Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why does everyone automatically think that every single Mac user is immune to Trojan's?

that raises a very good point. A fully updated Mac might be immune but if you have a user that doesn't bother to install updates or even think about where they are getting things, it doesn't matter how protected a perfect system is.

I remember a couple of years ago when a malware got huge press because "Oh my gosh, Macs can't get malware but here it is" and then it was revealed that the source was from a torrented copy of iWork '09. Legit ones had no such issues, but someone did this as a 'lesson' for those that would pirate software.
 
Two more than OS X used to get when marketshare was next to nil.

Actually we don't know that. It is possible that there were even more than 2 a year before.

The issue is that the increased marketshare and power as successful page hit fodder thanks to the iOS successes has increased reporting of such things so that even 1 incident is hyped up as way more major than perhaps it is. Just like bugs in software, antenna issues (that might actually be carrier issues) and so on.
 
Crap, I just did a "Check for Update" and it asked for the Administrator user name and password. Should I be worried?
:cool:

LOL.. Yeah, guess I should check for an update... but wasn't it just announced there was one yesterday? Something about the EFI bios?

Well, what do you know, one "Security" update. Installing it now. :D

I can confirm that this was (and is) a legit Firmware upgrade. :)
 
These days, there's very little reason to have Java enabled in your browser. There are very, very few sites that require it anymore. Most people should just leave it off.

And if you must use some website that requires Java, make sure your OS is up to date.

(I look forward to the day when the same is true for Flash, but we are not there yet.)
 
in all honesty malware can affect any system whether it be Windows or Mac. But at least apple has a system in place to help prevent malware. Also this news sort of reinforces the GateKeeper methodology that is being deployed in Mountain Lion.

Technology is continuously changing as well as security and as much as I hate to admit it the future of cyber security is what Apple is implementing with GateKeeper.

(on a side not I wonder which antivirus company is behind this one - kidding of course :D)
 
Actually we don't know that. It is possible that there were even more than 2 a year before.

I think I remember reading that there are usually 50-100 OSX bugs floating out in the wild on average. Not many, but more than you'd think. The reason no one notices is because Mac users are a much smaller, more tech savvy demographic. It's not nearly as likely to proliferate as it is on Windows, and it's far larger share of the mom and dad demographic.
 
Why is "Continue" the default choice when the root certificate is not trusted?

By pressing "Continue", you indicate that the current settings will not be changed. The current settings are "don't trust this certificate".

This is standard Mac user interface. "Cancel" means: The Mac will behave exactly as if the alert had never been shown. So if you manually turn trust on, after pressing "Cancel" no changes will actually be made. "Continue" means that all changes that you made manually will be taken. But you first have to actually make changes to trust this certificate.
 
Yes but a virus is malware. It's just in the general vernacular as virus so for all intents and purposes this is how it is understood by most people. Semantics really aren't as important as good practices and education about threats to computing IMHO.

----------



My same issue, parents. Im thinking of installing Sophos while I wait for Mountain Lion to release.

To be a virus it has to spread itself with no action by user.

A computer virus is a computer program that can replicate itself[1] and spread from one computer to another. The term "virus" is also commonly, but erroneously used, to refer to other types of malware, including but not limited to adware and spyware programs that do not have a reproductive ability.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_virus
 
Whatever you do, stuff happens!

A good number of the posts in this thread seem to be relatively thoughtless (you may freely include this one, too, if you wish).

Malware (MW) is MW, and it's all bad stuff. The technical distinctions among them (virus, trojan, etc.) are likely to be useful to only a very small segment of the entire user population. My experience with the rest is divided: some are at lesser risk, because what they've heard and digested has prompted them to never, ever update, or even check a YES box, on a computer; others, at much more risk, will blithely do anything their computer prompts them to do, in whatever form. And my impression is that neither group is particularly amenable to a little technical educational help, and, whatever you tell them, stick to their guns, or, at least, to their practices. This isn't because most users are dopes, or senile. They're simply not interested enough to involve themselves in something they feel is so secondary and arcane (which almost all members of this forum, for instance, are interested in, for whatever reasons). So this haggling about the distinction among MW types and mechanisms is largely irrelevant to most "normal" people (unlike us).

MW creators (who use or sell their know-how to devious ends - not all do, you know) are bad people, but they're smart, and keep learning all the time. Whatever their various motivations, sport certainly ranks high. "Can I do this or that" and "Can I do it better?" is an important driver, not unlike pros, or even tyros, in other arenas, except they lack maturity, or the conscience and behaviour which usually comes with it. They will always be around, like chronic speeders.

