Rhisiart
Registered
If the market share does rise, it will inevitably harvest more naive users (perhaps like myself). However, I take your point fryke.
Viruses On Os X
- Thread starter Captain Code
- Start date
ElDiabloConCaca
U.S.D.A. Prime
Also, bear in mind that in pre-OS X days, Apple wrote their own operating system and it was much like Windows 95/NT/95/Me/XP in that it was primarily written as a "single-user" operating system with multi-user capabilities bolted on as an afterthought.
Apple doesn't write their own operating system anymore. It's now based off of FreeBSD (with portions of Next/OpenSTEP, which was also UNIX-based), which has been in development for decades, and, in turn, is based off of the original UNIX operating system which is more than 30 years old. UNIX was originally written as a multi-user operating system, and part of the mind-set behind such operating systems is sheer paranoia, and that no one should be trusted with any more capabilities than they need.
People have been trying to hack UNIX for 30 years. The operating system itself is one of the most secure in the world. It is simply not true that because Mac OS is not as popular as Windows or as widespread that interest in "hacking" it is lower than interest in hacking/exploiting Windows. People are very interested in hacking UNIX, and have been for decades.
More people hack Windows simply because it is more hackable, plain and simple. Exposure may play a part in that, but a small one -- Windows is, inherently, more insecure than Mac OS X (ie, UNIX).
Also, the trojan(s) that appear on Mac OS X take advantage of social engineering instead of security flaws in the operating system in order to wreak havok. The DNSChanger trojan requires that the user actually take action (double-clicking the installer) and provide their password in order to operate -- which is much different than the way most exploits work on Windows. In short, someone actually has to be sitting in front of their Mac, logged in, and take action for anything to actually infect the computer, and they must explicitly install the malicious software themselves... whether or not this happens by trickery is beside the point and pretty much out of anyone's hands. With Windows, this is not true. You can leave an internet-connected Windows machine sitting by itself at the login screen and you could be 5,000 miles away and it could still become infected.
You're going to kill me Fryke, but here goes another simile: explicitly being tricked into launching a trojan program and supplying your password is like handing over your house keys to a stranger then acting surprised when you've been burgled. The burglar couldn't have done anything to the inside of your house without tricking you into handing over your keys (ie, your password). While measures can be taken to prevent trickery, it is ultimately up to the computer owner/user who and what they allow to run on their machines. If you're easily tricked into thinking you need some new QuickTime codec to view questionable videos on the internet (which is how the DNSChanger trojan works), then the computer becoming infected is nobody's fault but the user's.
Naivete is no excuse to blame Apple or make claims that Mac OS X is insecure, just as not knowing the speed limit is no excuse for exceeding it and getting a ticket. It is up to the user to know who to trust and who not to, and, like I said earlier in the post, UNIX is set up as a "trust no one" operating system.
The internet is out to get you, but it cannot do so with Mac OS X without your explicit permission. If someone is tricked into compromising their system, then they have only themselves to blame. There are warnings posted everywhere (like Firefox's phishing warnings), just like there are speed limit signs, yield signs, curvy road warnings and falling rock warnings posted everywhere along the roads you travel. If you choose to ignore these warnings, then you're on shaky ground and are taking unnecessary risks and putting yourself in harm's way. It is completely the user's responsibility to pay attention and observe street signs, the same as it's the user's responsibility to know what they're letting happen on their computer. If they're unsure about anything, the only reasonable and excusable action is to not do it.
Apple doesn't write their own operating system anymore. It's now based off of FreeBSD (with portions of Next/OpenSTEP, which was also UNIX-based), which has been in development for decades, and, in turn, is based off of the original UNIX operating system which is more than 30 years old. UNIX was originally written as a multi-user operating system, and part of the mind-set behind such operating systems is sheer paranoia, and that no one should be trusted with any more capabilities than they need.
People have been trying to hack UNIX for 30 years. The operating system itself is one of the most secure in the world. It is simply not true that because Mac OS is not as popular as Windows or as widespread that interest in "hacking" it is lower than interest in hacking/exploiting Windows. People are very interested in hacking UNIX, and have been for decades.
