Followup Re: claim that only systems running MS Windows are vulnerable:

http://www.h-online.com/security/features/Macs-in-the-crosshairs-1808317.html

"General malware continues to focus mainly on Windows systems, but targeted attacks aim at whatever system the intended victim is using, and this is bringing Macs increasingly into the firing line"

@ "simpsonsmovie...":
"Unlike even the most immoral and bullying US companies -- the Verizons and Montsantos -- Chinese state owned companies create no pressure on their government to rise to a higher moral ground,"

Verizon and Monstanto create pressure on the U.S. gov't "to rise to a higher moral ground"?!

Huh?!

The pressure exerted upon the U.S. gov't (quite effectively, it must be noted) by the likes of Verizon, Monsanto and every other major corporation has but one motive and goal: to influence the Gov., to the maximum extent possible, to place said corporation's _private_ interests ahead of the _public's_.

If you consider that to be moral in any way at all, much less to somehow constitute "a higher moral ground", then I suppose all I can say is that you have a very odd concept of morality.

I can only hope I have somehow misread your comment.
___________
@Peter from Manhattan:
"Many of the insecurities that make such attacks possible are flaws of Windows and Windows only."

Or is it (mainly/overwhelmingly at least) simple economics: attackers _target_ Windows systems because they account for the overwhelming majority of systems in use? (At least desktops)

Do you have any basis to assert, as you seem to be, that non-Windows systems are _inherently_ more secure?
_________________
@jgarbuz:

On what do you base your assertion that Iran is interested in destroying the U.S.?

Any actual evidence?

You missed this key point, that this is about a problem with state owned companies: they are only as good as the worst government official slash employee.

Unlike even the most immoral and bullying US companies -- the Verizons and Montsantos -- Chinese state owned companies create no pressure on their government to rise to a higher moral ground, no actionable citizen outrage nor any shareholder discontent. Any American doing business with a state owned company in a non-Democracy is at a massive disadvantage, with some slice of the world's biggest pie left on the table serving in the place of fairness." In retrospect, I blame America -- starting with Mr. Bill Clinton -- for saying Yes too much. In 1994 we still had so many chips to create a better world instead of one that has found peace with immorality and corruption. We still have a few though.

National Firewall!

"China has no interest of destroying us"

JG - probably not at this time, because we owe them a bob or two, but they certainly would like to have the option.

One crucial aspect that the media routinely fail to mention is that such attacks are not attacks on computer systems in general. They are attacks on Windows systems. Many of the insecurities that make such attacks possible are flaws of Windows and Windows only.

here goes brian looking for equivalency - the difference between iran and china should be clear even to you.

The guest said the US would not hack foreign computers to aid American companies just for national security.....you've been a great audience please tip your waiters

It is Iran, not China, that will try to sabotage us in retaliation. China is only interested in stealing our IP. China has no interest of destroying us, but Iran is a different story.

Everybody hacks. I'm sure that we cyber spy more on them than they do we.

It's just that they have little in terms of private proprietary corporate info to be had.

were they behind the zombie attack of the EBS
are Americans so dumb about security?
http://www.eweek.com/networking/zombie-attack-warnings-broadcast-after-emergency-alert-system-hack/

Great radio show Brian ;-)

Kevin Mandia (and Mandiant) have been warning for years about China's hacking and a possible Chinese pre-positioned cyber attack war plan of our entire infrastructure in the event of hostilities with the West.

(QUICK ... someone get the word out to Barry on the golf course that it's NOT a "peaceful rise".)