Laptop got a virus using Firefox, how do i remove!

[GGJstudios]

Ok so I've read many threads about this matter, and from what I've heard from even before my purchase of a macbook pro. Was that "Mac OS X cannot get viruses".

No one has said "Mac OS X cannot get viruses." It COULD, if a virus existed. There simply ARE no viruses in the wild at this time that can affect Leopard and Snow Leopard. That could change tomorrow, but the world would quickly find out about it.

But I never read about how Macs could POSSIBLY get a virus or spyware/malware?

That's why antivirus apps can't protect you from a Mac virus. They can't protect you from something that doesn't yet exist, because they don't know what to look for. In theory, a code could be written to exploit some vulnerability in Mac OS X. What that might look like, what the vulnerability is, and what it might do as a result is completely unknown at this time.

Question im trying to get at is: Can going to such entertaining sites and filling out user/email forms give your mac a virus or some sort of spyware or malware?

No, you can't get malware simply by visiting a porn site. If you give your email address, you can get spam. If you create a user name and password for the site, that has nothing to do with your administrator password on your Mac (unless you're foolish enough to use the same password!)

If not, then what are the ONLY ways to get a virus or spyware/malware on your mac? is it only possible when you actually download/save files??

Currently, the only threats are trojans. For a trojan to work, you must first download it, then install it, entering your administrator password. You will also get a popup warning when you first launch a downloaded app, asking if you're sure you want to run it. As you can see, there are many safeguards built into Mac OS X. If you get a trojan, it's because the user did something foolish.

 

[Eddyisgreat]

Edit: Already typed this but GGJs is on the scene so i'll reiterate.

You'll be fine on the interwebz.

The point at which you need to worry is when you start downloading files that are DMG (unlikely).

If you try to run it and something like this pops up you need to proceed with caution:

You'll see it every time you try to install Apps that are complex in nature and must reside in the system folders or will try to pin itself startup. Also when modifying system preferences.

Obviously if you are downloading sketchy things from sketchy places (i.e. warez) then you have to be wary of what you're giving access rights to. When you authenticate, you are saying to the machine that whatever the program is doing you are FULLY AWARE of what is going on. Obviously, even if you try to do drastic changes to the system, OS X will not back down because power users (like myself) are often digging deep, so I don't need the OS telling me what I can and can't do.

 

[chrono1081]

[irresistible]

Hey guys I was browsing the web on my mac in OS X and out of nowhere this pops up:

I mean i'm pretty sure i'm not running windoze but this is awfully convincing. What to do?

[/irresistible]

omg I saw this one before on my mac haha. Unfortunately there are computer illiterate people who fall for it and think their computer is infected.

 

[GGJstudios]

omg I saw this one before on my mac haha. Unfortunately there are computer illiterate people who fall for it and think their computer is infected.

LOL.... how long would it take to find the My Documents folder on a Mac? Or the Control Panel? I agree, only neophytes or those who simply don't pay attention and read would fall for such a bogus "warning". The warning page is littered with references to Windows-only items that don't exist in Mac OS X:

​

Also, as is many times the case with bogus sites, spam, etc., another clue is that the grammar is horrible:

Your computer remains infected by threats! They might lead to data loss and file structure damage, and needed to be heal as soon as possible.

 

[mikeo007]

LOL.... how long would it take to find the My Documents folder on a Mac? Or the Control Panel? I agree, only neophytes or those who simply don't pay attention and read would fall for such a bogus "warning". The warning page is littered with references to Windows-only items that don't exist in Mac OS X:

View attachment 226107​

Also, as is many times the case with bogus sites, spam, etc., another clue is that the grammar is horrible:

Any windows user who falls for that is a tool too.

"Ooh Windows XP Explorer is showing the wrong number and hard drives and is running inside my browser on Windows 7? Uh oh!"

 

[Eddyisgreat]

Any windows user who falls for that is a tool too.

tool might be a bit much. Remember, that's only one example of the scareware out there, some of which is downright nasty (I.e. Trapping the user in an endless set of prompts until they agree to the download).

 

[mikeo007]

tool might be a bit much. Remember, that's only one example of the scareware out there, some of which is downright nasty (I.e. Trapping the user in an endless set of prompts until they agree to the download).

Tool may be a bit much, but after working tech support for a major PC manufacturer, you might be amazed what people will click on and do to their computers. I have some stories that will make you facepalm haha. Let's just say that my 80 year old grandpa who has never touched a computer would be more internet savvy than some of those people.

 

[iphone1105]

This is a horribly dangerous belief... there ARE mac viruses in the wild and the mac system is ANYTHING but secure against attacks. It's not as common because it's not nearly as widely used. There is little to no security against them, though. The Mac OS is anything but revolutionary and wildly different from any other UNIX system.

Dude, did you even take time to read the thread and SEE GGStudios own everyone....bro, read the thread, then edit your post. I wish there was a wrong buzzer here. It's so weird, its like people just post without thought, guess the interwebs does that to people.