More people hack Windows simply because it is more hackable, plain and simple. Exposure may play a part in that, but a small one -- Windows is, inherently, more insecure than Mac OS X (ie, UNIX).
Also, the trojan(s) that appear on Mac OS X take advantage of social engineering instead of security flaws in the operating system in order to wreak havok. The DNSChanger trojan requires that the user actually take action (double-clicking the installer) and provide their password in order to operate -- which is much different than the way most exploits work on Windows. In short, someone actually has to be sitting in front of their Mac, logged in, and take action for anything to actually infect the computer, and they must explicitly install the malicious software themselves... whether or not this happens by trickery is beside the point and pretty much out of anyone's hands. With Windows, this is not true. You can leave an internet-connected Windows machine sitting by itself at the login screen and you could be 5,000 miles away and it could still become infected.
You're going to kill me Fryke, but here goes another simile: explicitly being tricked into launching a trojan program and supplying your password is like handing over your house keys to a stranger then acting surprised when you've been burgled. The burglar couldn't have done anything to the inside of your house without tricking you into handing over your keys (ie, your password). While measures can be taken to prevent trickery, it is ultimately up to the computer owner/user who and what they allow to run on their machines. If you're easily tricked into thinking you need some new QuickTime codec to view questionable videos on the internet (which is how the DNSChanger trojan works), then the computer becoming infected is nobody's fault but the user's.
Naivete is no excuse to blame Apple or make claims that Mac OS X is insecure, just as not knowing the speed limit is no excuse for exceeding it and getting a ticket. It is up to the user to know who to trust and who not to, and, like I said earlier in the post, UNIX is set up as a "trust no one" operating system.
The internet is out to get you, but it cannot do so with Mac OS X without your explicit permission. If someone is tricked into compromising their system, then they have only themselves to blame. There are warnings posted everywhere (like Firefox's phishing warnings), just like there are speed limit signs, yield signs, curvy road warnings and falling rock warnings posted everywhere along the roads you travel. If you choose to ignore these warnings, then you're on shaky ground and are taking unnecessary risks and putting yourself in harm's way. It is completely the user's responsibility to pay attention and observe street signs, the same as it's the user's responsibility to know what they're letting happen on their computer. If they're unsure about anything, the only reasonable and excusable action is to not do it.
Doctor X
Registered
Thanks!
Next time a PC'r starts the "if Mac was t3h popular" or "it is all user responsibility" I will cite that post.
The particular user claims to have "never had a virus or Trojan"--though he regularly runs proprietary anti-virus software. "Only an idiot gets a virus." So I asked him, being a "genius," why he bothers to pay for anti-virus software if he is, you know, so smart and stuff and his PC is "just as secure" as a Mac.
I am sure you have all heard this fallacious analogy: Why do you lock your front door?
I reminded him that he lives in a trailer next to a crack house whereas I live on my private island surrounded by sharks and candiru so, no, I do not lock my door. For some reason, he became very upset. . . .
--J.D.
Next time a PC'r starts the "if Mac was t3h popular" or "it is all user responsibility" I will cite that post.
The particular user claims to have "never had a virus or Trojan"--though he regularly runs proprietary anti-virus software. "Only an idiot gets a virus." So I asked him, being a "genius," why he bothers to pay for anti-virus software if he is, you know, so smart and stuff and his PC is "just as secure" as a Mac.
I am sure you have all heard this fallacious analogy: Why do you lock your front door?
I reminded him that he lives in a trailer next to a crack house whereas I live on my private island surrounded by sharks and candiru so, no, I do not lock my door. For some reason, he became very upset. . . .
--J.D.
ElDiabloConCaca
U.S.D.A. Prime
I have to admit that on my Windows machines, I have never been the unwitting suspect of a virus or trojan -- the one time I did get infected was when I was explicitly asking to get infected and allowed myself to get infected. Of course, I was running anti-virus software and had the system locked down behind a firewall, and I basically gave permission for the virus to enter my system.
I kinda just wanted to see what happens.
At any rate... Macs ARE popular. Dare I say even more popular than Windows. But let's not confuse "popular" with "widespread." Electric cars are more "popular" than gasoline-powered cars, but there's not more of them -- they just get more attention.
