Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Quietly Updates Antimalware Protection in Mac OS X 10.6.4
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Umm,
so Apple is wasting time remaking something they could just simply add too?
Sounds like somebody at Novell just got a job at Apple.
It seems obvious that you don't know what ClamAV is. Well, I won't bother to tell you, but I will say that there are more Mac AV solutions available than you might think.
Yeah. And don't surf to websites that exploit the vulnerabilities of your web browser. And never open those email attachments. And while you're at it, never download and install any shareware from an unknown source.
Unfortunately, the online life is not that simple.
Lord Vader: I'm afraid it is your comment that I don't understand. (Other than that you harshly disagree.)
Good, I dont need to be told what I already know. ClamAV is more than just an email scanner, maybe I should be telling you what clamAV is.
And they're all freaken scams as far as Im concerned. No virus scanner can protect a computer from a Trojan, because some idiot wanted to save some dosh. Since there are no Virii or Worms for Mac OSX, the use of AV software is pointless.
I think the companies that write anti-virus software are just a little upset with the Mac in general seeing as it's a bit difficult (short of deception) to sell "anti-virus" software for a system that to date (OSX anyway) hasn't had a single virus. Not only would you not need a daily update of the virus list, but you wouldn't even need the software period since it serves no purpose (unless you enjoy filtering Windows viruses out of e-mail for your friends...assuming you forward every stupid thing every sent out known to man without even looking at it).
I know a lot of people say the Mac and Linux don't get viruses because their market is too small to bother, but I say that reasoning is a load of bologna. The Commodore Amiga never had ANYWHERE NEAR the current user base of OSX and it had a LOT of viruses created for it. Admittedly most were floppy boot block viruses and weren't all that lethal, but that doesn't change the fact they were viruses and they were on a relatively small platform.
OSX and Linux have one other thing in common and that's their Unix (or Unix-like in Linux's case) heritage. It seems like it would be hard to comment on the susceptibility of a Unix system to viruses if none have ever been made for it. One could suppose it would be still be easy to do, but until someone does it, the proof seems lacking, IMO. Trojans and worms aren't the same thing, BTW.
It just seems like the Mac is a prime green field of completely un-mined, unsuspecting, completely vulnerable machines with absolutely no anti-virus protection. Come on. You're telling me 10+ MILLION unprotected machines wouldn't interest a few criminals while there are literally hundreds of thousands of viruses for Windows? Even by percentages this makes no sense. There should at least be a couple hundred or so Mac viruses out there. There are NONE. Susceptible to hacking? Yes, that's been demonstrated. I haven't seen a virus demonstrated (even in a security contest type thing) yet for the platform. I don't WANT to see one appear (given it's one of the biggest reasons I use a Mac on a daily basis instead of my Windows machine), but I don't buy the "small user base" theory alone. It has to be harder than just that or we'd at least have a few by now.
I know a lot of people say the Mac and Linux don't get viruses because their market is too small to bother, but I say that reasoning is a load of bologna. The Commodore Amiga never had ANYWHERE NEAR the current user base of OSX and it had a LOT of viruses created for it. Admittedly most were floppy boot block viruses and weren't all that lethal, but that doesn't change the fact they were viruses and they were on a relatively small platform.
OSX and Linux have one other thing in common and that's their Unix (or Unix-like in Linux's case) heritage. It seems like it would be hard to comment on the susceptibility of a Unix system to viruses if none have ever been made for it. One could suppose it would be still be easy to do, but until someone does it, the proof seems lacking, IMO. Trojans and worms aren't the same thing, BTW.
It just seems like the Mac is a prime green field of completely un-mined, unsuspecting, completely vulnerable machines with absolutely no anti-virus protection. Come on. You're telling me 10+ MILLION unprotected machines wouldn't interest a few criminals while there are literally hundreds of thousands of viruses for Windows? Even by percentages this makes no sense. There should at least be a couple hundred or so Mac viruses out there. There are NONE. Susceptible to hacking? Yes, that's been demonstrated. I haven't seen a virus demonstrated (even in a security contest type thing) yet for the platform. I don't WANT to see one appear (given it's one of the biggest reasons I use a Mac on a daily basis instead of my Windows machine), but I don't buy the "small user base" theory alone. It has to be harder than just that or we'd at least have a few by now.
