Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Virus protection

ROGERWILCO357

ROGERWILCO357

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jul 24, 2009
265
0
Michigan
New to mac, I have been a pc user for years and bought alot of anti-virus software to protect my pc's from virus's. Now that I have A mac what should I worry about as far as virus's go? what is the best anti-virus software out there for mac's and is it needed?
thanks
 
There aren't any viruses for the Mac. There are trojans and malware, but if you don't download any illegal software, you will be fine.
 
I find this ironic
Last edited by ROGERWILCO357 : Today at 10:12 PM. Reason: grammer
Click to expand...

Anyways, if you want to have a free anti virus solution get iAntivirus. Really, there isn't a real threat for macs. But as we see them gain market share in the PC market there may be more threats to the mac in the coming years. Really, I don't think there will ever be as many as PC users suffer from, because OSX is built on UNIX which is more stable. But for now, If you don't want to run antivirus software, don't.
 
No need for virus protection for now. If you want to protect PC users from spreading an infected email attachment, try ClamXav. It's free and it uses the open source ClamAV engine that is built into the server editions of OS X.

To greatly decrease your chances of getting a trojan or virus, follow these rules:

1. Do not download from shady sites and P2P networks. The new Mac trojans that popped up this year infected those who downloaded pirated copies of iWork 09 and Photoshop CS4. They used social engineering to trick people to install the trojan. The trojan didn't just install itself.

2. Do not run as an administrator. Go into System Prefs>Accounts and make another Admin account. Then log into that one and change your account to Standard. Every time you install an update or app, you will have to authenticate the task. This keeps rouge software from installing itself if hackers/crackers find a way to spread viruses.

3. If you use Safari, disable "Open 'safe' files after downloading". Again, in case virus/trojan writers find a way to exploit this feature.

4. Optional: Turn the built-in firewall to only allow essential services. Usually routers have adequate firewalls, but adding software firewalls add an extra layer of security.

5. Optional: Run software like Little Snitch or WaterRoof as an addition to the firewall. Little Snitch monitors outgoing connections and WaterRoof gives you a nice GUI to set IPFW rules.
 
r.j.s said:
MacMini2009 said:
http://blogs.computerworld.com/mac_hacker_macs_will_become_as_vulnerable_as_windows_pcs
Click to expand...
He has been saying that for several years, and it hasn't happened yet. He discovers only one or two vulnerabilities a year.

I don't see it happening, because UNIX is more secure.
Click to expand...

Who? Preston Galla, the author of the article or Zovi, the security researcher?

Because guys like Zovi and Charlie Miller know what they're talking about.

On the other hand, it's obvious from reading the article that Preston Galla does not. The author of the Reuters article Galla cites misunderstands a few critical points as well.

OS X is not bulletproof and there are flaws and weaknesses. They never get discussed in these articles that are posted here because everyone always misses the forest for the trees. BTW, if you ever read full, in depth interviews with guys like Miller and Zovi, you'll find out that they don't run AV/malware software, either. It's sound bite type quoting that makes it sound like security hackers think the sky is about to fall down.
 
Zovi and Miller have been screaming about the sky falling for a long time. Yes, they are good at what they do, but that doesn't mean there are hundreds or thousands of vulnerabilities, or more importantly exploits for those vulnerabilities, just waiting to be discovered by having more people look at the system.

UNIX is very secure by design, therefore the potential threat posed by a vulnerability is normally much less than it is for Windows. Why do you think most of the exploits to date have required your admin password?

Social engineering is a different beast than having thousands of holes in the system, with the ability for each one to instantly turn the machine into a bot.
 
r.j.s said:
Zovi and Miller have been screaming about the sky falling for a long time. Yes, they are good at what they do, but that doesn't mean there are hundreds or thousands of vulnerabilities, or more importantly exploits for those vulnerabilities, just waiting to be discovered by having more people look at the system.

UNIX is very secure by design, therefore the potential threat posed by a vulnerability is normally much less than it is for Windows. Why do you think most of the exploits to date have required your admin password?

Social engineering is a different beast than having thousands of holes in the system, with the ability for each one to instantly turn the machine into a bot.
Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying and while you make good points, I disagree.

I don't think it is Zovi and Miller who are screaming about the sky falling down. Like I said, if you read the longer interviews with either of them, they have balanced views on safety and security. They usually also state why it's easier for them to write an exploit of a vulnerability on it's technical merits. It's usually the PC tech writer - a tech writer who usually doesn't understand these issues, is having a slow news day, carries a grudge against macs, etc - who cherrypicks quotes and puts together an FUD article.

UNIX user privileging is non issue for the class of exploits Miller is talking about. You don't need root or admin access to run peek code at the user level. If the attack is not aimed at gaining control of your machine and instead, the objective is gaining access to the user's data or online interactions, then all you need to do is compromise the browser and then observe/record behaviour. You don't need out of the ordinary user interaction for this so social engineering is moot.

The anti-exploitation technologies that Miller refers to have little to do with user privileges and more to do with arbitrary code execution being easier because they know where to go look for it in memory after it's been injected in the first place. Vista does this obfuscation step well, OS X does not. OTOH, I understand that this should be better implemented in SL.
 
ok will take your word

this mac world is so shiny and new everything looks so nice ,i'm getting scared hold me macbook hold me...:apple::eek::rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back