Mac OS X: Is it true that MacOS is Virus Free?...
Is it true that MacOS is Virus Free?...
by oobe2u - 2/23/08 8:04 AM In reply to: Is it true that MacOS is Virus Free?... by lukmanfebriantoSince the title of this section is simple question, simple answer, the correct answer to your simple question is: pretty much.
Is Windows virus free?
by R. Proffitt
- 2/23/08 8:09 AM
In reply to: Is it true that MacOS is Virus Free?... by oobe2u
If we just answer the question we could say yes. Windows does not come with a virus. We add them later.
Sadly the question needs a little work.
Bob
VIruses On Mac?
by wkia - 2/23/08 6:26 PM In reply to: Is it true that MacOS is Virus Free?... by lukmanfebriantoMacOSX cannot get many viruses for the following reasons:
MacOSX is not mainstream. You cannot walking to a place like circut city, look for something like picture editing software, and expect to find more than 2 different brands. Microsoft Windows is mainstream, so not only will you be able to buy/get software for almost any job, but the same thing applies to hardware as well. Almost 99.9% of every piece of software and hardware can be used with windows. Since everyone uses Microsoft Windows, there will be people who will try to expliot the holes in the software and mess the system up. Those are your virus programmers and they are the ones responsible for most of the problems in windows. The virus programmers won't bother with mac because hardly anyone uses it. Everyone, From the home users, to the buisinesses, to the government, uses windows. Now imigine this. You come home one day, turn on your tv and find out that a virus brought down windows systems worldwide. The virus programmer, when caught, would go down in history, for bringing down Windows (and the world). But if that same programmer wrote the virus for mac, he would probably recieve little to no attention from the media.
Personally I use Windows XP on my laptop and Windows Vista on my desktop. Between Ashamoo firewall, AVG Anti-Virus Free Edition, and Windows Defender, I have never gotten a virus. I am always on the net, and always downloading executable programs to my PC. To top it off I never even scan the programs I download because AVG's Intergrated Monitoring System check all files automatically for viruses when you download and warns you if one is found.
Ashampoo firewall alerts me when ever ANYTHING tries to connect to the internet without my permission. Ashampoo also alerts me if something tries to connect to my PC without my permission. You then have the option to Allow, Block, Always Allow, and Always Block the connection.
Windows Defender does the samething, but also scans for potentially dangerous software.
All of the programs above are free. You even get free updates.
You can buy the professional versions of AVG and Ashampoo but Windows Defender (created by Microsoft Corporation) is free for everyone to use. If you have Windows Vista then you already have Windows Defender.
heh, heh, good one
by Krioni - 2/23/08 10:08 PM In reply to: VIruses On Mac? by wkiaFor a second there, I almost thought you were serious...there are people out there that uninformed, but they wouldn't be capable of stringing that many words together, so it must be a parody of ignorant computer users.
Safety
by 3rdalbum - 2/23/08 7:07 PM In reply to: Is it true that MacOS is Virus Free?... by lukmanfebriantoIf you buy a Macintosh, you will find that you won't have to worry about Windows viruses; unless you run Windows within some third-party virtualisation software; or unless you run Windows as part of a dual-boot.
It's true that there are very few viruses for the Macintosh at the moment. You won't have to be paranoid like you were with Windows, and you could probably work quite happily without any sort of protection. However, to put it nicely, Apple's engineers place quite a low emphasis on making the operating system secure. To put it bluntly, there's no way in hell I'd run Mac OS X without a *hardware* firewall, and I'm very concerned about the iPhone. The exploits will come.
As long as your ADSL/cable router has a firewall built-in, you ditch Safari for some other browser and you *never* download anything that you can't trust, you'll be as safe as houses.
(laughs)It is even more virus prone now
by welrdelr - 2/25/08 4:08 PM In reply to: Is it true that MacOS is Virus Free?... by lukmanfebriantoA few years ago, Apple used a different processor architecture for the Macintosh line. This was a RISC based CPU that was faster.
Viruses/virii are written not in executable languages but in assembly language according to the type of processor the machine is using.
So it seems that Apple hasmigrated to an architecture that is more prone to attacks.
Another is the kernel. 4.4BSD wasn't that stable. Building a system on this isn't a good idea.
So, is Mac OS virus free? If it was still using the PPC CPU and used a modern day *BSD distribution it may be; but,
it isn't and Mac OS can get viruses.
um, no
by Krioni - 2/25/08 9:57 PM In reply to: It is even more virus prone now by welrdelrYou might want to look up what "prone" means. It does not mean "more possible than before in some theoretical way." It means "having a natural inclination or tendency to something; disposed; liable" - so your use of that word was incorrect.
You also might want to re-think "faster" - faster when? Faster at that exact moment? In comparison to what? Certainly not faster than the chips going into machines TODAY. Generally, when you use a comparative word like "faster" you need two things you are actually comparing, not just one.
Viruses can certainly be written in languages other than assembly - ever hear of macro-viruses? Written in Visual Basic. Second, whatever language they are written in, they still have to deal with the operating system. Linux has used run on Intel processors for a long time - can't run Windows viruses on it. Same thing for Mac OS X - viruses target the operating system, but require knowledge of the processor architecture if written in assembly. So, there may be a slight advantage in familiarity of how to _finish_ writing a virus for Mac OS X, once you've found an exploitable vulnerability in it. Knowledge of the processor helps a virus-writer cross the finish-line, not run the entire race up to that point.
