How do you figure? One exploit for OS X infects binaries and then uses those binaries to subvert the system.
That's a virus.
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.
security help (Mac Newbie)
- Thread starter det2004
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How do you figure? One exploit for OS X infects binaries and then uses those binaries to subvert the system.
That's a virus.
your on!
"Opener". download it, infect your computer with it, buy me something pretty off ebay
hahahhaa.your on!
"Opener". download it, infect your computer with it, buy me something pretty off ebay
Or MOAB 15.
so trojans are not security risks? does it matter if we called it a worm? a trojan? a virus?
so Apple claims to be virus free, really means "not Trojan free, not worm free"? and I guess virus free != safe, right?
But it was poorly written, as it wasn't able to propigate itself to other computers.
That's not a virus.
It's a half-hearted attempt at a virus. And if memory serves, it required an admin password when the picture was opened, which makes it more of a trojan.
And.. that hole is now patched.
I never said that. Please don't put words in my "mouth".
Does Apple claim to be virus free? Or do Apple users claim them to be virus free? Again, this comes back to the incorrect usage of "virus" instead of malware. It's ad people and fools pandering to the lowest common denominator.
"MY 'PUTER DON'T WORK, I HAS VIRII!"
Christ, gimme a break.
I'm not going on a wild goose hunt to find these things. You find them, and you send them on over. And I'll get back to you.
And $5 is not going towards any eBay purchases. I'll PayPal it if anything.
And $5 is not going towards any eBay purchases. I'll PayPal it if anything.
http://www.apple.com/getamac/viruses.html
tell me again who is interchanging the definitions: virus, security risks, internet attacks.
oh, yes, and tell me that "114,000 virus" includes no trojans and worms.
http://www.lindqvist.com/index.php?ID=1735
Opener requires that I log into Root via a 'sudo' terminal command, 'chmod' the file so that its owned by the root. And then run the file?
I didn't think that I had to disclaim that a virus should be disguised as a Pron program (or something) that I get tricked into running. Not a script that requires rudimentary knowledge of UNIX terminal commands to activate. Gimme a break.
NEXT!
EDIT: MOAB 15, I'm not really sure what this one does. Sounds like it makes a new user that can access from outside. Gaining access to ones files. Still not seeing how this can be implemented unless its an inside job.
http://applefun.blogspot.com/2007/01/moab-15-01-2007-multiple-mac-os-x-local.html
Opener requires that I log into Root via a 'sudo' terminal command, 'chmod' the file so that its owned by the root. And then run the file?
I didn't think that I had to disclaim that a virus should be disguised as a Pron program (or something) that I get tricked into running. Not a script that requires rudimentary knowledge of UNIX terminal commands to activate. Gimme a break.
NEXT!
EDIT: MOAB 15, I'm not really sure what this one does. Sounds like it makes a new user that can access from outside. Gaining access to ones files. Still not seeing how this can be implemented unless its an inside job.
http://applefun.blogspot.com/2007/01/moab-15-01-2007-multiple-mac-os-x-local.html
Of course not. They make it to bilk overcautious, undereducated computer users out of their money, the same reason they make Norton Systemworks for XP and Vista (which already have all the hard disk and memory management tools anyone would need built in, Norton notwithstanding).
But hey, if you wanna pay $49.95 for a piece of software that basically turns on a feature that's built into OS X, and that you could turn on yourself for free with a mouseclick, be my guest.
I'm not saying you should take a cavalier approach when using a Mac. But I am saying I didn't trust Norton on Windows machines, and I sure as all heck wouldn't trust their products on a Mac. Norton AV for Mac is no doubt a resource hog just like its Windows cousins, with only minimal (if any) benefit.
ClamXav and use of the OS X firewall is reasonably good enough protection, and it's free to boot. It also doesn't hurt to check for Mac software updates from time to time.
That's why I'm a 68020 and you're nothing but a 68000
lol do you want to take a look at my average of posts?? i do have an opinion. compared to your measly 2.50posts per day
. ill be up and past you in no time
lol do you want to take a look at my average of posts?? i do have an opinion. compared to your measly 2.50posts per day
22 posts a day average?! Man, get a job or go outside or something.
lol i know its quite sad.
68000 => 1505 posts
68010 => 2000 posts
68020 => 2005 posts
not that far off you
did you end up having any luck infecting your computer???
To make money?
I half believe that anti-virus companies actually contribute to making viruses just so you'll end up renewing your contract with them each year.
Norton on a Mac causes a lot more problems and hassle than it is worth.
lol do you want to take a look at my average of posts?? i do have an opinion. compared to your measly 2.50posts per day
About only 40% of your posts are worthwhile, the rest are worthless comments.
I'm on my Vista VAIO at work at the moment, so no way am I going to try. My research on your suggestions proves that the files you suggested require a high level of voluntary action to get any malicious stuff done. So no, my Mac will remain safe.
I stand by the fact that no Mac can have involuntary malware installed on it.
The idea is use use a privilege escalation (like MOAB 15) in conjunction with opener.
Sorry, didn't mean it to be that harsh!
Was just saying that you do tend to post things that aren't contributing, theres a few posts in this topic which are an example of that.
everyone does that. especially as the thread tends to get a bit old. people get off topic. such as now.... everyone does it. like i am now, so i shall shutup
Once again, you're putting words into my "mouth".
I never said that Apple didn't say this. I asked a question if Apple said they were virus free. Clearly the Apple marketing and ad people fall into the exact same category I spoke of earlier, pandering to the lowest common denominator.
Thanks for making my point for me.
oh, yes, and tell me that "114,000 virus" includes no trojans and worms.
Clearly, Sophos, whose job it IS to knows the difference.
Again, thanks for making my point for me.
ok, you are welcome, so your point is:
altho apple thinks trojans and worms and spywares are "viruses", but you don't agree with that. Glad to know.
I guess you also agree, when most users (especially newbie as OP mentioned) talk about security, they mostly, actually follow the definition of virus from "apple", not "you".
I guess you also agree, that the Anti-Virus softwares on the market also follow the general definition of virus from apple, since their anti-"virus" apps actually also anti-"spywares, worms, and trojans".
so, I guess you can see, practically, according to apple, macs are not "virus free", and anti-"virus" apps maybe useful too.
Thanks for making your POV clear.
I would really like we all follow apple's POV, since to promote another definition, altho might be correct to experts, are confusing to new users, give them false and conflicted idea, and further affect their judgment. There is nothing against the experts, just apple is more influential.
So now I am curious....how many of you are running anti-virus software? I'm new to Macs, but I realized yesterday that my new Imac had the firewall in the off positions. I guess that's the default, but I turned it on.