[anniebrion]

http://www.pcworld.com/article/25818...ml#tk.rss_news

In the wake of the Flashback botnet which targeted Mac computers, Apple has removed a statement from its messages on its website that Mac operating system X (OS X) isn't susceptible to viruses.

[Maxatoria]

Oh dear what will the fanbois do now that their god has returned to the heavens and its not immune to viruses.....better get the £20/min apple suicide helpline going

[alanwarwic]

There was no need to.

Obviously "It doesn't get PC viruses" is still correct.

[barky99]

but macs are pc's !!! just not ones that run windows as standard

[alanwarwic]

Originally Posted by barky99

but macs are pc's !!! just not ones that run windows as standard

Indeed but they have always been differentiated as 'PC versus Mac'.

Even by Apple.

[hungover]

Originally Posted by alanwarwic

There was no need to.

Obviously "It doesn't get PC viruses" is still correct.

even that claim is crap, Macs spread windows viruses but too many users are so dumb that they believe the BS and have no av protection

apple do like their cake though, they refer to ipads as PCs, and Macs when it suits them

[Batwing]

Originally Posted by hungover

even that claim is crap, Macs spread windows viruses but too many users are so dumb that they believe the BS and have no av protection

apple do like their cake though, they refer to ipads as PCs, and Macs when it suits them

No, it is correct. Being a carrier is different to being infected.

[whoever,hey]

Originally Posted by Batwing

No, it is correct. Being a carrier is different to being infected.

How can you be a carrier if you aren't infected?

[MartinPickering]

Macs have always been somewhat susceptible to viruses but the fact is that there aren't any OSX self-replicating viruses and (compared with Windows) extremely few "trojans" or other malware. So few that you could count them on the fingers of one hand. In addition, up until the introduction of Windows 7, OSX was inherently more secure than Windows (and isn't any less secure now - it's just that Windows is finally catching up).

The fact that OSX malware is so rare is borne out by the amazing reaction of the news media each time a new OSX exploit is discovered (typically once a year). If they reacted the same way each time a new Windows exploit appeared, the printing presses would quickly run out of paper.

As for Windows malware, I have received two examples in the last ten years. They downloaded onto my desktop and sat there. I simply trashed them. OSX isn't vulnerable to Windows malware and only rarely automatically downloads it. As for sending it on to Windows users, that's unlikely to happen automatically. It would need to be a deliberate action on the part of the Mac user to forward an email attachment. (I know there's a few idiot Mac users who would do that, but it wouldn't matter because Windows users protect themselves anyway.)

Apple is clearly working hard to eliminate the (already miniscule) risk. I predict that, within a short time, it will be impossible to install software on a Mac, other than via download from an Apple approved source (i.e, the App Store). In my opinion, that would be a bad move for users like me and might be enough to make me switch to Linux. I don't want to have to "jailbreak" every Mac I buy.

But I think Apple will go ahead anyway. They'll use the imaginary "virus threat" as an excuse to "lock down" the MacOS (and make more profit from software writers) just as America used the various "terrorist attacks" as an excuse to lock down its population with the Homeland Security Act.

[johnnybgoode83]

There is no such thing as a virus proof OS and the sooner people realise that the safer they will be online. Even on Linux, arguably one of the most secure OSes, I recommend having some kind of virus scanner. Quite frankly it is stupid not to.

[cat666]

Macs are only used by a minority of people, and even then they tend to be office machines so are protected even more securely than home ones. Same can be said with Linux, in the grand scheme of things there usage is a minority. Also more "geeky" people use Macs and Linux. These are the sort of people to be sure there machine is secure.

Therefore virus makers usually don't bother trying to infect them as the reward isn't worth it. Make one for PC's and your virus has the potential to be that more potent, and it's infection machines owners could be non-techies and not realise there machine is up to no good.

[DotNetWill]

Originally Posted by MartinPickering

Macs have always been somewhat susceptible to viruses but the fact is that there aren't any OSX self-replicating viruses and (compared with Windows) extremely few "trojans" or other malware. So few that you could count them on the fingers of one hand. In addition, up until the introduction of Windows 7, OSX was inherently more secure than Windows (and isn't any less secure now - it's just that Windows is finally catching up).

Wrong, Win7 is fundamentally no different to Vista. Most of the security restrictions that came in to secure Windows came in with Vista.

