’une controverse sur la blogosphère, notamment sur le cas du MacBook Air qui aurait été pris pour une cible privilégiée. Certains observateurs notent également que des [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Antivirus on a Mac Pt. 2</title>
		<link>http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/comment-page-2/#comment-16325</link>
		<dc:creator>Antivirus on a Mac Pt. 2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 21:57:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/#comment-16325</guid>
		<description>[...] that the Macbook Air was hacked in a few minutes at CanSecWest during the Pwn2Own competition. This article pretty much sums up my rebuttal to that claim. However I disagree with the ending paragraph in [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] that the Macbook Air was hacked in a few minutes at CanSecWest during the Pwn2Own competition. This article pretty much sums up my rebuttal to that claim. However I disagree with the ending paragraph in [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Thurrott calls Apple “the Bad Guys” of Microsoft&#8217;s $300 Million Ads &#8212; RoughlyDrafted Magazine</title>
		<link>http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/comment-page-2/#comment-12113</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Thurrott calls Apple “the Bad Guys” of Microsoft&#8217;s $300 Million Ads &#8212; RoughlyDrafted Magazine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 06:50:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/#comment-12113</guid>
		<description>[...] Mac Shot First: 10 Reasons Why CanSecWest Targets Apple [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Mac Shot First: 10 Reasons Why CanSecWest Targets Apple [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Concours de hacking : Ubuntu plus résistant que Mac OS ou Vista!</title>
		<link>http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/comment-page-2/#comment-7466</link>
		<dc:creator>Concours de hacking : Ubuntu plus résistant que Mac OS ou Vista!</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 23:11:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/#comment-7466</guid>
		<description>[...] fait l&#8217;objet d&#8217;une controverse sur la blogosphère, notamment sur le cas du MacBook Air qui aurait été pris pour une cible privilégiée. Certains observateurs notent également que des [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] fait l&#8217;objet d&#8217;une controverse sur la blogosphère, notamment sur le cas du MacBook Air qui aurait été pris pour une cible privilégiée. Certains observateurs notent également que des [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rails Podcast Brasil - Epis</title>
		<link>http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/comment-page-2/#comment-7142</link>
		<dc:creator>Rails Podcast Brasil - Epis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2008 13:32:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/#comment-7142</guid>
		<description>[...] Mac Shot First: 10 Reasons Why CanSecWest Targets Apple [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Mac Shot First: 10 Reasons Why CanSecWest Targets Apple [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pharaos World</title>
		<link>http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/comment-page-2/#comment-7110</link>
		<dc:creator>Pharaos World</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Apr 2008 11:27:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/#comment-7110</guid>
		<description>[...] nice article about CanSecWest security [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] nice article about CanSecWest security [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rip Ragged</title>
		<link>http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/comment-page-2/#comment-7071</link>
		<dc:creator>Rip Ragged</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Apr 2008 05:02:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/#comment-7071</guid>
		<description>@freedom

I&#039;m trying really hard to read between the lines, but I&#039;ll need a little more help I guess.

You&#039;ve agreed with the basic premise of the original article, I think, that OS X is more secure than other operating systems. Or at least that CanSecWest didn&#039;t prove otherwise.

You&#039;ve agreed with the reason why: Apple builds the whole widget, ergo they have more control over the entire system – hence security.

Your basic disagreement, then, is that those opinions lack validity because they are opinions. The very real empirical data that us old FanBoys have (years without malware) don&#039;t solidify our opinions (in or between your lines). Twenty-one years without malware is not an opinion. It&#039;s a fact. I was there.

You also seem to disagree with people who adamantly advance opinions that agree with yours because they&#039;re &quot;FanBoys,&quot; or because in the comparison between Apples and Oranges we prefer Apples. That seems to be argument for its own sake from here, particularly when you agree with the basic tenets of the &quot;cult.&quot;

Reading between the lines doesn&#039;t yield facts contradictory to Daniel&#039;s original post; just that you seem to think there should be more &quot;balance.&quot;

If you have &quot;balancing&quot; facts, please post them. With no facts to counter our opinions we have no reason to change them.

I have an open mind. But it&#039;s only open to new facts. New opinions, unsupported by new facts, must be very compelling.

Thank you for explaining the jokes. It takes all the mystery out of the comments. Really.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@freedom</p>
<p>I&#8217;m trying really hard to read between the lines, but I&#8217;ll need a little more help I guess.</p>
<p>You&#8217;ve agreed with the basic premise of the original article, I think, that OS X is more secure than other operating systems. Or at least that CanSecWest didn&#8217;t prove otherwise.</p>
<p>You&#8217;ve agreed with the reason why: Apple builds the whole widget, ergo they have more control over the entire system – hence security.</p>
<p>Your basic disagreement, then, is that those opinions lack validity because they are opinions. The very real empirical data that us old FanBoys have (years without malware) don&#8217;t solidify our opinions (in or between your lines). Twenty-one years without malware is not an opinion. It&#8217;s a fact. I was there.</p>
<p>You also seem to disagree with people who adamantly advance opinions that agree with yours because they&#8217;re &#8220;FanBoys,&#8221; or because in the comparison between Apples and Oranges we prefer Apples. That seems to be argument for its own sake from here, particularly when you agree with the basic tenets of the &#8220;cult.&#8221;</p>
<p>Reading between the lines doesn&#8217;t yield facts contradictory to Daniel&#8217;s original post; just that you seem to think there should be more &#8220;balance.&#8221;</p>
<p>If you have &#8220;balancing&#8221; facts, please post them. With no facts to counter our opinions we have no reason to change them.</p>
<p>I have an open mind. But it&#8217;s only open to new facts. New opinions, unsupported by new facts, must be very compelling.</p>
<p>Thank you for explaining the jokes. It takes all the mystery out of the comments. Really.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: freedom</title>
		<link>http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/comment-page-2/#comment-7069</link>
		<dc:creator>freedom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Apr 2008 04:03:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/03/29/mac-shot-first-10-reasons-why-cansecwest-targets-apple/#comment-7069</guid>
		<description>@rip