Again, just to reiterate, Intel's chips are not more vulnerable than PPC (or any difference is almost irrelevant). It's the operating system "that is more prone to attacks," not "the architecture." Windows is the problem, not Intel's chips.
I'm not going to argue about 4.4 BSD - everything I said above is based on general knowledge of how computers work and my good friend, Google. Vague critiques of specific kernels seems to be your specialty, so I bow to your superior (so much you don't bother to back it up?) knowledge.
One last rebuttal: your conclusion is illogical Gobbledygook. You ask whether it IS virus free, and seem to so "no," but then admit that it might not be. You insinuate that it may not be in the future. I'm a little confused by what you're concluding. It is; it isn't, but may have been; it might not be - what are you even saying? All I know is that you think the situation is somehow bad, but can't even say what you think the situation specifically is.
Virus
by welrdelr - 2/26/08 1:13 AM In reply to: um, no by KrioniNo. It isn't incorrect. Since the x86 and AMD64 architectures are the most used, they are the ones which have more viruses written for them. These architectures are the base for the Mac now. Since they are prone tto attacks, Mac is also.
RISC processors are faster and cleaner in executing a program. Perhaps you should use one.
No and no.
A virus is a simple program. Very simple.
No, it is the chip.
Stacks are written for the amd64 & x86 more than others.
Your friend "george" should educate you on stacks and root kits some time.
Neither of you are completely wrong
by santuccie - 2/26/08 11:48 AM In reply to: Virus by welrdelrPorch-a-Geese is correct when he says the processor architecture makes a difference. Hackers are much more familiar with the x86 architecture than PowerPC. Most exploits combine a buffer overflow with shellcode. And most malware authors actually do not write their own code, at least not from scratch. They use ready-made kits, and these kits are designed for x86 architecture. Finally, vulnerabilities have been turning up in Mac OS at more than double the rate they were before Apple left Motorola for Intel.
I believe the entire library of Mac viruses dating all the way back to McAfee's establishment in 1987 has yet to reach the triple-digit mark. And until now, practically all of them were PoC samples. People pay less attention to Linux than to the Mac, and even Linux had raked in 863 samples by 2005, according to Kaspersky.
Nevertheless, the PPC architecture itself was not invulnerable to attack. In fact, the library of Mac OS malware still contains more samples written for PowerPCs than for the new Intel Mac. But either way, a platform with only 1/30 of Microsoft's market share is still of very little interest to criminals.
No
by msgale - 2/26/08 2:49 PM In reply to: Neither of you are completely wrong by santuccieNo!!
"before Apple left Motorola for Intel."
by mrmacfixit - 2/26/08 3:56 PM
In reply to: Neither of you are completely wrong by santuccie
Would that be "before Apple left IBM for Intel?
Motorola made the 680xx series processors while IBM made the PPC.
Whichever way you cut it, and you all could argue until the cows come home, the fact remains that we are now over 7 years into OS X and still have not had the first real virus.
I see the share myth has come up again. I believe the first Vista virus was written, and affected, the developers release of Vista when there were less than 10K copies of it in use.
The first person to write a real, it does damage and spreads to other Macs without any intervention from the user, virus is going to be a hero in the world of virus writers.
You really believe that nobody is trying?
P
Kudos
by santuccie - 2/26/08 4:30 PM In reply to: "before Apple left Motorola for Intel." by mrmacfixit
Thank you for your correction re: Motorola and IBM.
And you're right, no one has created a real "virus" for OS-X. I believe the first viruses were actually written for the Mac, but not for OS-X. Anyway, over 60% of all malware these days is Trojans, as most malware authors these days aren't as interested in notoriety as they are in profit.
The DNS-changer Trojan is not a worm, in that it does not propagate by itself. And it is not a virus, in that it does not make copies of itself. Nevertheless, it is a real ItW threat for Mac OS. It's out there, right now, and all you have to do is install a "codec." Like I said before, social engineering is still the foremost method of delivery, and always has been.
Anyway, it's of little concern for me which OS is the biggest target, or most vulnerable out of the box. And infection is of no concern for me, because I lock the kernel. I can open an infected e-mail attachment with impunity, although I won't try it, nor recommend it (I always scan attachments at VirusTotal). Thank you for a mature conversation, and also for enlightening me with a few new bits of information. Kudos!
BTW
by santuccie - 2/26/08 4:35 PM In reply to: Kudos by santuccieThe first ItW "threat" for OS-X actually was a worm, but I understand it didn't do any real damage: http://www.sophos.com/virusinfo/analyses/osxleapa.html
Cheers!
The 'obscurity by numbers' myth
by b8375629 - 2/26/08 7:19 PM In reply to: "before Apple left Motorola for Intel." by mrmacfixit
With over 25 million Apples out there, you'd think that'd be an inviting enough target for all those "criminal gangs" he's talking about, right?
None of the links santuccie supplied hold any water, and I've read them all. There's nothing definitive. Just a lot of FUD being thrown around without any actual proof. If it were true, the press would be all over it.
I'm not sure what the motive is here for spreading these myths, but it seems pretty counter-productive to me.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