There is very few "true viruses" the vast majority of malware is trojan based and is installed via social engineering and every platform has that problem.

Originally Posted by MartinPickering

The fact that OSX malware is so rare is borne out by the amazing reaction of the news media each time a new OSX exploit is discovered (typically once a year). If they reacted the same way each time a new Windows exploit appeared, the printing presses would quickly run out of paper.

Exploit != malware, there is plenty of potential exploits found constantly on __every__ platform and 99% don't get press. What do you think all those Apple updates are for?

Every bug is a potential exploit and I know you're not trying to say Apple software is bug free.

Originally Posted by MartinPickering

As for Windows malware, I have received two examples in the last ten years. They downloaded onto my desktop and sat there. I simply trashed them. OSX isn't vulnerable to Windows malware and only rarely automatically downloads it. As for sending it on to Windows users, that's unlikely to happen automatically. It would need to be a deliberate action on the part of the Mac user to forward an email attachment. (I know there's a few idiot Mac users who would do that, but it wouldn't matter because Windows users protect themselves anyway.)

You had Windows malware download itself to your Mac desktop, wut?

Originally Posted by MartinPickering

Apple is clearly working hard to eliminate the (already miniscule) risk. I predict that, within a short time, it will be impossible to install software on a Mac, other than via download from an Apple approved source (i.e, the App Store). In my opinion, that would be a bad move for users like me and might be enough to make me switch to Linux. I don't want to have to "jailbreak" every Mac I buy.

But I think Apple will go ahead anyway. They'll use the imaginary "virus threat" as an excuse to "lock down" the MacOS (and make more profit from software writers) just as America used the various "terrorist attacks" as an excuse to lock down its population with the Homeland Security Act.

The funny thing is code signing is not the answer, it has been proved time and time again that it will not stop malware. The same goes for the App Store. A great example is jail breaking iOS devices, they use zero day exploits to execute unsigned code.

So they're not going to solve anything.

[hungover]

Originally Posted by cat666

Macs are only used by a minority of people, and even then they tend to be office machines so are protected even more securely than home ones. Same can be said with Linux, in the grand scheme of things there usage is a minority. Also more "geeky" people use Macs and Linux. These are the sort of people to be sure there machine is secure.

Therefore virus makers usually don't bother trying to infect them as the reward isn't worth it. Make one for PC's and your virus has the potential to be that more potent, and it's infection machines owners could be non-techies and not realise there machine is up to no good.

There was a time when Unix was the reserve of geeks, i guess that has been eroded to some degree by the sales of cheap notebooks a few years ago.

Of the MAC owners I know, most are women of a certain age, who purchased them because they were pretty and "safe from viruses". Off hand I can honestly only think of one MAC owner that is a geek.

I agree that virus writers see Windows as being more lucrative, but disagree that they think that Apple owners are too savvy to be caught out, In the event that MACs increase their market share it follows that they will become a greater target. Until Apple start to be more honest about the threats too many Apple owners will refuse to accept that they need AV

[johnnybgoode83]

The only way to be 100% safe from viruses/malware etc is don't connect to the Internet and don't use external media to transfer data.

[DotNetWill]

Originally Posted by johnnybgoode83

The only way to be 100% safe from viruses/malware etc is don't connect to the Internet and don't use external media to transfer data.

It always made me laugh that Win NT had the highest security level award for use in the US so long as you didn't connect it to a network.

[hungover]

Originally Posted by DotNetWill

Wrong, Win7 is fundamentally no different to Vista. Most of the security restrictions that came in to secure Windows came in with Vista.

There is very few "true viruses" the vast majority of malware is trojan based and is installed via social engineering and every platform has that problem.

Good point, it has been quite a long time since a "true virus" attacked any OS, never the less, it is clear that Apple are using the term to refer to malware in general. From memory the last major windows virus dates back to 1998.

Herein lies the irony, iCultists why rush to point out the differences between viruses and malware when gushing over OSx but then include malware in their definition of Window's viruses.

Although the Apple site rewording is welcomed all they have really dropped is the lie that owners don't have to do anything to remain malware free. They still try to confuse readers elsewhere through their slight of hand.

eg.

"It’s built to be safe.

