Expert: McAfee Mac Security Report Is 'Scaremongering'

Discussion in ' News Discussion' started by MacBytes, May 8, 2006.

  1. MacBytes macrumors bot

    Jul 5, 2003


    Category: Opinion/Interviews
    Link: Expert: McAfee Mac Security Report Is 'Scaremongering'
    Description:: McAfee's report follows on the heels of a study by the SANS Institute that placed Mac OS X at the top of its list of potential security vulnerabilities. Both reports join a litany of statements from security experts who have begun to rethink their assumptions about Mac users having little to worry about when it comes to malware attacks. However, while many in the security industry have jumped on the "Mac is not secure" bandwagon, several experts have taken issue with the way the Mac is being positioned as a potentially insecure system. Andrew Jaquith, an analyst at the Yankee Group, is one such expert. He called the McAfee report "sloppily written and sloppy in its use of statistics." It is, he said, "a speculative house of cards resting on a foundation of shaky statistics and questionable assumptions."

    Posted on
    Approved by Mudbug
  2. mvc macrumors 6502a


    Jul 11, 2003
    Nortons & Mc Afee probably pay blackhats to write virii.

    There is about as much evidence for that statement of mine as there is for any of their typical FUD. Why don't we explore the logic of this kind of argument.

    Who can know for sure whether they are writing virii or not?
    It's technically do-able.
    It certainly seems in their best business interests to manufacture a virus threat where there is none.
    So it must be inevitable!
    Therefore it is going to happen to YOU.
    You should start worrying.
    You should buy anti - antivirus protection right now before it is too late!!!

    I have no time for these vultures :mad:
  3. Belly-laughs macrumors 6502a


    Jun 8, 2003
    you wish
    Man needs enemies. When there are none left, he creates new.
  4. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Jan 6, 2004
    of course the Security companies want to scare people, they want to make money, thats all anyone wants anymore. more money. more. more. more.
  5. bwintx macrumors regular

    Jul 17, 2002
    "Viruses," not "Virii"

    Just so you don't get slapped-down if you ever choose to post at Slashdot, here's a pre-emptive warning: Strangely enough, the plural for virus is viruses. Perhaps even more strange is that this even has its own Wikipedia page.

    As for the rest of your comments: Well said.
  6. cwtnospam macrumors regular

    Sep 4, 2004

    Even this article can't get the facts right. Anti virus software can only reliably catch viruses that it has definitions for. Since there are no definitions for nonexistent Mac viruses, av software can't help Mac users. All we would be doing would be protecting PC users, who should have av software installed on their systems, making the Mac av software useless.
  7. nagromme macrumors G5


    May 2, 2002
    That's pretty much my thinking. If (when!) there is a real, successful, Internet virus for Mac, you'd need to download virus definitions for it.

    So... why not wait until then, and download the software AND the definitions both at that time? What's the point of pre-paying for the software just to wait for hypothetical definitions that don't exist for a hypothetical virus? The other things AV software does are not worth it to me.

    Not even for stopping Windows viruses to help my friends: if they don't already have anti-virus software, then ME having it isn't going to save them. And when I get infected Windows spam, the buck stops there anyway: with or without AV software, why would I forward it to anyone else? I may or may not know it's a Windows virus, but I still have no reason to forward the email to anyone.

    Plus, odds are that the Mac community and/or Apple will respond to block the first virus very quickly, making the definitions useless anyway.

    I'm glad tech writers are stepping up to point out the misinformation that's been spread about Mac security. Unfortunately, the FUD that AP sends out to get re-printed as sixteen "different" articles is what gets remembered probably.

Share This Page