 

[hypebeast]

There are a few antivirus apps for Mac that will detect Windows viruses, such as ClamXav. However, that won't protect your sister from viruses from other sources. The best approach is for each Windows system to have its own AV protection.

Will this program slow down my Mac at all?

This thread is great for people that are new to Macs, like I am. Although there are many people saying there are viruses out there that can affect OSX, they don't have any proof at all. However, those that say there aren't, have a substantial amount of proof from different sources. GGJstudios seems to be on top of his game and I don't doubt him at all. Thanks for all the help from the helpful members on this board.

 

[AVonGauss]

Dude, did you even take time to read the thread and SEE GGStudios own everyone....bro, read the thread, then edit your post. I wish there was a wrong buzzer here. It's so weird, its like people just post without thought, guess the interwebs does that to people.

Yes, it would be good if there was a wrong buzzer. He isn't owning anyone, this is the same old tired tirade from Mac/Linux users and their misunderstanding of what a "virus" is and how it can potentially affect them. Remember, the Titanic was considered "unsinkable" until, of course, it sunk. Have there been Mac/Linux viruses and other malware in the past? Yes. Will there be new Mac/Linux viruses and other malware in the future? Yes. In over 2000 years of recorded history people are still looking for ways to screw over other people, unfortunately, I don't see this changing in the immediate future.

With all that said, is your chance of "getting a virus" on a Mac high? No. The simple fact is there are more "Windows" machines than any other type of computer out there by far and hence more "virus writers" target that platform as there is an increased chance in success by numbers alone. It also doesn't help that Microsoft made some bad design decisions early on that made it easier to successfully write a piece of malware.

 

[GGJstudios]

Will this program slow down my Mac at all?

Running any application on your Mac will use system resources. However, ClamXav won't hog your system like Norton or McAfee does on Windows systems. Because all my Windows user clients and friends use their own AV protection, having it on my Mac is pointless, so I don't. I've been using personal computers (Windows and Macs) since they were first invented (more years than I care to think about), and I've never had one infected by any kind of malware.

 

[spinnerlys]

a bag of grapefruits for a scarlet pimpernel.

The beauty of those posts telling there are currently no viruses for Mac OS X, is that they use the present tense an not some future tense, like "there never will be a virus for Mac OS X".

So in short, Mac OS X gets plenty of viruses every day anyway, why waste time denying it. Or not.

Poppycock.

 

[hypebeast]

Running any application on your Mac will use system resources. However, ClamXav won't hog your system like Norton or McAfee does on Windows systems. Because all my Windows user clients and friends use their own AV protection, having it on my Mac is pointless, so I don't. I've been using personal computers (Windows and Macs) since they were first invented (more years than I care to think about), and I've never had one infected by any kind of malware.

Will I see any noticeable slowdown? All my friends that use Norton or McAfee don't seem to have too much slow down at all. I just want to make sure this is the best solution for me. Thank you again, you've been very helpful.

 

[shadygrove]

People should start using the firefox adblocker ad-on more. I don't get any ads or popups. No more flash ads and wasted battery life viewing them.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1865/

 

[GGJstudios]

Will I see any noticeable slowdown? All my friends that use Norton or McAfee don't seem to have too much slow down at all. I just want to make sure this is the best solution for me. Thank you again, you've been very helpful.

I don't know what your computer specs are, but you probably wouldn't notice any difference in normal use. I've run tests before (on Windows XP) and Norton was using as much as 40% of system resources (CPU and RAM). I completely abandoned Windows for Mac a couple years ago, so I don't know how current versions run on Windows 7, Vista, etc.

 

[Eddyisgreat]

With all that said, is your chance of "getting a virus" on a Mac high? No. The simple fact is there are more "Windows" machines than any other type of computer out there by far and hence more "virus writers" target that platform as there is an increased chance in success by numbers alone. It also doesn't help that Microsoft made some bad design decisions early on that made it easier to successfully write a piece of malware.

Bro gtfo. The market share argument is weaker then saying there are viruses RIGHT HERE RIGHT NOW infecting os x sl as we speak.

Once again NT != *nix

 

[GGJstudios]

The simple fact is there are more "Windows" machines than any other type of computer out there by far and hence more "virus writers" target that platform as there is an increased chance in success by numbers alone.

Setting the virus record straight: debunking the market share myth

 

[AVonGauss]

Bro seriously gtfo. The market share argument is weaker then saying there are viruses RIGHT HERE RIGHT NOW infecting computers as we speak.

Once again NT != *nix

I'm not your bro and I am not going "GTFO". If you can't understand why market share matters, I'm not sure anyone will be able to help you. I haven't looked up the numbers, but I would imagine if every Mac "got infected" today it still wouldn't equal the estimated total number of Windows PCs currently infected with some type of virus or malware today.

You do realize that the expression NT != Unix / Linux is awfully silly, right? Would you be trying to refer just to the kernels or would that be a Windows vs Ubuntu or Windows vs Mac comparison? I can't think of a case where it doesn't, but in most cases there is some time of user interaction which causes the installation of the undesirable code the question is how noticeable is it to the user?