Built-in defenses in OS X keep you safe from unknowingly downloading malicious software on your Mac"

???? So FlashBack victims intentionally infected their MACs? Nice one Apple- blame your customers (yet) again

I doubt that any OS that is capable of communicating with other devices will ever be bullet proof. Even Symbian had BlueTooth viruses back in 2004

[s2k]

Originally Posted by DotNetWill

It always made me laugh that Win NT had the highest security level award for use in the US so long as you didn't connect it to a network.

That was probably backed up by the lack of USB support. No risk of users plugging in their dirty virus-infested flash drives into the machines.

[whoever,hey]

Originally Posted by s2k

That was probably backed up by the lack of USB support. No risk of users plugging in their dirty virus-infested flash drives into the machines.

It was floppies back then

[Maxatoria]

Originally Posted by s2k

That was probably backed up by the lack of USB support. No risk of users plugging in their dirty virus-infested flash drives into the machines.

you could get usb support for nt4 but it was a bodge

[MrQuike]

Originally Posted by johnnybgoode83

There is no such thing as a virus proof OS and the sooner people realise that the safer they will be online. Even on Linux, arguably one of the most secure OSes, I recommend having some kind of virus scanner. Quite frankly it is stupid not to.

You sound like an IT professional. I'd say it's stupid not to run up to date anti virus on a Windows PC - even if it's not connected to a network. It's a bit of a waste of time running anti virus on a Linux machine. If you run them - they check for some Windows viruses which is exactly what a decent Windows antivirus real time scanner should be doing anyway when it checks for incoming. I'd imagine Apple users are pretty safe.

[hungover]

Originally Posted by MrQuike

You sound like an IT professional. I'd say it's stupid not to run up to date anti virus on a Windows PC - even if it's not connected to a network. It's a bit of a waste of time running anti virus on a Linux machine. If you run them - they check for some Windows viruses which is exactly what a decent Windows antivirus real time scanner should be doing anyway when it checks for incoming. I'd imagine Apple users are pretty safe.

??? Linux AV scanners don't just check for windows viruses. There are real world examples of Linux malware that have infected machines.

Eg the UnReal IRC server software was infected with a trojan that could run any command with the privileges of the person running the software. It was months before anyone even noticed.

I'd imagine that you'd "imagine that Apple users are pretty safe" because of the lies and untruths started by Apple and that have filtered down through the press and on to the public over the years. Where were you when FlashBack infected 600,000 MACs?

[hungover]

Originally Posted by MrQuike

I'd imagine Apple users are pretty safe.

Does that include Apple owners that own windows machines?

There was a time when Apple shipped iPods that came preinstalled with their very own windows virus.

True to form Apple blamed MicroSoft, for not having an bullet proof OS...

http://www.apple.com/support/windowsvirus/

What wan£ers

[Batwing]

Originally Posted by whoever,hey

How can you be a carrier if you aren't infected?

Look up carriers of vruses in Google. The same applies when comparing a Mac and a Windows PC. An .exe file, which is a program for Windows, can not be run on the Mac OS but the Mac can certainly carry that file which could then unknowingly be transferred to a Windows PC. Then when double clicked the virus will infect the Windows PC. You can double click the file all you want in the Mac OS and it simply will not run.

So while Apple's claim was technically correct I agree with the decision to get rid of it so as to not confuse the novice or average computer user, though 'm not too crazy about the wording of the new one either.

[Batwing]

Originally Posted by cat666

Macs are only used by a minority of people, and even then they tend to be office machines so are protected even more securely than home ones.
.

The market share of Macs has been growing for years while Windows has declined. The majority of Mac computers are now in the home.

[DotNetWill]

Originally Posted by Batwing

Look up carriers of vruses in Google. The same applies when comparing a Mac and a Windows PC. An .exe file, which is a program for Windows, can not be run on the Mac OS but the Mac can certainly carry that file which could then unknowingly be transferred to a Windows PC. Then when double clicked the virus will infect the Windows PC. You can double click the file all you want in the Mac OS and it simply will not run.

So while Apple's claim was technically correct I agree with the decision to get rid of it so as to not confuse the novice or average computer user, though 'm not too crazy about the wording of the new one either.

What like a pigeon? I think most, esp whoever,hey, know you can't run an ,exe* on OSX. I think the point is more how would the virus transmit itself without you have some kind malware.

If you're referring to you can send a doc/pdf/a.n other file to a Windows that may contain some kind of exploit I would say that's something different. Because you have to perform that action.


*A very naive statement, for example mono can produce .exes that run on OSX.