Mac OS X has had over 30 years of security hardening done to the underlying OS framework by some of the gooberiest, nerdiest, geekiest, mathematically-inclined minds -- Windows has about 15 (the current incarnation of Windows we use today started with Windows 95, even though there are major differences in the underlying structure of the operating system).
And, you can throw that "it is all user responsibility" fallacy right back at your friend -- Mac OS X cannot become infected simply by sitting on the internet. Windows can. If it were all the user's responsibility, that wouldn't happen.
http://www.techworld.com/security/news/index.cfm?newsid=5535
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-137900.html
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/01/0218209&tid=172&tid=220&tid=218
Mind you, those articles are at most 5 years old, and security patches have been made available so that compromises don't happen so quickly. I saw no articles about Mac OS X systems being compromised at all.
Hell, I'd even be willing to set up a test site if someone would like to take a stab at compromising a Mac OS X system. I'll set up a default Mac OS X 10.4 Server, bring it up-to-date, expose the whole damn thing to the internet (no hardware firewall, software firewall disabled, in my router's DMZ), give out the administrator user name that I choose, and publish my IP address. I'd be willing to bet money that no one could gain any meaningful access to it in a week and that it would be humming along just fine for months without being compromised.
I kinda just wanted to see what happens.
At any rate... Macs ARE popular. Dare I say even more popular than Windows. But let's not confuse "popular" with "widespread." Electric cars are more "popular" than gasoline-powered cars, but there's not more of them -- they just get more attention.
Mac OS X has had over 30 years of security hardening done to the underlying OS framework by some of the gooberiest, nerdiest, geekiest, mathematically-inclined minds -- Windows has about 15 (the current incarnation of Windows we use today started with Windows 95, even though there are major differences in the underlying structure of the operating system).
And, you can throw that "it is all user responsibility" fallacy right back at your friend -- Mac OS X cannot become infected simply by sitting on the internet. Windows can. If it were all the user's responsibility, that wouldn't happen.
http://www.techworld.com/security/news/index.cfm?newsid=5535
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-137900.html
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/01/0218209&tid=172&tid=220&tid=218
Mind you, those articles are at most 5 years old, and security patches have been made available so that compromises don't happen so quickly. I saw no articles about Mac OS X systems being compromised at all.
Hell, I'd even be willing to set up a test site if someone would like to take a stab at compromising a Mac OS X system. I'll set up a default Mac OS X 10.4 Server, bring it up-to-date, expose the whole damn thing to the internet (no hardware firewall, software firewall disabled, in my router's DMZ), give out the administrator user name that I choose, and publish my IP address. I'd be willing to bet money that no one could gain any meaningful access to it in a week and that it would be humming along just fine for months without being compromised.
Doctor X
Registered
Funny. I was going to just leave the "thanks" then a self-proclaimed PC "expert" posted that basically all of that information is suspect because it come from a "Mac Guru."
She also posted a "roll-eyes" smiley.
Damn! How does one rebut the "roll-eyes" smilie?!11! It is t3h D34dly!!11!
So, I will post your invitation.
See if she puts her money where her mouth is.
--J.D.
She also posted a "roll-eyes" smiley.
Damn! How does one rebut the "roll-eyes" smilie?!11! It is t3h D34dly!!11!
So, I will post your invitation.
See if she puts her money where her mouth is.
--J.D.
ElDiabloConCaca
U.S.D.A. Prime
What "Mac Guru?" Sophos was the author of one of those articles, and they are renown for their cross-platform anti-virus software. If they're labeled as a "Mac Guru," then they must also be labeled as a "Windows Guru" as well as a "Linux Guru." So, with them being a "Windows Guru," then by her own reasoning and logic, their word must be taken as a truth, right? 
ElDiabloConCaca
U.S.D.A. Prime
I've read all about the Mac Hacks at the BlackHat conference, and there's holes or "gotchas" in every one of their tests:
http://www.newswireless.net/index.cfm/article/2932
It seems that you have to be using special hardware that is not included with standard Mac configurations, among other things.