Because of this, the sophistication of MW will get higher and higher, so that it will get harder and harder for most computer users (and here I include a good number of us, in this forum) to smell the danger, let alone combat it, whatever kind it is.

OS (and app, especially Anti-MW app) creators will never become blasé about the MW danger, whatever impression you might sometimes get from their press releases. Quite the contrary. Consequently, they're constantly on the alert to their possible or potential vulnerabilities, doing the best they can to make themselves bulletproof (knowing full well that absolutely bulletproof is impossible, even for a rock), and keep up with and study the attacks which will come, repair the damage, and build a better version as soon as they can.

All this is like the interplay of disease and medicine in the human body. There are bad diseases and less serious ones, there's good medicine and bad medicine, and there's good luck and bad luck, all of that in some combination all the time. But there are no guarantees of absolutly perfect health always. Never. Stuff happens, whatever care you take.
 
Why waste your time trying to explain? This point has been proved more than a billion times already, and people still come with the "security through obscurity ********"...

More than 50 MILLION Mac users, ZERO viruses, a handful of script kiddie trojans...even OS 9 with a much smaller market share had far more than that.

Right. Since there are so many unprotected Macs (vs. the droves of PCs that run some kind of AV app), then I would think the Mac market would be totally ripe for “malware”.

If I was a thief, I’d target a neighborhood I knew had houses with nobody home, without locked doors vs. a larger neighborhood with an unknown amount of alarms, locked doors, barred windows and guard dogs :D

I just don’t think market share is a reasonable conclusion any longer.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

MJL said:
Apple computers do not get a virus. Yeah right. (as the Tui advertisment goes).

Great ads but **** beer.
 
My attempt to clarify

This is my attempt to clarify this subject. To the best of my knowledge it is accurate. Please give feedback and correct me if I'm wrong.
 

Attachments

  • malware.png
    malware.png
    411.3 KB · Views: 96
Last edited:
Right. Since there are so many unprotected Macs (vs. the droves of PCs that run some kind of AV app), then I would think the Mac market would be totally ripe for “malware”.

If I was a thief, I’d target a neighborhood I knew had houses with nobody home, without locked doors vs. a larger neighborhood with an unknown amount of alarms, locked doors, barred windows and guard dogs :D

I just don’t think market share is a reasonable conclusion any longer.

The way malware proliferates these days is through what the kids call social engineering. It's basically a fancy of saying that they infect you buy trying to convince you it's some new neat or cool thing. Want free music? What about games? OH CRAP! YOU'RE ADVERTISING AN IP ADDRESS OVER THE INTERNET! DOWNLOAD OUR FIX FROM THIS SUSPICIOUS POPUP!

For this to work, malware authors have to hit the largest demographic they can. The larger the target, the more likely it is someone will get suckered into their little scheme. Of their choices, which do you think they'd go for? The Windows scene, which covers 85-90% of the market? Or OSX, which makes up about 10-15%?

Yeah, it very much is a security through obscurity situation.
 
Gatekeeper does have its limitations, however, as it only scans applications downloaded through a handful of mechanisms such as browsers and can not detect applications that are modified by malware after their initial launch.

Surely that's not the case, because the signature will no longer be valid if the app bundle has been tampered with?
 
Hell, you could have 500,000 pieces of malware floating about, and you'd still never have to worry about it. Even in the windows scene, most of them go after old vulnerabilities that have long since been patched. As long as you're running some form of antimalware and update your OS regularly, your chances of catching any bugs is only a half step above nil.

Be the tiniest bit proactive, and don't be stupid. There you go. You're bug free.

Spot on...I always have, I not going to get paranoid and scan all my drives on a daily basis....I'd never get a damn thing done. All the files on my NAS have already passed through my iMac, MBA or MBP anyway.

I am not spending all night scanning those puppies.
 
The average user doesn't care or know the difference between a trojan, virus, malware, etc. So if there's a vulnerability and there's news about it - all they hear is virus.

Argue technical fine points and semantics all you want. Most people wouldn't differentiate.
 
Spot on...I always have, I not going to get paranoid and scan all my drives on a daily basis....I'd never get a damn thing done. All the files on my NAS have already passed through my iMac, MBA or MBP anyway.

I am not spending all night scanning those puppies.

this is very true. Yes people are correct in saying that Macs aren't "virus-proof" but you are much less likely to incur a malware scenario on a mac. I almost never worry about it.
 
Crap, I just did a "Check for Update" and it asked for the Administrator user name and password. Should I be worried?
:cool:

LOL.. Yeah, guess I should check for an update... but wasn't it just announced there was one yesterday? Something about the EFI bios?

Well, what do you know, one "Security" update. Installing it now. :D

EFI != BIOS. Small distinction, but drives me nuts.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.