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.
Why DOESN'T someone make a virus for mac?
- Thread starter G5Unit
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nice..
So you are saying that you are willing to commit a crime for the right amount of money?
No lol. What I meant is that if someone kidnapped me or something and tortured me into doing something nasty, then I think a some people would have something to worry about.
PS: I lock my doors, don't worry noone will be kidnapping me anytime soon...
your skills are obviously prolific. i think wed all appreciate it if you went into hiding NOW!
The more I read this thread, the more I realize you people are quite clueless about security.
The fact is, OS X is less secure than the latest incarnation of Windows. There are many technical reasons why but I will spare you the information (you can google it if you're interested)
So from that standpoint, it is easier to write a Mac virus, although the time it takes to write a mac virus and a windows virus is probably most likely the same time.
So, the bigger issue is market share. If you're a virus programmer, and you've spent 100 hours on writing a virus that will hit 90% of all computers in the world, why would you waste another 80 hours writing a virus that will only hit 8% of the computers in the world?
That's the reason why Macs don't get attacked so often. It's also the reason why they can launch an update to their OS nearly on a year to year basis. Snow Leopard would've failed miserably if it were trying to update a 90% marketshare. The tiny amount of complaints in this thread alone would be some indication (imagine if the number of complains multiplied 11x). Apple is in a special sweet spot, it's OS is stable and market share is small enough to secure itself from the mass attacks of hackers. The problem I do have with Apple right now is its false advertisement. But hey, whatever sells right?
The fact is, OS X is less secure than the latest incarnation of Windows. There are many technical reasons why but I will spare you the information (you can google it if you're interested)
So from that standpoint, it is easier to write a Mac virus, although the time it takes to write a mac virus and a windows virus is probably most likely the same time.
So, the bigger issue is market share. If you're a virus programmer, and you've spent 100 hours on writing a virus that will hit 90% of all computers in the world, why would you waste another 80 hours writing a virus that will only hit 8% of the computers in the world?
That's the reason why Macs don't get attacked so often. It's also the reason why they can launch an update to their OS nearly on a year to year basis. Snow Leopard would've failed miserably if it were trying to update a 90% marketshare. The tiny amount of complaints in this thread alone would be some indication (imagine if the number of complains multiplied 11x). Apple is in a special sweet spot, it's OS is stable and market share is small enough to secure itself from the mass attacks of hackers. The problem I do have with Apple right now is its false advertisement. But hey, whatever sells right?
Prove it then, wankey. Seriously, throw down or get out. Your statements have already been rebuffed multiple times in this thread and many others prior, so unless you're willing to offer proof of your lies, don't bother coming back.
jW
You claim everyone else is clueless about security, yet offer zero facts yourself? Not a very compelling argument..
I'll go one further, and post my email virus here :
Code:
Hi, I'm an Irish virus.
Please forward me to everyone in your address book, then delete every file from your hard drive.
That's great, thanks very much.And yet, they have been attacked more than windows servers and show twice as many vulnerabilities than windows servers. Curious to know that when UNIX gets exposed in rally important tasks, it's less safe than Windows.
Nonsense. Apple presence outside the US is testimonial. Virtually nobody outside US or UK buys a Mac unless is needed for work (something you can hardly justify these days)
There's another thread where this is being discussed. After Mac fanbois run out of arguments, they just say: there are no virus for Mac so it must be safer.
Go to the other thread about which OS is more secure and you will know. Arguments like "apps in windows can write on system files while they can't on MAcOSX" are discussed.
The main conclusion, is despite fanbois repeat the mantra "OSX is UNIX so automatically has to be safer (with no arguments)" it seems that security technology is on windows side. From a formal point of view, Windows is safer than MacOS, even if nobody cares to attack Macs.
Which is good to me as I am a Mac owner, but not a fanboi.
People are missing the point, Viruses are DEAD, on both operating systems.
Viruses do not affect Windows Vista (or even most Xp machines that are up to date). Virii are self executing code on any web site or program, that automatically What what that study, less than 5% of the old viruses can even execute on Vista?
Two major things affect the modern operating systems:
1. Trojans, which masquerade as legitimate programs, require the user's consent to authenticate and give permission. This is the source of all the bullcrap malware and fake AV we see on Windows PCs, in fault completely to the user. These occur on both platforms.
2. Explots, bugs in the code, which can be exploited from a server, remotely, or through an executable similar to a trojan. These are in the system, and occur from time to time on both platforms. As food for thought, they have occurred more frequently, and been patched slower on Mac OS X than on Windows since Vista.