And why does this have to be a "Mac vs. PC" thing? I know Macs extremely well, and I know Windows machines extremely well. I also have a bachelor's degree in Linux and UNIX programming, security and administration. I don't think that one platform is "better" than another, and it pains me when people "take sides." It's ridiculous. Just open your mind, learn all of the operating systems, and use whichever OS suits your needs at the moment. Being so blindly loyal to one operating system doesn't make you cool or give you the right to slam other operating systems -- it makes you a closed-minded, bull-headed, stubborn fool. It's almost like admitting you haven't the mental capacity to learn how double-click on an icon in more than one environment. After all, under Windows, Linux, most UNIX and Mac OS X, it's all just clicking and double-clicking... how freaking hard is that?
Call me a fanboy; call me a Mac-lover; call me whatever. I use Macs more than I use any other operating system, but I would bet money (or even a limb) that my knowledge and skills with Windows extends far beyond anyone who uses solely Windows and dismisses Macs sheerly out of some sort of far-fetched prejudice.
To quote a horrible cheerleader movie: Bring it. I'll school you with Macs, and I'll make you feel like a 3rd grader with Windows computers. Quit being such a stubborn idiot and expand your horizons. You may just like what you see if you go into the situation with an open mind. Just because you like Windows doesn't mean you need to hate Macs.
http://www.newswireless.net/index.cfm/article/2932
It seems that you have to be using special hardware that is not included with standard Mac configurations, among other things.
And why does this have to be a "Mac vs. PC" thing? I know Macs extremely well, and I know Windows machines extremely well. I also have a bachelor's degree in Linux and UNIX programming, security and administration. I don't think that one platform is "better" than another, and it pains me when people "take sides." It's ridiculous. Just open your mind, learn all of the operating systems, and use whichever OS suits your needs at the moment. Being so blindly loyal to one operating system doesn't make you cool or give you the right to slam other operating systems -- it makes you a closed-minded, bull-headed, stubborn fool. It's almost like admitting you haven't the mental capacity to learn how double-click on an icon in more than one environment. After all, under Windows, Linux, most UNIX and Mac OS X, it's all just clicking and double-clicking... how freaking hard is that?
Call me a fanboy; call me a Mac-lover; call me whatever. I use Macs more than I use any other operating system, but I would bet money (or even a limb) that my knowledge and skills with Windows extends far beyond anyone who uses solely Windows and dismisses Macs sheerly out of some sort of far-fetched prejudice.
To quote a horrible cheerleader movie: Bring it. I'll school you with Macs, and I'll make you feel like a 3rd grader with Windows computers. Quit being such a stubborn idiot and expand your horizons. You may just like what you see if you go into the situation with an open mind. Just because you like Windows doesn't mean you need to hate Macs.
Doctor X
Registered
Indeed.
I simply prefer Macs for reasons I am sure you have heard enough times from ease of use to better security. However, there is never a "perfect" system nor a "perfect" computer. I think Macs are "better" made . . . some of them. It is easier, in my opinion, to secure a Mac. It is also possible to screw up. Leave your doors open, your keys in the ignition, in a "bad neighborhood," do not complain if your metaphor gets stolen like a car. . . .
Beyond the "joke partisanship"--which is how the argument started--there are those who take this very very seriously. It is like sports fans. I have a friend who is a Yankees fan. We have relatively civil discussions. However, too many revert to the "Yankees suck!" "A-rod is Gay!" "Red Sox suck" level of sports analysis. That is "fan-boy" speak, and it is useless and pathetic.
Thus with Mac versus PC.
The "PC Fanboys and Fangirls," in question, had no response to your posts. If they have something of substance--rather than "Macs r useles!" and profanity, I will inform them of your response. One asked, "how do you define pc and mac?" I am not going to waste time with that.
That being written, I have converted far more PC users to Macs than I have encountered Mac users who have converted to PC . . .
. . . and I know quite a few who use both . . . OMFG!!!11!!
Back to the Topic
So are there any more things a Mac user should worry about?
--J.D.
I simply prefer Macs for reasons I am sure you have heard enough times from ease of use to better security. However, there is never a "perfect" system nor a "perfect" computer. I think Macs are "better" made . . . some of them. It is easier, in my opinion, to secure a Mac. It is also possible to screw up. Leave your doors open, your keys in the ignition, in a "bad neighborhood," do not complain if your metaphor gets stolen like a car. . . .