No, but a Trojan can download a virus in the background (but not all do). why do you think they called it trojan in the first place.
when you give The trojan your password it can do anything to your system it wants even grant permission to could be viruses without you knowing.
A trojan is just as bad as a virus if not worse.
ever hear of social engineering, from your post i guess not, which would make me believe that you would be the one that would fall for it. It doesn't have to be from downloading pirated/illegal/illicit software from the internet.
A example of social engineering
I can make a fake company, which makes a fake program (a delivery system/Trojan in disguise if you will), That i make it to where you and others believe that is real. As soon as you install it or run it and enter your password then BOOM i have you, I would be able to do many things to your system.
So, Apple rightfully recognizes that inviting outside parties
to manage their security simply results in a cottage industry dedicated to forcing people to buy updates. And that these security company's bloatware often includes so much 3rd party crap, that they destroy the simple elegance for which Apple's OS is so loved.
Thank you Bill Gates, for encouraging the creation of an entire for-profit virus industry that we are now stuck with forever.
to manage their security simply results in a cottage industry dedicated to forcing people to buy updates. And that these security company's bloatware often includes so much 3rd party crap, that they destroy the simple elegance for which Apple's OS is so loved.
Thank you Bill Gates, for encouraging the creation of an entire for-profit virus industry that we are now stuck with forever.
Welcome to the world of 2010!
Why is it that people are still so obsessed with viruses? The hot topics of today are Identity Theft, Creditcard Fraud, Scamming, Botnet-Herding...
Have a look at the last Internet Crime Report.
Viruses are now very much a thing of the past - even on Windows. There is simply no money to be made in writing viruses.
Hi,
Well there goes my false sense of security. Will this happen even if I just view a website?
s.
I don't see anything wrong in that
Why would there be something wrong with that?...
Not every post involves bitching, although I do understand your confusion! Many posts do.
Really though, you have to understand the whole story. The reason is Unix/Unix-like OSes are more secure is in part due to its permission structure. With permissions you can, in detail, say exactly who you want to be able to read/write/execute a file/folder, and with the introduction of ACLs in OS X, this structure is even more specific. Windows has ACLs, but AFAIK it has yet to introduce the same type of permission structure that Unix/Unix-like OSes are so well known for. What does this mean? It means that even software with giant gaping holes in them that some guy downloaded have limited access to certain parts of the system, and on Mac OS X, only certain parts of that app with giant gaping holes are allowed admin access if it's requested.
Yes i know windows prevents you from accessing certain parts of the system too, but lets be honest with ourselves, that prevention system is crap. On a default installation of windows, users have admin access, which, by default, makes windows only display a box that asks for permission, without asking for a password, which is easy to circumvent.
Ever heard of Apple Software Update? Or actually paying for software that isn't included in the Apple updates?
Lol, sad but true.
My practice manager had a look at me getting RHCE and RHVCA certificates. (In the University Holidays)
His face literally dropped at the price. It was quite funny actually.
There was no 'official' translation/transition word created for the plural of Virus, in the sense that Universities and Grammar Nazis online still argue about it. Some people say it was Viruses because Viri from latin translates to viral. But Virus from Latin was a mass noun so Viruses technically wouldn't be correct.
His point is there are many people out there who are either cheap or stupid, and would rather download the "free" version of something they would have to pay for otherwise. For those people, I have a word of advice: NOTHING IS FREE. Except my free IHaxYou.app. That's free. TRY IT!
Read the wikipedia page on it. And yes, Viruses is official English. There isn't an official agreed Latin plural form.
I got this malware! Emails were sent to people from my yahoo contact list from my yahoo email address. Very scary.
I changed my yahoo password and reset safari, now I'm wondering if I need to buy a anti-virus program like Intego or something else? Any opinions?
I changed my yahoo password and reset safari, now I'm wondering if I need to buy a anti-virus program like Intego or something else? Any opinions?