New Patch Fixes 43 Flaws In OS X, Many Serious 2140
And they all have setuid bits.
Was it? I have never used it. Have you?
Yes. It's a *brand*.
If Apple wished, they could well obtain the right to use this brand in their marketing. But this would have *no* security implications.
snip
Windows is, indeed, not a Unix.
Exactly. Windows is also a brand, and the brand has identified more than one codebase.
So has the "Macintosh" brand, for that matter.
Sure thing.
If Apple had used the actual Tru64 kernel, rather than the one from NeXTStep, it might be more impressive.
But not much more. It is not like an insecure userspace is in any way mitigated by a secure kernel.
Yes. Any further questions? snip I think I am being consistent: Unix is a brand, and Apple can...
No. OS X's kernel is Mach. They've put some bits of BSD in there for improved compatibility, which is fine, but not important for security.
Daniel Johnson Yeup. Now do you know what these are for? Yes. Very buggy. Then it is obvious then that your recent remarks about OS X not being a Unix is...
Security is not something you can sprinkle on like jimmies on an ice-cream cone.
snip
That would be a long and not very relevant post; they are quite different OSes.
You can ignore things like the Dashboard Debacle, but they remain very illustrative; in this case that no amount of chanting "Unix! Unix!" makes your OS secure.