Beyond the "joke partisanship"--which is how the argument started--there are those who take this very very seriously. It is like sports fans. I have a friend who is a Yankees fan. We have relatively civil discussions. However, too many revert to the "Yankees suck!" "A-rod is Gay!" "Red Sox suck" level of sports analysis. That is "fan-boy" speak, and it is useless and pathetic.
Thus with Mac versus PC.
The "PC Fanboys and Fangirls," in question, had no response to your posts. If they have something of substance--rather than "Macs r useles!" and profanity, I will inform them of your response. One asked, "how do you define pc and mac?" I am not going to waste time with that.
That being written, I have converted far more PC users to Macs than I have encountered Mac users who have converted to PC . . .
. . . and I know quite a few who use both . . . OMFG!!!11!!
Back to the Topic
So are there any more things a Mac user should worry about?
--J.D.
LABachlr
Registered
So, almost 4 years after the original post of this thread, are there still no known viruses for OS X? Why is Apple suggesting that we have "multiple antivirus utilities" on our system?
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2550
Is it still just to protect our PC user friends, or has the Mac OS been compromised? I'm going to guess it's the former, but please do advise.
Thanks.
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2550
Is it still just to protect our PC user friends, or has the Mac OS been compromised? I'm going to guess it's the former, but please do advise.
Thanks.
Randy Singer
Registered
Apple is suggesting that you use anti-virus (AV) software because they are covering their asses. That way if, god forbid, a tremendously virulent piece of malware were to suddenly appear, they could say "we *told* you to use AV software" and they would be absolved from blame.
Of course, they say just the opposite in this television commercial:
<http://movies.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac_ads1/viruses_480x376.mov>
or
http://comapple.notlong.com
Note that while Apple suggests using AV software, they don't mention any specific threats. That's because there are no really serious threats currently.
If a malicious virus shows up for the Macintosh (and we all know that it is imminent, because we have been told that it is imminent by Windows apologists and "security experts" for 8 years now) it will be all over the press, and they will be telling you specifically what it is you have to protect yourself from.
For now, there are malware threats to the Macintosh, but they are incredibly rare, and you can protect yourself against them without the need for AV software.
There are a few malicious Trojan Horses for the Macintosh. However, they are so rare that if you purposely went looking for them, you probably couldn't find them.
Trojan Horses do not self-propagate. That being the case, they are only disseminated from venues where the origin is anonymous and you can be easily tricked into installing something questionable. These are usually either peer to peer file sharing networks (i.e. where folks are pirating software and/or music) or questionable Web sites, such as pornography sites.
So, if you don't engage in any risky computing behavior, and if you don't install software from questionable sources, you should be quite safe. There is no reason to be worried. The press likes to blow this topic out of proportion and insinuate that a Trojan Horse is the same thing as a virus. They aren't. Trojans are very difficult to disseminate, and they tend to dissappear after they are discovered because once the site that is spreading them is closed down, there is no other source to spread them.
The only other significant malware threat to the Macintosh are Word and Excel macro viruses. These are no threat at all if you don't use Microsoft Office products (or NeoOffice or OpenOffice). And they are no threat to MS Word users if they are using Word 2008 which does not include Visual Basic.
A Word macro virus can be a a part of a Word document and when opened and run can cause mischief. But you can protect yourself from a Word macro virus by disabling automatic running of macros in Word. In Word 2004, click Security, and then check the box for Warn before opening a file that contains macros.
See here for instructions for the various versions of Word:
http://kb.iu.edu/data/agzk.html
If a document has a macro in it, and you weren't expecting it to have one, you can choose to disable the macro until you determine if it is a legitimate or malicious macro.
Of course, they say just the opposite in this television commercial:
<http://movies.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac_ads1/viruses_480x376.mov>
or
http://comapple.notlong.com
Note that while Apple suggests using AV software, they don't mention any specific threats. That's because there are no really serious threats currently.
