Mac users, you may now panic.
[edit=update]
Apple Releases Mac Defender Security Update
You may stop panicing now.
There have been others, but these are the ones I remember (though I did have to look up dates on the first two for accuracy).
Interesting factoid: The first microcomputer virus to spread "in the wild" was Elk Cloner. It was written by a 15 year old in 1982. It infected the boot sector of Apple II boot floppies, and stored itself in RAM. Once in the system's RAM, it would copy itself to any inserted floppy disk.
I heard about this virus a few days ago. Apple tech support was apparently told not to help people if the virus had already been installed. It's pretty awesome when they just sit there and say, "You're screwed and we won't help you."
oh wow hahaha
This guy should get his facts straight.
I assume the following is what you are referring to as it is the only thing even related to your statements.
Lots of people are dismissing blogs and news stories about Mac Defender, and the Mac Guard variant, as frivolous reporting. Reasoning: There are hundreds of thousands of Windows PC viruses and Trojans and just the one for the Mac. I disagree. This Trojan is the first Mac malware to widely spread in the wild. That makes it news.
He starts with what other people say, says he degrees, and then make his own statement very specific statement. As such you have utterly failed to show any facts he got wrong.
Lots of people are dismissing blogs and news stories about Mac Defender, and the Mac Guard variant, as frivolous reporting. Reasoning: There are hundreds of thousands of Windows PC viruses and Trojans and just the one for the Mac. I disagree. This Trojan is the first Mac malware to widely spread in the wild. That makes it news.
I gave just three examples of many that refute what he says. I suppose you could play semantics games with his use of the word "widely", but he himself is basing use of that word on a single confirmed incident. The simple fact is, this is not the first Mac virus/trojan/worm to spread in the wild. The very nature of a trojan makes it far less likely to spread "widely" in the wild. Trojans do not self-propogate.
Apple knows this and that is what makes their marketing strategy regarding "virus-free" computers brilliant, since they are completely basing it on the success of the PC.
And yeah, that article is full of inaccuracies. Apple has never, to my knowledge, claimed that Macs are invulnerable to viruses; such a remark would be the height of foolishness.
Sounds like they're targeting the weakest link in the apple-chain, the **** that bought one.
hahaha! Nice!
> malicious software, sure, but it requires the user to purposefully install it,
> and cannot spread to the unwilling.
That fits the definition of a Trojan Horse virus.
--
The biggest problem with the "virus free" marketing by Apple is that it lulls its users into a false sense of security. Why worry about system security or best practices when you're "immune"? The bad guys have been playing on that for a long time now.
> I wouldn't really call this a virus, based on the article's description. It's
> malicious software, sure, but it requires the user to purposefully install it,
> and cannot spread to the unwilling.
That fits the definition of a Trojan Horse virus.
A Trojan (or Trojan Horse) is not a virus. To be a virus, the program must self-replicate. Worms are a sub-set of viruses, but Trojans do not self-replicate so they are not.
> I wouldn't really call this a virus, based on the article's description. It's > malicious software, sure, but it requires the user to purposefully install it, > and cannot spread to the unwilling. That fits the definition of a Trojan Horse virus. -- The biggest problem with the "virus free" marketing by Apple is that it lulls its users into a false sense of security. Why worry about system security or best practices when you're "immune"? The bad guys have been playing on that for a long time now.
There is nothing about this program which can't also happen on a phishing site or a 419 email scam. This isn't a matter of the system being vulnerable, it's a matter of users being gullible retards, and falling for cons.
> I wouldn't really call this a virus, based on the article's description. It's > malicious software, sure, but it requires the user to purposefully install it, > and cannot spread to the unwilling. That fits the definition of a Trojan Horse virus. -- The biggest problem with the "virus free" marketing by Apple is that it lulls its users into a false sense of security. Why worry about system security or best practices when you're "immune"? The bad guys have been playing on that for a long time now.
There is nothing about this program which can't also happen on a phishing site or a 419 email scam. This isn't a matter of the system being vulnerable, it's a matter of users being gullible retards, and falling for cons.
I got hit with this type of scareware before. It downloads to your computer, locks functionality, makes pop-ups with porn, and then advertizes its own removal. You do not have to be dumb enough to actually fall for that last part to have problems with the rest.
None of which is made any better when the computer system is falsely presented as being somehow impervious to many of those problems. "Why not install whatever offers itself up? Nasty stuff can't affect me anyway!" Yes, a halfway-savvy user will know better, but (unfortunately) that's a small portion of the population.
I've not watched Mac adds for a while (partly to me not having watched TV in quite a while) but i don't remember them marketing their stuff as virus immune. They seemed to market it more as being virus resistant.
But either way such a claim isn't based on mac stuff actually having resistance or immunity to viruses but rather due to the fact that almost none of the computer market is mac so there is no point in writing a virus to effect nothing.
I got hit with this type of scareware before. It downloads to your computer, locks functionality, makes pop-ups with porn, and then advertizes its own removal. You do not have to be dumb enough to actually fall for that last part to have problems with the rest.
It doesn't download itself. The user must download it. Consciously. Like, by inputing their user password and going through an install just like every other program. The fact that they'll download and install everything they see isn't Apple's problem.
They should make it their problem before it gives them a bad rep.
Apple's going to get a bad rap regardless. No matter what, anything bad that happens on a Mac is taken as Steve Jobs personally hating everyone.
A guy takes a golf club to his iMac until it explodes? Apple should have constructed sturdier iMacs.
Someone installs a program they end up not liking? Apple was lying about Macs being invulnerable to anything unpleasant (which they've never claimed in the first place). The only way Apple could have prevented this would be to force everyone to use the App Store for all software, disallowing unapproved apps from being installed on any machine running the MacOS (and I can hear the screams of oppression now).
I think Apple is just suffering from Jobs syndrome. Steve Jobs is indeed the face of Apple, and he made it so that anything Apple related wears his face, and anything Apple does is done by Steve Jobs.
Whether that was a wise decision will have to be determined... I think they'll get in trouble when Steve Jobs retires.
Apple currently has a good rep. It's one of the few reasons people buy macs. That, and hipsters.
I think Apple is just suffering from Jobs syndrome. Steve Jobs is indeed the face of Apple, and he made it so that anything Apple related wears his face, and anything Apple does is done by Steve Jobs.
Whether that was a wise decision will have to be determined... I think they'll get in trouble when Steve Jobs retires.
doesn't he have really bad cancer?
Oh and macintosh doesn't say their stuff is virus proof, but their sales people do, as well as the computer people in best buy, and geek squad, and the mac users. by the way a quick search on google images of "typical mac user" with strict safesearch should prove something.
PC users seem to get cautious after their first big run in or two with viruses. Most mac users I know probably haven't seen a virus in half a decade so they're probably of the view of many linux users i know which is "what's a virus ?
" * and so aren't really used to be cautious. --------------------------------
*well actually the linux users i know do know what a virus is. they're pretty computer savy. they just use such a line as a joke. i couln't say the same about the mac users.
MacDefender is back agin this year, very active: http://macsecurity.net/view/79/