Wow, no wonder you can&#039;t read between the lines, you can&#039;t even read the lines (and you are questioning my literacy?). In a way it is pointless to quote my previous post since you did not get it the first time, why would I expect you to get it the second time? But for the sake of others;

&quot;just because you believe it, does not make it fact! Just because I believe it does not make it fact.&quot;

Not sure, but I don&#039;t think I could have put our &quot;opinions&quot; on any more equal ground then that. The point of my comment was to note that so many &quot;opinions&quot; stated here are referred to as facts when they are merely opinions. (and for the person who is about to point out any of the &quot;provable facts&quot; in this thread, don&#039;t bother, I am not saying there are no facts I am just saying many are opinions) Note; Opinion + heartfelt sincerity does not =fact. Nor does opinion +agreement by most others of my thought-persuasion =fact.

I &quot;willingly&quot; came to this site, because I saw a link to this article and the title got my attention. I was expecting to be educated not opinionated. My reason for posting was to point out that I felt the article was ignoring a very important concept…    ….and it seems Apple agrees with me…

As I have said twice now, 

&quot;The whole point of my original post was to point out that the arguments here do not accurately take into account the fact that you are comparing Apples to Oranges. A RATIONAL person could concede that, a FanBoy could not.&quot;

I was watching a show recorded with Windows Media Center yesterday and as I was skipping through the commercials, I noticed an &quot;I&#039;m a Mac&quot; commercial, so I backed up to watch it (They are well done and I enjoy them, way to go Steve). What da ya know... I would assume this one is entitled &quot;It&#039;s not your fault&quot;. 

Mac tells PC it is not his fault for having issues because... ....well let me just quote my previous post yet again  

“I would expect a Mac to be more secure simply because the hardware and software are both made by Apple. I would expect a PC to be less secure because MS only makes the OS they do not make the hardware and or the majority of the drivers etc.”

And that is exactly what Apple claims in their commercial. I guess I need to start a Mac Fanboy Free site where Apples views can be more accurately portrayed. Lets call it www.ThechApple.com . And Rip since you don’t read between the lines well, allow me to decipher; chApple is a tongue-in-cheek reference to the “Cult” that is Apple Fanboys…</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@rip</p>
<p>Wow, no wonder you can&#8217;t read between the lines, you can&#8217;t even read the lines (and you are questioning my literacy?). In a way it is pointless to quote my previous post since you did not get it the first time, why would I expect you to get it the second time? But for the sake of others;</p>
<p>&#8220;just because you believe it, does not make it fact! Just because I believe it does not make it fact.&#8221;</p>
<p>Not sure, but I don&#8217;t think I could have put our &#8220;opinions&#8221; on any more equal ground then that. The point of my comment was to note that so many &#8220;opinions&#8221; stated here are referred to as facts when they are merely opinions. (and for the person who is about to point out any of the &#8220;provable facts&#8221; in this thread, don&#8217;t bother, I am not saying there are no facts I am just saying many are opinions) Note; Opinion + heartfelt sincerity does not =fact. Nor does opinion +agreement by most others of my thought-persuasion =fact.</p>
<p>I &#8220;willingly&#8221; came to this site, because I saw a link to this article and the title got my attention. I was expecting to be educated not opinionated. My reason for posting was to point out that I felt the article was ignoring a very important concept…    ….and it seems Apple agrees with me…</p>
<p>As I have said twice now, </p>
<p>&#8220;The whole point of my original post was to point out that the arguments here do not accurately take into account the fact that you are comparing Apples to Oranges. A RATIONAL person could concede that, a FanBoy could not.&#8221;</p>
<p>I was watching a show recorded with Windows Media Center yesterday and as I was skipping through the commercials, I noticed an &#8220;I&#8217;m a Mac&#8221; commercial, so I backed up to watch it (They are well done and I enjoy them, way to go Steve). What da ya know&#8230; I would assume this one is entitled &#8220;It&#8217;s not your fault&#8221;. </p>
<p>Mac tells PC it is not his fault for having issues because&#8230; &#8230;.well let me just quote my previous post yet again  </p>
<p>“I would expect a Mac to be more secure simply because the hardware and software are both made by Apple. I would expect a PC to be less secure because MS only makes the OS they do not make the hardware and or the majority of the drivers etc.”</p>
<p>And that is exactly what Apple claims in their commercial. I guess I need to start a Mac Fanboy Free site where Apples views can be more accurately portrayed. Lets call it <a href="http://www.ThechApple.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.ThechApple.com</a> . And Rip since you don’t read between the lines well, allow me to decipher; chApple is a tongue-in-cheek reference to the “Cult” that is Apple Fanboys…</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

