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.
Malware
- Thread starter tm0000
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How do you know you have malware on your Mac? It's fairly rare.What is the best app for removing malware on my macbook pro?
Thanks in advance!
What is the best app for removing malware on my macbook pro?
Thanks in advance!
http://www.adwaremedic.com/
This one is effective.
Not as rare as you'd want people to believe. Here's the latest.
http://rt.com/news/193032-mac-infected-hackers-reddit/
More page views than "infections" I'd say and until proven to the contrary there is every indication that it used a social engineering attack vector.
Even rarer in fact
17,000 out of the WW population of Macs??? pretty much approximates to zero...judging by this forum more global users spilt a drink on their MBP in the last month....
The reason Mac users are vulnerable is because they're generally casual about internet security threats. "...practice safe computing and you don't have to worry" we're constantly told as a "matter-of-fact". Macs are proven to be capable of hosting Malware & Trojans, but the way some members are critical about these posts, you'd think it was an impossibility.
When someone asks for a Malware scanner, why is it so hard to give a recommendation, instead of crying foul all the time?
[/RANT]
I recommend ClamXav from the Mac app store! If nothing else, it gives peace of mind.
When someone asks for a Malware scanner, why is it so hard to give a recommendation, instead of crying foul all the time?
[/RANT]
I recommend ClamXav from the Mac app store! If nothing else, it gives peace of mind.
Last edited:
The reason Mac users are vulnerable is because they're generally casual about internet security threats. "...practice safe computing and you don't have to worry" we're constantly told as a "matter-of-fact". Macs are proven to be capable of hosting Malware & Trojans, but the way some members are critical about these posts, you'd think it was an impossibility.
When someone asks for a Malware scanner, why is it so hard to give a recommendation, instead of crying foul all the time?
[/RANT]
He got a recommendation, the rest is essentially light-hearted debate over what is "rare".
BTW better IMHO to put an alert folder action on the Application Support and launch daemon locations that will advise if anything is added to those locations.
I've seen threads on the subject where the replies are more "light-hearted" banter to the point of ridicule, than helpful. Banter is fine if all parties realise it's only banter.
Maybe he doesn't, but wants to know for certain!?!
...that last paragraph isn't debate or banter, it's a p***-take.
But not directed at the OP, directed at the assertion that 17,000 is not "rare".
"p***-take" or gentle chiding depends on your point of view but humans are proven to value the perception of risk over actual risk almost every time so it does no harm for us all to be reminded of the big picture from time to time....IMHO
So it's Human Nature to perceive risk where there may be none! I agree! but it's also Human Nature to ignore potentially genuine risk. That's why there's so much crime perpetrated against unsuspecting victims in the world today! It cuts both ways.
Agreed. Where a risk is being over- or understated it is good if the big picture is given too.
But 17,000 out of the 75million sold in the last 5yrs is still, by any definition, very rare.
gotta be careful when you install certain programs some have ads that like to be installed just read carefully and not just click everything lol this is the first I ever read someone getting malware on their osx
As already pointed out by several, 17K out of 75 million would qualify as "fairly rare". The fact is that the vast majority of average Mac users will likely never encounter OS X malware at all.
Even running an antivirus app won't tell you for certain, as they have less than 100% detection rates.
For those saying Mac users are more vulnerable if they don't run antivirus apps, remember that such apps consume system resources, have less-than-perfect detection rates, and cannot provide any additional security or protection that isn't already available by practicing safe computing. If you want to run antivirus on your Mac, that's your choice. Just don't be fooled into thinking it will protect you better than simply practicing safe computing, because it won't.
Macs are not immune to malware, but no true viruses exist in the wild that can run on Mac OS X, and there never have been any since it was released over 12 years ago. The only malware in the wild that can affect Mac OS X is a handful of trojans, which can be easily avoided by practicing safe computing (see below). 3rd party antivirus apps are not necessary to keep a Mac malware-free, as long as a user practices safe computing, as described in the following link.
Read the What security steps should I take? section of the Mac Virus/Malware FAQ for tips on practicing safe computing.Nice theory.
Rare or not, it doesn't seem the 17,000 that got stung did much wrong ...not according to THIS anyway. ...And I'm sure if anyone in this thread was one of the 17,000, they'd want to know which is the best scanner to run.
Edit: BTW: If you're going to quote the total amount of OSX systems sold, it's only fair to quote the total Malware\Trojans written specifically for them, not just the one.
Last edited:
Nice theory.
Rare or not, it doesn't seem the 17,000 that got stung did much wrong ...not according to THIS anyway. ...And I'm sure if anyone in this thread was one of the 17,000, they'd want to know which is the best scanner to run.
Safe computing isn't a "theory". It's a fact. You don't know how those computers were infected. Some evidence that has been made public is people installing pirated software, which is a violation of one of the most basic principles of safe computing. Also, most antivirus scanners don't detect such malware when it is first introduced. It takes them time to update their definitions, so antivirus software is useless in protecting against such zero day threats.
Nobody said anything about "protecting" anything until you did. The OP simply asked for a scanner and was given the third degree.
Do you have a link to this public evidence of piracy you can share? Thanks.
No, that says "the exact mechanism of infection was unclear". So its unclear. Not "installed by the innocent using a previously unknown attack vector that defeats the OSX' permissions structure".
Edited to add, from the comments on that page: "You have to download a pirated app, such as Photoshop, and then give the pirated installer administrator privileges.
No amount of malware security can fix stupid.
EDIT: Link to evidence: http://www.thesafemac.com/iworm-method-of-infection-found/ (http://www.thesafemac.com/iworm-method-of-infection-found/)"
Until shown otherwise this should be treated as user-installed malware using social engineering as the attack vector.
The C&C method has also been exposed so is effectively dead in the water. So that starts to look like a 17k bonnet that hasn't and can't ever be used....which is a good thing.
Asking why the OP thought they had malware is hardly "giving the third degree". There's no need to get emotional about it.
Already provided in another thread: https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/20008152/
It's still speculative!
The first comment and subsequent reply in the link is as much evidence as you've provided to the contrary.
Don't shoot the messenger, but I think you're being a little too hasty in condemning folk for piracy in this case.
Evidence for: 0
Evidence against: 0
Result: Stop claiming there's some public evidence, when there isn't.
The first comment and subsequent reply in the link is as much evidence as you've provided to the contrary.
Don't shoot the messenger, but I think you're being a little too hasty in condemning folk for piracy in this case.
Evidence for: 0
Evidence against: 0
Result: Stop claiming there's some public evidence, when there isn't.
I specifically said, "Some evidence that has been made public is people installing pirated software...". I did not condemn anyone for anything. There is definitely public evidence, as already posted by others. I didn't say anything about any evidence being conclusive, as it is still unclear as to the exact method of infection. Take some time to read and comprehend what is posted, rather than continuing to make false accusations.
Follow the link I posted, he has run tests, admin password required for the installer, if no admin password given, no installation. Root was in pirated Photoshop installer.
Link again: http://www.thesafemac.com/iworm-method-of-infection-found/
You're trying to insult me into submission, but I won't be swayed!
Here's your post in its entirety and your new problem is that I read only too well ...sometimes between the lines.
If you're not claiming evidence of Piracy, why do you insist this is a breach of the basics of safe computing, when the comments I've posted describe how it could also be the result of legitimate software installation ...or is that a breach of your precious safe computing too?
You Guys need to have the blinkers you're wearing surgically removed, then maybe then you'll see that infections can happen to the most careful of users.
----------
I did, maybe you should ...that's where the comments I posted came from.