If a malicious virus shows up for the Macintosh (and we all know that it is imminent, because we have been told that it is imminent by Windows apologists and "security experts" for 8 years now) it will be all over the press, and they will be telling you specifically what it is you have to protect yourself from.
For now, there are malware threats to the Macintosh, but they are incredibly rare, and you can protect yourself against them without the need for AV software.
There are a few malicious Trojan Horses for the Macintosh. However, they are so rare that if you purposely went looking for them, you probably couldn't find them.
Trojan Horses do not self-propagate. That being the case, they are only disseminated from venues where the origin is anonymous and you can be easily tricked into installing something questionable. These are usually either peer to peer file sharing networks (i.e. where folks are pirating software and/or music) or questionable Web sites, such as pornography sites.
So, if you don't engage in any risky computing behavior, and if you don't install software from questionable sources, you should be quite safe. There is no reason to be worried. The press likes to blow this topic out of proportion and insinuate that a Trojan Horse is the same thing as a virus. They aren't. Trojans are very difficult to disseminate, and they tend to dissappear after they are discovered because once the site that is spreading them is closed down, there is no other source to spread them.
The only other significant malware threat to the Macintosh are Word and Excel macro viruses. These are no threat at all if you don't use Microsoft Office products (or NeoOffice or OpenOffice). And they are no threat to MS Word users if they are using Word 2008 which does not include Visual Basic.
A Word macro virus can be a a part of a Word document and when opened and run can cause mischief. But you can protect yourself from a Word macro virus by disabling automatic running of macros in Word. In Word 2004, click Security, and then check the box for Warn before opening a file that contains macros.
See here for instructions for the various versions of Word:
http://kb.iu.edu/data/agzk.html
If a document has a macro in it, and you weren't expecting it to have one, you can choose to disable the macro until you determine if it is a legitimate or malicious macro.
ElDiabloConCaca
U.S.D.A. Prime
For the same reason your homeowners association recommends putting locks on your doors. While a break-in isn't going to happen today, or this week, or this month, or this year, you can't fix the damage after the fact. Putting locks on your door after you've been broken into doesn't do squat.
Apple recommending anti-virus software is not an admission that there are threats in the wild that affect Mac OS X, the same as putting locks on your doors is not an admission that your home will be broken into tonight.
...the same as putting on a seatbelt doesn't mean you're getting into an accident tonight.
...the same as putting on a condom doesn't mean the girl you're with has an STD.
...the same as giving heartworm medicine to your dog doesn't mean the next mosquito that bites him/her is carrying heartworm eggs.
...the same as calling 911 when you hear gunshots doesn't mean someone's been shot dead.
...the same as turning off your computer during a storm doesn't mean you will inevitably will have a power surge.
...need I go on?
VirtualTracy
Thunderbirds are GO!
While surfing last night I was presented with this dialogue window ...
I tried to close the Tab and saw this window:
I opted to "Force Quit" Safari rather than clicking the OK button ...
Then I relaunched Safari and from the menubar chose "History" then "Reopen all Windows from last session".
I made sure I quickly closed the Tab which showed me the above dialogue.
I guess the moral is that if you are careful you stand a greater chance to avoid catching the webs nasties ..
I tried to close the Tab and saw this window:
I opted to "Force Quit" Safari rather than clicking the OK button ...
Then I relaunched Safari and from the menubar chose "History" then "Reopen all Windows from last session".
I made sure I quickly closed the Tab which showed me the above dialogue.
I guess the moral is that if you are careful you stand a greater chance to avoid catching the webs nasties ..
Randy Singer
Registered
There is a slight flaw in your analogies, though. Thieves do exist. So do STD's.
There are no OS X-specific viruses yet.
So installing anti-virus (AV) software isn't protecting you from something that is unlikely. There is nothing, yet, to be protected from.
Also, most good AV software requires the developer to write a definition to ward off a known virus threat. When such a definition has been written, everyone's AV software needs to be updated with that definition. So, if you install AV software now, it will be useless against any future threat until it is updated. That update won't be forthcoming until any new threat is generally known. So, theoretically, you can wait to purchase AV software until when and if there is a threat. Macintosh users who have relied on this have saved themselves the expense of AV software for the past 8 years (since the introduction of OS X.)
