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.
ClamXav went Commercial
- Thread starter Artimus12
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
MisterMe
macrumors G4
Wow! Nothing in your two links either says or implies that there are viruses on OS X. To the contrary, the Macworld report does a good job of explaining OS X built-in security facilities and how to use them to ensure that OS X remains virus-free.
You may be conflating malware and viruses. I won't bother to explain the distinction. Ironically, your second link is to a Google search whose second hit is to a MacKeeper ad. MacKeeper is technically not malware because it is commercial software that people pay to install and use. However, MacKeeper is malware in most ways that matter. It is currently giving fits to Mac users who were stupid enough to install it.
However, neither MacKeeper nor any other Mac software in the wild is a virus. Assertions to the contrary notwithstanding, you have done nothing to show otherwise.
mw360
macrumors 68020
It's funny how pretty much every article on Mac viruses uses the same sleight of hand...
Can Macs get viruses?
Yes, Macs certainly can get viruses and malware.
Here are several examples of Mac malware...
In order to meet the proper definition of virus, and therefore disprove the old Mac's don't get viruses claim, malware must be able to install itself and spread itself between different devices without the user granting permission. While anything is possible, its has turned out to be extremely rare for macs to become infected with viruses. In fact the 'cyber security' industry and clickbait writers seems to have moved to expand the definition of 'virus' to pretty much anything bad since the search for profitable threats has turned out to be so fruitless. This is true of Windows too, where true viruses have become very rare.
See for example your first link, where the author would be quite happy for you to think he had found 30 viruses on his computer. 28 of them are just phishing emails, 1 is a malicious website he's purposely saved to his HDD for some reason, and the other is a trojan. None of them would even meet the definition of 'Mac malware', let alone 'Mac virus'
Last edited:
jlc1978
macrumors 604
While I agree with you, the popular definition of virus has become "pretty much anything bad." That may not be technically correct, but it's easier to use virus, a concept people understand, than educate readers on the difference. Once a word becomes commonly accepted to mean something it's hard going back to the original definition. Hacker is another example of where what it used to mean has morphed into something else from common usage.
Ulenspiegel
macrumors 68040
"Can Macs get viruses? “The answer is definitely, yes,” says Bogdan Botezatu, Bitdefender’s Senior E-Threat Analyst, “There have been incidents, and there will be more.”" (http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/can-macs-get-viruses/).
What I have found: http://www.welivesecurity.com/2014/03/21/10-years-of-mac-os-x-malware/
And a picture for completion.
What I have found: http://www.welivesecurity.com/2014/03/21/10-years-of-mac-os-x-malware/
And a picture for completion.
Attachments
maflynn
macrumors Broadwell
I don't think anyone will deny that Macs can get a virus, but to date there are no active viruses in the wild for Macs and I don't recall hearing about one for a very long time.
You can largely avoid infection of malware by practicing safe computing habits, without going into the details, you can largely avoid malware without the need of antivirus software.
steve62388
macrumors 68040
steve62388
macrumors 68040
He hasn't proved anything. I have installed it on various Macs over the years, used it for a while and then always ended up removing it. Why? Because in all that time it has detected precisely zero, zip, nada.
jlc1978
macrumors 604
True. Interestingly enough the links referenced above mention AVTest's test of OS X anti-virus programs. In that, ClamXAV came in dead last in detection by a wide margin.
http://www.av-test.org/en/news/news...-attack-10-security-packages-put-to-the-test/
The test mentions 140 malwares used to test the effectiveness; but does not state what those 140 are; nor do they mention if OS X already guards against them, or at least the ones aimed at the OS and not java, etc.
ardent73
macrumors regular
I've been using https://www.avast.com/free-mac-security recently, I can't be infected by Win32 or Java exploits but it's nice to know where they are when downloaded and delete them.
Some folk seem to be hung up on whether a Mac can get a Virus or Not, with the same old arguments - I don't know what the thinking is, but every time someone posts regarding Mac Virii or Malware, the same group of members congregate in the thread as though they have an investment in the virus industry - you're getting repetitive and boring! Please allow others to discus the subject without feeling the need to "clarify the difference between malware and virus" as though others haven't heard it a thousand times before. Knowing the difference doesn't make anyone here a genius and I think it has been proven that IT IS POSSIBLE for OS X to get a VIRUS ...whether there's currently any out there or not! but that's not even the point of the post.
The question is: Is ClamXav worth the price the Dev is now charging for it or is it not? simple really.
The question is: Is ClamXav worth the price the Dev is now charging for it or is it not? simple really.
I'm inclined to throw ClamXav from my Mac now as well. I'm going to say that you a not getting a qualitative product for that price. The user experience is still subpar and it looks really dated now, despite the new icons. I want my anti-malware software to be inconspicuous and run in the background, allow me to do quick checks without having to wait for too long and don't annoy me with uninteresting notifications just because the virus definitions were updated. This just isn't a piece of software worth that much and I feel uncomfortable paying so much money for it, even with the discount.
jlc1978
macrumors 604
IMHO, no; the survey respondents also seem to feel that way.
Ulenspiegel
macrumors 68040
It was a passive reflection, reaction to one of the posts dealing with non-existent viruses on a Mac.