Viruses do not affect Windows Vista (or even most Xp machines that are up to date). Virii are self executing code on any web site or program, that automatically What what that study, less than 5% of the old viruses can even execute on Vista?
Two major things affect the modern operating systems:
1. Trojans, which masquerade as legitimate programs, require the user's consent to authenticate and give permission. This is the source of all the bullcrap malware and fake AV we see on Windows PCs, in fault completely to the user. These occur on both platforms.
2. Explots, bugs in the code, which can be exploited from a server, remotely, or through an executable similar to a trojan. These are in the system, and occur from time to time on both platforms. As food for thought, they have occurred more frequently, and been patched slower on Mac OS X than on Windows since Vista.
LOL at the lack of knowledge of some people.
Giz Explains: Why OS X Shrugs Off Viruses Better Than Windows
http://i.gizmodo.com/5101337/giz-explains-why-os-x-shrugs-off-viruses-better-than-windows
The Mac Malware Myth
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/01/29/the-mac-malware-myth/
The Unavoidable Malware Myth
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/...-apple-wont-inherit-microsofts-malware-crown/
Market Share Myth
http://blogs.bellinghamherald.com/i...uter_virus_record_straig&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1
Giz Explains: Why OS X Shrugs Off Viruses Better Than Windows
http://i.gizmodo.com/5101337/giz-explains-why-os-x-shrugs-off-viruses-better-than-windows
The Mac Malware Myth
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/01/29/the-mac-malware-myth/
The Unavoidable Malware Myth
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/...-apple-wont-inherit-microsofts-malware-crown/
Market Share Myth
http://blogs.bellinghamherald.com/i...uter_virus_record_straig&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1
I'm not joking: outside the US, nobody buys a Mac for home use unless they use one for work. I have an ASUS, for example. I can do more with my $600 ASUS in term of versatility, flexibility, use of software, drivers, etc., than I could ever do with my much powerful-better suited for work $2000 MBP. Why spend the money on something more expensive that gives me a power I don't need and is crippled in other ways?
For someone that reads the mail, watch youtube videos and play some games, how can you justify to spend at least $1500 on a system when a $500 one would do the job?. It's that simple. I know the mac would be better, better screen resolution, etc. So what? I don't need that (i'm speaking for the vast majority of the computer community. Exactly for the 90-95% who agrees with me.
I'm from Germany and use my Mac at home and for personal things. I'm sure there are many, many, MANY people out there who have Macs for work and personal use who easily could buy a PC instead.
What about the other 5.7 billion who don't live in the US, and aren't you?
Obviously the marketshare is smaller than in the US; but still lots of people have Macs for home use. If there weren't home Mac users, their market share would be even smaller!
I live in Portugal and have a Mac to use at home.
How about that?
Hummm.... You theory needs a little more thinking!
KR,
BA
Wrong. Just because more people eat McDonalds than good quality food doesn't mean that it's better. Sure it's food, but it's not really healthy for you in the long term.
Apple cracks top 20 global brands in Business Week study
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/09/21/apple_cracks_top_20_global_brands_in_survey.html
Wall Street Journal Asia: Apple Most Admired in Asia
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...dshare_in_asia_far_outweighs_marketshare.html
This forum is void of people that understand the difference between "safety" and "security".
I haven't read the rest yet, but the Gizmodo article basically does support the market share "myth", at least partly. Where it makes mention of actual security as opposed to safety it refers to pre-Vista machines, which is correct; OS X is more secure than XP and prior Windows OSes. Where this changes is Vista, SP1 or later. At this point Windows Vista x64 is actually more secure than OS X (both SL and Leo).
However it's still not at the point where Vista/7 is a bullet proof vest and OS X is a cheap T-shirt. Security on OS X is still pretty good. Once Apple integrated ASLR and NX into SL, it will be as secure as Win7 while still being a far smaller target.
Virus takes over Mac! and cross platform...
Coffee Virus:
pour coffee cup over CPU = lost files, ruined computer, loss of productivity.
Do this it totally works! or buy a PC if you want more headaches.
The only way to keep a PC really safe is; dont take it out of the box.
Coffee Virus:
pour coffee cup over CPU = lost files, ruined computer, loss of productivity.
Do this it totally works! or buy a PC if you want more headaches.
The only way to keep a PC really safe is; dont take it out of the box.