ElDiabloConCaca
U.S.D.A. Prime
Nope, you're right. There are no OS X-specific viruses yet...
...but there are trojans. Two, to be exact. Plus rootkits have existed for UNIX for 30 years or more now, and since OS X is UNIX, it is susceptible to the same security flaws that UNIX is.
Untrue. In addition to the trojans that are Mac OS X-specific, you will also be protected from UNIX rootkits and exploits as well as all Windows viruses, so you don't pass them on. Kind of like never exhibiting any symptoms of herpes, but being a carrier of the virus. (Sorry to be so graphic!) Think that girl will be so happy to hop in the sack with you when you tell her, "Hey, I got no viruses that are compatible with me, but I may carry a virus that's compatible with you."
Not true at all... virus software employs advanced and complex heuristics to defend against unknown threats. Antivirus software can scan not only the known virus activities, but can detect "virus-like" behavior that can protect you against a virus that is not currently in the virus definitions file.
The good thing about being protected from a known threat is that then the damage can potentially be reversed. However, using virus behavior heuristics, you can prevent infection from an unknown threat.
Sure (unless you're the first person to be infected by it, which is quite possible -- people do win the lottery), but what if that virus deletes your home folder? What if it renders your system unbootable? "After-the-fact" virus protection doesn't help there at all, especially if you fly-be-the-seat-of-your-pants and don't keep backups (as we know many, many, many users here still do).
I'll have to defend my analogies and say they're pretty spot-on. Catching a virus on your computer is extremely similar to catching an STD in real-life -- you can't tell from outward appearances whether they're "infected" or not, so being safe up front is the best protection you can take.
Also not true at all. Ask any member here how many threads we've had recently about the DNSChanger trojan -- it's more widespread than you're making it out to be, and not everyone has the sense of mind to read any popups that occur before blindly clicking "OK" and saying "Sure, I do want the updated Quicktime codec to view some obscure movie that I didn't request!"
Just to set the record straight and clear any confusion: I do not have any virus protection installed on my Macintoshes. However, I am an educated network and security engineer, and I know everything that my systems do and have access to. I'm not recommending that everyone do the same as I do, and not to sound arrogant, but I've been around the block since the original IBM PC was released and I know what to do and what not to do. I'm not trying to convince anyone to either run or not run anti-virus software on their Mac -- I'm just backing up Apple's position in saying that virus protection is recommended. My virus protection is knowledge of my systems... for those that don't have such in-depth knowledge, you may need virus protection to cover the bases that you can't cover.
Last edited:
Doctor X
Registered
Well, it is sort of like this thread and the concerns I raise--many of the public, like myself, are not computer security experts. Any day I can get into a "Mac vs. PC" fruitless debate that recapitulates many of the myths exposed in this thread: bottom line is people believe them.
So you will hear that basically, at any moment, a virus will be developed or once the Mac reaches that critical market share all t3h 3v1l virus creators will turn their attention to Mac OS. I think a scroll will be unraveled and a cow will try to mate with an avocado when that happens.
I think Apple is responding to that--the criticism that some day Apple will "need" anti-virus protection. That is not a bad approach. However, I also think it really recognizes the problem that Mac users may have with passing a PC virus or getting one if they use Parallels/Bootcamp.
On that note, I got my "First Official Virus" this week when I googled for a picture--a normal picture, not a porn picture!--clicked on the picture, and got a warning that the page went to a "bad page"--then my Sophos immediately alerted me to a virus that was downloaded on my computer!!11!
Now my Mac could not "read" the file if I wanted to activate it. It sat on my desktop with Sophos asking me if I wanted to trash it, which I did. So was I "infected?" I do not run P/BC, but if I did I doubt it could do anything unless I tried to open it--myself!--under those or attached it to an e-mail and sent it to a PC using friend with the "oh just go ahead and enable it!" The e-mail antivirus would have probably got it.
Nevertheless, I assume that non-event is far more common to other users, and I am sure many immediately get on the phone with Apple demanding to know why their Apple is "infected."
--J.D.