Thanks, Myke, for your advice, but I am quite aware how to avoid malware. My posts in such topics reflect that.
Last edited:
Dirtyharry50
macrumors 68000
I have noted also that the Mac App Store version remains free and runs without asking the user to upgrade, etc. There is no upgrade for it on the App Store. The definitions can still be upgraded so basically it is still available for free to anyone wanting to use it until some future version of OS X breaks compatibility with it or something happens so far as definitions updating goes.
I think keeping Adware Medic around is a good idea in case some browser issue pops up. The price is certainly right.
By the way, it is worthy of note that Apple includes in OS X a protection system called XProtect which has definitions kept up to date automatically by Apple. The most current malware definitions file is version 2061 on my system that is dated May 28, 2015 and protects against 49 known OS X malware infections.
So Apple is actually watching out for users without any visible indication of it unless you use a utility like OnyX to see it. This is one more reason you probably do not need to think about using or certainly purchasing any AV product for Mac unless you encounter some sort of problem.
I think I must have mentioned before too that truly the very best defense is a backup system like Time Machine that will let you go back far enough to predate a problem should disaster strike somehow.
Edit: I'd just like to toss out there too that getting bogged down in semantics over what constitutes what kind of threat is not really productive. Anything that infects a system is a problem. Naming the various types of infection is just a way to classify them. They are all bad in some way and the naming conventions have never been intended to classify by severity so much as what a given infection does and how it does it.
I think keeping Adware Medic around is a good idea in case some browser issue pops up. The price is certainly right.
By the way, it is worthy of note that Apple includes in OS X a protection system called XProtect which has definitions kept up to date automatically by Apple. The most current malware definitions file is version 2061 on my system that is dated May 28, 2015 and protects against 49 known OS X malware infections.
So Apple is actually watching out for users without any visible indication of it unless you use a utility like OnyX to see it. This is one more reason you probably do not need to think about using or certainly purchasing any AV product for Mac unless you encounter some sort of problem.
I think I must have mentioned before too that truly the very best defense is a backup system like Time Machine that will let you go back far enough to predate a problem should disaster strike somehow.
Edit: I'd just like to toss out there too that getting bogged down in semantics over what constitutes what kind of threat is not really productive. Anything that infects a system is a problem. Naming the various types of infection is just a way to classify them. They are all bad in some way and the naming conventions have never been intended to classify by severity so much as what a given infection does and how it does it.
Last edited:
Dirtyharry50
macrumors 68000
That's fine but the point remains some folks may take issue with charging for something based on open source or the price charged for it. The perception of value for some people is very likely affected by that. Personally, if someone adds value and charges a price I agree with I am fine with it but that's just me. Not everyone would agree with that I'm sure.
Last edited:
Dirtyharry50
macrumors 68000
Actually there are and OS X has built in protection against them as I mentioned above.
chrfr
macrumors G5
Dirtyharry50
macrumors 68000
I'll just toss out one more thing while I am thinking of it. I don't see the harm either in installing something like Avira, Avast, BitDefender or whatever else is free since maybe they will catch something
Thanks. Well, since Apple does this automagically I'm sure they will get to me soon. 😀
Are you aware of a way to check for updates to XProtect on demand?
chrfr
macrumors G5
Yes. Enter the following in Terminal:
Code:
sudo softwareupdate --background-criticalDirtyharry50
macrumors 68000
That's great! Thank you. I am always learning new things here. 😀
Sure enough it updated to version 2063, June 26th.
Considering I had 2061, it would seem that somehow I missed two updates and yet my system is connected to the internet and running 24/7 other than when it sleeps. According to the OnyX help system, supposedly this is checked by OS X every 24 hours but if it is I've been missing it somehow.
I'll have to run that from time to time I guess just to make sure I stay up to date.
Any ideas about why I might miss updates?
Thanks again for pointing that out to me.
I've been using the web version because Sentry isn't available for the MAS version ...Sentry is a plug-in that loads and scans the folders you select (downloads, mail, etc) automatically. It also updates prior to the MAS version, which is probably why the MAS version is still free. I would expect them to either drop support for it or update it to commercial in the very near future - maybe they'll launch a new paid for version for the MAS and call it "Pro" or something??
I won't be running ClamXav in future, but it's the Sentry plug-in more than the actual program itself that I'll miss. FWIW I also think the user interface is in need of a refresh.
Traverse
macrumors 604
See, that's what I didn't want: Sentry. As of right now, I don't feel the need to have something continuously scanning or running. I only ever visit the same set of websites, I don't torrent, I've disabled safaris open safe files option.
I only ever download indie music from places like Sound Cloud that artists link to on their YouTube stations or wallpapers from a few websites. I just wanted an on-demand scanner to check these downloads for Windows/OS X malware.
I hate to see ClamXav go, it was one of the few I trusted for this purpose.
I only ever download indie music from places like Sound Cloud that artists link to on their YouTube stations or wallpapers from a few websites. I just wanted an on-demand scanner to check these downloads for Windows/OS X malware.
I hate to see ClamXav go, it was one of the few I trusted for this purpose.