Virus protection on the Mac

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Virus protection on the Mac 

On Thu, 25 Dec 2008 23:30:42 -0500, Colyn wrote
(in article ):

> Many people believe that Mac's don't get computer virus (but they can
> rarely)

If 'rarely' = 'never', then yes.

> so just how important is virus protection?

It's not at all useful.

>
> I've been using ClamX for a couple of years now and as yet haven't even
> gotten a hint of a threat..

Possibly because there are no OS X viruses. There are a few (under a half
dozen) trojans, but you have to work hard to even find them, and then you
have to install them yourself. There are a few macro viruses which work under
Microsoft Office or Open Office or both, but mostly they die on contact with
OS X or Microsoft's macro protection system or simply don't do anything
significant on a Mac. (They tend to look for a C: drive. Macs tend to not
have C: drives.)

Antivirus on OS X is a grand waste of time.

--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.
 >> Stay informed about: Virus protection on the Mac 

In article ,
J.J. O'Shea wrote:

> Antivirus on OS X is a grand waste of time.

I am a long, long time Mac user, and while I agree with this statement,
I also never simply shun the concept, out of concern that at some point
in hte future, this could change. If it does, I want to be aware in
time to protect myself.

By the same token, as common as the knowledge is that so tremendously
few Maccies have virus protection, I am amazed that there has been no
tangible attempts at creating virii (plural of virus?) for the Mac.

jt
 >> Stay informed about: Virus protection on the Mac 

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 08:46:22 -0500, jt august wrote
(in article ):

> In article ,
> J.J. O'Shea wrote:
>
>> Antivirus on OS X is a grand waste of time.
>
> I am a long, long time Mac user, and while I agree with this statement,
> I also never simply shun the concept, out of concern that at some point
> in hte future, this could change. If it does, I want to be aware in
> time to protect myself.

It could change in the future. The problem is that the current Mac malware
systems are unlikely to be able to detect a _real_ threat because they're all
aimed at fake threats. Some (Virex, I'm thinking of _you_) don't even pretend
to be able to defend against certain threats (viruses coming in via email;
Virex for OS 9 and earlier could defend against that class of threat, but as
of Virex 7.5 they could not do it under OS X, as when they tried they would
eat the entire incoming mail queue. It's up to 8.6 and _still_ can't defend
against email threats...) and others are simply big and clunky and waste
system resources (ClamXav, I'm thinking of _you_.) Windows users have AV
systems, but that doesn't stop zero day attacks. _Nothing_ can stop such an
attack. If you're one of the first victims of an attack, well, oops.

Now, if there was an attack and if someone came up with a defence _then_ it
would make sense to install that defence. But as there isn't even the
attack...

>
> By the same token, as common as the knowledge is that so tremendously
> few Maccies have virus protection, I am amazed that there has been no
> tangible attempts at creating virii (plural of virus?) for the Mac.

OS X is basically UNIX. There hasn't been a successful attack on a UNIX
variant in a very long time, possibly because UNIX is fairly secure, having
been the target of major attacks (including the most devastating worm of all
time, the sendmail worm) over a prolonged period. Most holes have been
located and covered up; it's hard to mount an attack on a UNIX platform
because there isn't much to attack. Not anymore, anyway.

This cold change tomorrow. but until then, antivirus on OS X is a grand waste
of time.



--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.
 >> Stay informed about: Virus protection on the Mac 

In article , J.J. O'Shea
wrote:

> Possibly because there are no OS X viruses. There are a few (under a half
> dozen) trojans, but you have to work hard to even find them, and then you
> have to install them yourself. There are a few macro viruses which work under
> Microsoft Office or Open Office or both, but mostly they die on contact with
> OS X or Microsoft's macro protection system or simply don't do anything
> significant on a Mac. (They tend to look for a C: drive. Macs tend to not
> have C: drives.)

There's no protection from PEBCAK.
 >> Stay informed about: Virus protection on the Mac 

In article ,
jt august wrote:

> I am a long, long time Mac user, and while I agree with this statement,
> I also never simply shun the concept, out of concern that at some point
> in hte future, this could change. If it does, I want to be aware in
> time to protect myself.

When the time comes, I/we will deal with it appropriately.

> By the same token, as common as the knowledge is that so tremendously
> few Maccies have virus protection, I am amazed that there has been no
> tangible attempts at creating virii (plural of virus?) for the Mac.