So you will hear that basically, at any moment, a virus will be developed or once the Mac reaches that critical market share all t3h 3v1l virus creators will turn their attention to Mac OS. I think a scroll will be unraveled and a cow will try to mate with an avocado when that happens.
I think Apple is responding to that--the criticism that some day Apple will "need" anti-virus protection. That is not a bad approach. However, I also think it really recognizes the problem that Mac users may have with passing a PC virus or getting one if they use Parallels/Bootcamp.
On that note, I got my "First Official Virus" this week when I googled for a picture--a normal picture, not a porn picture!--clicked on the picture, and got a warning that the page went to a "bad page"--then my Sophos immediately alerted me to a virus that was downloaded on my computer!!11!
Now my Mac could not "read" the file if I wanted to activate it. It sat on my desktop with Sophos asking me if I wanted to trash it, which I did. So was I "infected?" I do not run P/BC, but if I did I doubt it could do anything unless I tried to open it--myself!--under those or attached it to an e-mail and sent it to a PC using friend with the "oh just go ahead and enable it!" The e-mail antivirus would have probably got it.
Nevertheless, I assume that non-event is far more common to other users, and I am sure many immediately get on the phone with Apple demanding to know why their Apple is "infected."
--J.D.
Randy Singer
Registered
Well, first, no true Macintosh AV program looks for *all* Windows viruses. At most, they look for the Windows threats that are likely to show up on a Mac via e-mail and the Web.
In any case, Macs simply do not spread Windows viruses and there is no sound reason why Mac users need to be concerned about protecting Windows users from
viruses.
Windows viruses usually show up in one of two ways on a Macintosh. First, they can show up as an e-mail attachment to a message sent out by a Windows virus on a Windows computer. In this case, the attachment won't run on your Macintosh and it will open (if at all) as just a mess of code. Since a Window virus can't run on a Mac, it cannot re-e-mail itself out from a Macintosh (i.e. it cannot be self propagating). Such a virus will be easy to spot and just trash. There is little to no chance of spreading such a virus to a Windows using colleague.
The second common way to get a Windows virus on your Mac is to receive a Word or Excel macro virus as part of a Word or Excel document that someone sends you. You should have "Macro Virus Protection" turned on in the preferences of both of those applications, which will keep any unidentified macros from running. Documents with unidentified macros should never be sent to others.
So, if a Mac user exercises the slightest amount of care, the likelihood of a Mac user accidently infecting a Windows-using colleague with a virus is ridiculously low. No virus detection software is required to protect Windows-using colleagues.
In any case, any Windows user who isn't running good, meticulously updated anti-virus software to protect _themselves_, deserves any viruses they get. There are literally over 180,000 Windows viruses!
http://vil.nai.com/vil/default.aspx
Windows users should protect themselves. They shouldn't have to rely on Mac-using colleagues to use AV software to protect them from the miniscule possibility of receiving a Windows virus from a Mac user. Windows viruses are Windows-users' responsibility.
Randy Singer
Registered
Modern (read: "good") AV software for the Mac doesn't do this. First, AV programs that did this in the past were notoriously problematic, causing incompatibilities with one's programs and creating general performance issues.
In fact, that's one of the reasons that most Mac users don't want to use AV software. It has a history of being more of a problem than actually having malware.
Second, they didn't work. Malware authors found it to be very easy to get around such programs.
Macworld's highest rated anti-virus program, Intego's Virus Barrier, goes strictly by definitions. That's why it is so highly rated. It is non-obtrusive, it doesn't slow down your computer, and it doesn't cause incompatiblities.
Randy Singer
Registered
I don't count paranoia as an indication of how prevelant viruses are.
I'm the head of a Mac user group with overe 7,000 members. I'm the resident "mentor" (my actual title) with another user group with over 7,000 members. I'm on about a dozen discussion lists encompasing many thousands more Mac users. I don't think that you are going to find anyone who is more in touch with a larger number of actual, ordinary Mac users. if lots of folks were encountering Trojans, I'd know it. They aren't. No matter how much you would like to stir people up.
Oh, good...a "security expert." One of my favorite types of people. You wouldn't be inclined to tell folks that they need to be worried about malware when they really don't need to be, would you? Just because your job depends on your doing so...?