Symantec warns of Mac OS X trojan on the loose

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by Spanky Deluxe, Jul 1, 2006.

  1. Spanky Deluxe macrumors 601

    Spanky Deluxe

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Location:
    London, UK
    #1
    http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/2006/06/30/symantec_macosx_trojanhorse/

    Just in case no one's seen this yet.

    Edit: Sorry I didn't realise this was the same warning as this one. The article was dated a day later. :eek:
     
  2. thegreatluke macrumors 6502a

    thegreatluke

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2005
    Location:
    Earth
    #2
    :eek:

    Oh my gosh, the three people who still have 10.4.6 are at risk!!!

    In a few days, expect a giant banner ad on CNET saying "MACS* now have more viruses than Windows!"

    *Typo on purpose.
     
  3. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #3
    Only if someone breaks into their houses. :rolleyes:
     
  4. Jovian9 macrumors 68000

    Jovian9

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2003
    Location:
    Planet Zebes
    #4
    Now hurry and buy Symantec's products so you are protected. Hurry hurry hurry! Symantec cares about your security! :)
     
  5. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #5
    OT, but this is the first time I realized ClamAV was integrated in Tiger Server. Was it like that from launch?

    I wonder if the standard version of Leopard will have a front-end for the client / workstation version of ClamAV? Not that we really need it, but... support of open-source AV by a commercial company is interesting to me. :)
     
  6. Josias macrumors 68000

    Josias

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    #6
    LOL. Symantec probably made it because they want to sell more products. It's good Apple made a patch after 3 days, including all sorts'a cool stuff. With 10.4.7, my MB boots in 18.8 seconds. In 10.4.6 the record was 21.3 seconds.:cool:
     
  7. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #7
    Ha! Like any Mac user is foolish enough to buy Symantec's crap after it was shown they actually make Macs less secure. I'll stick to ClamXav thanks!
     
  8. SC68Cal macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2006
    #8
    Network policy demands that Macs on our networks also have a license of Norton Anti-Virus. Mainly to ensure that windows viruses don't get into the system from a Mac.
     
  9. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #9
    Is this an edu or a business? Does it have to be Norton, or are others acceptable?

    I read the O'Reilly article about the ClamXAV front end...it seems pretty nice. I might give it some thought at some point.
     
  10. thegreatluke macrumors 6502a

    thegreatluke

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2005
    Location:
    Earth
    #10
    Honestly, I'm sure there is a slight risk, but Symantec likes to blow Mac risks out of proporsion.

    Like the Oomp-A virus or whatever... Remember all the requirements you had to have to pass it on? And a whopping 0-2 estimated people were affected and MR shut down the thread after like two days... and it barely did any damage to your apps... yet Symantec set the Mac's risk level to "high." Then Apple patched it after about a week.

    If a really knowledgable Mac-hating Mac-OS-X-savvy hacker were out there, I'm sure he could come up with something in a matter of years. It's probably a really obscure setting with some really obscure and hard-to-write code needed to pull it off.

    So... the moral of the story is... Don't download "Pronswatcher.app" from some poorly-translated fishy Mac-user-oriented porn site.
    "Oh, yeah, Ron, show me your 13-inch MacBook and then we can install Shake together!"
     
  11. Arcus macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2004
    Location:
    of my hand will get me slapped.
    #11


    Im running 10.3.9 :(
     
  12. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #12
    Well, then I repeat my comment... if someone with a launchd hack script *breaks into your home physically* and gets past whatever password protection you have on that mac, then yes, you might be vulnerable. But a good lock on your front door will probably help more than Symantec.

    The launchd exploit is a LOCAL exploit.

    P.S. Tiger really is the bomb. :eek:
     
  13. thegreatluke macrumors 6502a

    thegreatluke

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2005
    Location:
    Earth
    #13
    Oh right, I forgot "Mac OS X 10.4.7 and below" would include the four other OS X versions.

    Oops, sorry.
     
  14. MisterMe macrumors G4

    MisterMe

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    USA
    #14
    Don't worry about MacOS X 10.3.9

    The launchd vulnerability cannot possibly affect MacOS X 10.3.9 because launchd was introduced as a part of MacOS X 10.4.
     

Share This Page