 

[avediswolf]

Market share argument is BS!

Trust me, I guarantee a virus writer/botnet owner/hacker type would love to be high up on a pedestal as the one who "broke down" OSX.

Argue it until you are blue in the face, It's pure unadulterated BS to claim market share as the reason.

 

[spinnerlys]

I'm not your bro and I am not going "GTFO". If you can't understand why market share matters, I'm not sure anyone will be able to help you. I haven't looked up the numbers, but I would imagine if every Mac "got infected" today it still wouldn't equal the estimated total number of Windows PCs currently infected with some type of virus or malware today.

Isn't that beautiful? No matter how hard we try to infect our machines with the dozen of malware products for Mac OS X, we just can't surpass Windows vulnerabilities to those kind of software.

You do realize that the expression NT != Unix / Linux is awfully silly, right? Would you be trying to refer just to the kernels or would that be a Windows vs Ubuntu or Windows vs Mac comparison? I can't think of a case where it doesn't, but in most cases there is some time of user interaction which causes the installation of the undesirable code the question is how noticeable is it to the user?

It most certainly refers to their kernels and the architecture involved in the OS.

And that it is easier to infect a Windows machine, without protection, than it it to infect a Mac OS X machine, also without protection.
In Mac OS X you have to enter your password when you want to install something that needs access to the system files and folders, thus only an inbred and computer illiterate can infect her or himself.

If there would be viruses for Mac OS X, I certainly would have got one, as I'm quite handy in attracting them. I can stand besides a Linux PC and it will hiccup.

 

[AVonGauss]

Setting the virus record straight: debunking the market share myth

What in this relatively obscure source article makes you believe that it "debunks" any kind of "market share myth" again? I don't believe anyone in this thread has suggested that OS X is a virus heaven that just hasn't been exploited frequently because there aren't enough machines out there to make it worth while. What has and I did say was that it is not as frequent of a target as say a Windows machine because there are simply a lot more Windows machines to work with. It's all about odds, you target what you will think will be successful because of factors such as market share and vulnerability.

I'm not even going to get in to how wrong the blog post is on a technical level about trying to lump all Unix derivatives together and stating Mac OS X is not a platform. Unless you're just running a "kernel" on your machine, there is a lot more to be considered and that is indeed often referred to as a platform.

 

[GGJstudios]

What in this relatively obscure source article makes you believe that it "debunks" any kind of "market share myth" again?

In this case, the source of the article isn't as important as what is said. It's a fact that earlier versions of Mac OS had viruses to deal with, even though they were far fewer in number than current versions. The market share of Macs has increased, but the instances of viruses have decreased. That fact, alone, debunks the market share theory. And has been pointed out, a hacker would consider a "virus-free" Mac OS X a worthy target as a path to fame, regardless of the market share.

It's all about odds, you target what you will think will be successful because of factors such as market share and vulnerability.

What makes you think you're an expert on the mentality of virus creators? Who says "it's all about odds"? From what I've seen and heard, it's more likely about challenges.

 

[AVonGauss]

And that it is easier to infect a Windows machine, without protection, than it it to infect a Mac OS X machine, also without protection.

That is true and would go back to some of the poor decisions by Microsoft that I mentioned earlier.

In Mac OS X you have to enter your password when you want to install something that needs access to the system files and folders, thus only an inbred and computer illiterate can infect her or himself.

If there would be viruses for Mac OS X, I certainly would have got one, as I'm quite handy in attracting them. I can stand besides a Linux PC and it will hiccup.

A virus or malware program does not necessarily need to modify system files in order to be effective, but also lets be real, when you type in your password - almost automatically I would guess, do you really have any idea of what that installer is actually going to do?

The earlier point about the kernels is the kernel, while a very important piece, is also a relatively small piece of the puzzle when it comes to evaluating a platform's vulnerability to security concerns. Look through the Apple security updates, you will see some changes which you can consider "kernel" level changes but many are in applications or the "user land" area.

 

[Eddyisgreat]

What in this relatively obscure source article makes you believe that it "debunks" any kind of "market share myth" again? I don't believe anyone in this thread has suggested that OS X is a virus heaven that just hasn't been exploited frequently because there aren't enough machines out there to make it worth while. What has and I did say was that it is not as frequent of a target as say a Windows machine because there are simply a lot more Windows machines to work with. It's all about odds, you target what you will think will be successful because of factors such as market share and vulnerability.

ok.

 

[AVonGauss]

In this case, the source of the article isn't as important as what is said. It's a fact that earlier versions of Mac OS had viruses to deal with, even though they were far fewer in number than current versions. The market share of Macs has increased, but the instances of viruses have decreased. That fact, alone, debunks the market share theory. And has been pointed out, a hacker would consider a "virus-free" Mac OS X a worthy target as a path to fame, regardless of the market share.

Fame is nice, but I'm sure cash is a much stronger motivation. Like I said to another, if you can't understand why potential install base (market share) would factor in to someone's decision process when writing a piece of malware or even a legitimate software package, I'm not sure what anyone could say.