Hacker News Reader

OS X doesn't need antivirus software, and I didn't say that it did. Not needing it is a selling point, saying "you know, we don't need it, but we threw it in there anyway despite that it's worthless" isn't.

View on HN

Not needing and having are two different selling points, both in evidence here.

Having it negates the "not needing it" selling point IMO. In addition, it being worthless and taking up space and CPU cycles (however passive it is) is a negative in my book. I don't see how it's a selling point at all.

Most users will see any security feature as a net positive. Note the positive publicity (amongst normal users) for Leopard ASLR, a feature that adds no real security. Adding basic anti-malware features to the OS will not negate any of the security value prop in Snow Leopard.

I share your take on antivirus software, but do note that preventing a user from installing something with a known virus on it does not have negative utility.

presumably details on why Leopard ASLR "adds no real security" are discussed in http://www.matasano.com/log/986/what-weve-since-learned-abou..., which will eventually be reachable again?

Yep. Short answer: Leopard didn't randomize important core libraries.

Is there any confirmation that Snow Leopard has fixed this?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com