Perimeter
2/10/2009
06:15 PM
Sara Peters
Sara Peters
Commentary
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Could Slimmer OSes Lead To Better Mobile Device Security?

Maybe I'm stretching a bit, but let's say that operating system developers slimmed down their standard OSes enough so that eventually they'd be skinny enough to have a career in fashion and, more important, run on mobile devices. And, if so, would this be a good thing for mobile device security?

Maybe I'm stretching a bit, but let's say that operating system developers slimmed down their standard OSes enough so that eventually they'd be skinny enough to have a career in fashion and, more important, run on mobile devices. And, if so, would this be a good thing for mobile device security?I pondered this today while reading Ephraim Schwartz's story on ComputerWorld, "The incredible shrinking operating system."

I've spoken before about how delightful it would be if Microsoft, Apple, and their colleagues would cool it with the window dressing and frenetic adding of new features, and, instead, take some time to make their current OSes slimmer. In fact, I was a bit giddy when Mac announced this was precisely its plan for Mac OS X "Snow Leopard." A trim OS moves more quickly than a massive, bloated OS. Plus, less code generally means more security.

Another compelling reason Schwartz mentioned for putting operating systems on a diet is because "a smaller OS can run on a greater variety of devices, and as netbooks, smartphones, and new devices like the iPod Touch gain traction, the benefit of a smaller OS becomes hard to ignore."

OK, so let's say your Apple comes out with the new, slim-and-sexy Mac OS X Snow Leopard, and it can run on your iPhone.

Good thing? Bad thing?

From an interoperability, ease-of-use standpoint, it sounds good. From a security standpoint--well, it could be good because the mobile platform would have gone through the same scrutiny as other operating systems. (Maybe Mac's a bad example, here, but you get my point.)

Similarly, the iPhone's Snow Leopard operating system could theoretically run the same well-scrutinized applications as an iMac's Snow Leopard. (Realistically, though, the applications, themselves, would have to lose a lot of tonnage if they want to dance with an iPhone's comparatively puny RAM.) If, for example, the security industry ever succeeds in developing a secure Web browser that actually works,, I'd love to see it work on my BlackBerry.

On the other hand, narrowing the number of OSes to pen test and exploit might make attackers' job easier.

I'm just beginning to ponder this. I'm eager to gain the benefit of your thoughts.

Sara Peters is senior editor at Computer Security Institute. Special to Dark Reading. Sara Peters is Senior Editor at Dark Reading and formerly the editor-in-chief of Enterprise Efficiency. Prior that she was senior editor for the Computer Security Institute, writing and speaking about virtualization, identity management, cybersecurity law, and a myriad ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Flash Poll
Title Partner’s Role in Perimeter Security
Title Partner’s Role in Perimeter Security
Considering how prevalent third-party attacks are, we need to ask hard questions about how partners and suppliers are safeguarding systems and data.
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2015-0192
Published: 2015-07-02
Unspecified vulnerability in IBM Java 8 before SR1, 7 R1 before SR2 FP11, 7 before SR9, 6 R1 before SR8 FP4, 6 before SR16 FP4, and 5.0 before SR16 FP10 allows remote attackers to gain privileges via unknown vectors related to the Java Virtual Machine.

CVE-2015-1914
Published: 2015-07-02
IBM Java 7 R1 before SR3, 7 before SR9, 6 R1 before SR8 FP4, 6 before SR16 FP4, and 5.0 before SR16 FP10 allows remote attackers to bypass "permission checks" and obtain sensitive information via vectors related to the Java Virtual Machine.

CVE-2015-1916
Published: 2015-07-02
Unspecified vulnerability in IBM Java 8 before SR1 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via unknown vectors related to SSL/TLS and the Secure Socket Extension provider.

CVE-2015-3157
Published: 2015-07-02
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none.

CVE-2015-3202
Published: 2015-07-02
fusermount in FUSE before 2.9.3-15 does not properly clear the environment before invoking (1) mount or (2) umount as root, which allows local users to write to arbitrary files via a crafted LIBMOUNT_MTAB environment variable that is used by mount's debugging feature.

Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Marc Spitler, co-author of the Verizon DBIR will share some of the lesser-known but most intriguing tidbits from the massive report