MacSlash
posted an interesting question to their readers that I
thought would make for an interesting discussion here at TUAW: due to the rise in Mac OS X security-related stories,
the debunked worm alarms and even
hacking contests
that get cancelled before they become useful experiments, does Apple need to appoint a public Chief Security
Oficer?
On one side of the topic, some argue that it would show a sign of weakness in Apple's security
department. On the other side, some believe it would equate to Apple putting their best foot forward on security, a
topic that will likely hit the company head-on sooner or later anyway. To clarify what this position would
(theoretically) be: the Chief Security Officer would be a public figure for Apple who could speak as an authority on
Mac security, putting rumors and mis-reported news to rest, announcing the company's position and status on security,
etc. The MacSlash post also summarized an important public element of this topic quite well: "
In matters
related to product marketing, it's the public perception, not the reality that really matters....And once you've lost a
user's confidence, it's hard to get it back. Just ask Microsoft."
What do you think, TUAW readers?
Should Apple get ahead of the game and appoint a public security official before something more serious strikes Mac OS
X? Sound off.
Steve Jobs told shareholders this week that, in light of Disney's acquisition of Pixar, he would actually be spending
more time at Apple, in part because he'll be relinquishing his CEO position at Pixar in a couple of weeks once the
merger finishes. Many have been speculating that Mr. Jobs would be spending more time at Disney, but he publicly
responded "that couldn't be further from the truth... It'll require less of my time than Pixar did."
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