Because unlike Windows, the default user is not logged in as an admin
with root access.
 >> Stay informed about: Virus protection on the Mac 

On Thu, 25 Dec 2008 22:55:19 -0800, Mr. Strat wrote:

> In article , Colyn
> wrote:
>
>> Many people believe that Mac's don't get computer virus (but they can
>> rarely) so just how important is virus protection?
>
> Name just one...
>>

I have no knowledge of any just what I have read online and Apple advises
that Mac users get protection.
 >> Stay informed about: Virus protection on the Mac 

In article , Colyn
wrote:

> I have no knowledge of any just what I have read online and Apple advises
> that Mac users get protection.

Apple has since removed the ridiculous advisory.
 >> Stay informed about: Virus protection on the Mac 

Colyn wrote:
> Many people believe that Mac's don't get computer virus (but they can
> rarely) so just how important is virus protection?
>
> I've been using ClamX for a couple of years now and as yet haven't even
> gotten a hint of a threat..

Back in the old days, sometimes running a HyperCard Stack could leave
you with a nasty surprise...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperCard

.... there were a few virus for the Classic Mac OS, but they were easy to
clean out as they would usually hide as invisible files the System
Folder:Preferences folder

They used to delete the resources out of the System file, such as sounds
and fonts, but they were few and far between.

My Amiga on the other hand...
 >> Stay informed about: Virus protection on the Mac 

In article ,
Colyn wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Dec 2008 22:55:19 -0800, Mr. Strat wrote:
>
> > In article , Colyn
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Many people believe that Mac's don't get computer virus (but they can
> >> rarely) so just how important is virus protection?
> >
> > Name just one...
>
> I have no knowledge of any just what I have read online and Apple advises
> that Mac users get protection.

Apparently you didn't read the right pages then:

<http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1000000189,39569659,00.htm>

The Apple advice in question was pulled from a very old knowledge base
article on Apple's web site. The advice applied to versions of Mac OS
*before* Mac OS X was released. Apple has since pulled the article
because antivirus vendors and "security" companies were using it to
spread misinformation in attempts to scare Mac users into purchasing
antivirus software.

You should understand that antivirus software companies and the
so-called "security" companies (who also often sell security software)
have a vested interest in making you believe there is a significant
threat and that their software can help you. Always consider the source.

The fact is there hasn't been a *single* Mac OS X virus in the wild
since the very first release of Mac OS X in 1999, over eight years ago.
There have been attempts, and lots of proof of concepts, but nothing
real and in the wild. People have debated for years on years why this
is. And I believe there isn't a single reason, but many put together,
including that Mac OS X is built on Unix, which brings with it a lot of
secure designs built right into the system - designs that Windows never
had until recently with Vista (and even then were bolted on as an after
thought rather than designed from the start). Another reason is that Mac
users use their computers a bit differently than Windows users. Yet
another reason is that Macs aren't targeted first because Windows is
easier to attack and Macs don't make up the majority of computers on the
market. Regardless of the reasons, the fact is Macs are safer.

--
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
 >> Stay informed about: Virus protection on the Mac 

In article ,
jt august wrote:

> In article ,
> J.J. O'Shea wrote:
>
> > Antivirus on OS X is a grand waste of time.
>
> I am a long, long time Mac user, and while I agree with this statement,
> I also never simply shun the concept, out of concern that at some point
> in hte future, this could change. If it does, I want to be aware in
> time to protect myself.
>
> By the same token, as common as the knowledge is that so tremendously
> few Maccies have virus protection, I am amazed that there has been no
> tangible attempts at creating virii (plural of virus?) for the Mac.

There have definitely been attempts. But most depend on social
engineering to trick the user into installing them, which doesn't work
for Mac OS X users as well as it does for Windows users. So they never
get off the ground.

--
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
 >> Stay informed about: Virus protection on the Mac 

In article ,
J.J. O'Shea wrote:

> OS X is basically UNIX. There hasn't been a successful attack on a UNIX
> variant in a very long time, possibly because UNIX is fairly secure, having
> been the target of major attacks (including the most devastating worm of all
> time, the sendmail worm) over a prolonged period. Most holes have been
> located and covered up; it's hard to mount an attack on a UNIX platform
> because there isn't much to attack. Not anymore, anyway.

I'd like to add that there are security holes being found all the time
in various Unix services. And Linux computers fall victim to them all
the time. The difference is that Apple mostly buttons up those services
on Mac OS X so they aren't exposed to the world in the default
configuration.

Any computer can be made vulnerable to attack.

--
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
 >> Stay informed about: Virus protection on the Mac 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Virus protection on the Mac