Subscribe
Over and over, I hear from Windows users every time some guy in the tech world claims OS X viruses. Usually it is from a guy trying to sell anti-virus software to Mac users. Now, read this, Symantec states categorically that there are NO known file infecting viruses for OS X. NONE! Period!
Now I want to point out that OS X is NOT immune to ALL malware, rootkits, worms, or exploits. The author, Todd Woodward, of the Symantec post points out OS X has been “tested” by worms, Trojan horses, rootkits, and other various security vulnerabilities. He also states, “proof of concept” code was released publicly, which triggered a threat advisory. I think “tested” and “proof of concept” are the keywords here. If it is NOT in the wild, spreading, and wreaking havoc, like so many Windows exploits have, average users are NOT affected.
Apple’s security track record with OS X is so far above that of Microsoft Windows it is not funny. Something like 100,000 to zero. And someday when OS X does finally get a virus, yes it may happen, probably even WILL happen, it will be 100,000 to ONE!
So when the Mac gets a virus, or if, it will still be a more secure OS than Windows. And please do not bother me with the old tired arguments of the small market share, hackers do not target Macs, etc, etc. If you are an average user, there are NO viruses, at least for now, and OS X will never have the vulnerabilities of Windows and THAT is ALL that matters.
(4 votes, average: 4.25 out of 5)
a blogger at symantec may be saying that there are no file infecting viruses for osx, however that same blogger goes on to include a link to a write-up on a piece of malware that the virus analysts at symantec claim is a file infector on a particular version of osx…
so much for the categorical statement of no viruses for osx…
Gee, it did not take long for this post to get the comments I expected from a Windows user!
I state clearly in my SECOND paragraph that OS X IS NOT immune and state clearly the position of the Symantec blogger! I think you might want to notice the words “tested†and “proof of concept†in the blogger’s post.
I state nowhere in my post any “categorical statement of no viruses for osx” were possible. I simply state that up until now, as does the Symantec blogger also states, there have been no viruses for OS X. If you read some Windows centric blogs, magazines, you would think there are already OS X viruses wreaking havoc on Mac users. As I, and the Symantec blogger points out, this is NOT true.
Windows=100,000 plus, OS X=ZERO
This is the POINT. It NEVER ceases to amaze me how many Windows users are concerned about viruses on Macs and seem to take for granted the daily barrage of security problems, viruses, worms, and especially spyware of the platform they do use.
I hate to state the obvious here, but there are no viruses in the wild for OS X. An Operating system that has been around since 2000, based on an OS from 1987! Most Mac users do not pay for, or slow their computers down with anti-virus/spyware software, which is one of the highest growth areas in the Windows world. Even Microsoft is now “cashing in” on the cash cow of the lack of Windows security.
Again, when OS X does get a virus, it will be 100,000 to ONE and Windows apologists can “crow” see, see, you Mac guys got ONE! A bit ridiculous, wouldn’t you say?
i’m not talking about the ‘possibility’ of a virus, i’m talking about the existence of one…
read my comment again, although the symantec blogger claims there are none, he links to a page that contradicts that claim…
as for the comparison to windows, i never said osx wasn’t much safer, it certainly is safer, but the claim that there are no file infecting viruses for the platform is false…
I suggest you re-read the the post. It states \”Shortly thereafter, proof of concept code was released publicly, which triggered a Category 1 threat advisory for OSX.Exploit.Launchd\” A proof of concept is just that, not a virus in the wild. More important is the fact that it was for 10.4.6 and was patched BEFORE it ever infected anyone by Apple! See below. I will also remind you that Symantec sells anti-virus software.
Take a peak on the Wild Level: Low and the Number of Infections: 0 – 49. Glad you at least said that OS X is much safer than Windows, I will say the comparison is NOT even close! I think if you looked at the report from the story you quoted you would have to agree that this is not much of a threat to average users and understand the term proof of concept. NOT a virus in the wild and ZERO means ZERO. Not a high level with 25 million machines out there. Trust me if there was a real virus out there the Mac sites would be full of this information.
Most Windows users love to point to the almost, as to some fact of something. Most Windows XP machines connected to broadband are actually loaded with spyware in no time at all, fact, not a proof of concept.
If it makes Windows users feel better to say \”there are no file infecting viruses for the platform is false…\” so be it. I will still say I will be fast to point to a \”real virus\” for OS X and still say 100,000 to zero, for now and say 100,000 to ONE, when one widespread actual virus happens!
I think you would have to admit Microsoft\’s track record on security, and patches has been dismal in most cases. The usual scenario, is a third party pubilcizes the exploit, Microsoft denies the vunerability, denies it is a problem, a third party may even patch before Microsoft does. Then when it infects a few million machines and is all over the web, they get out a patch, of course on \”PATCH TUESDAY, not before, that fixes the vulnerbility while it breaks a bunch of apps, including Microsoft apps! I support plenty of Windows desktops and servers for a living, I know the dance!
ok, we’re clearly talking about 2 different things…
osx.leap.a is a file infecting virus for the osx platform… he said it wasn’t (he said there were none, not just none in the wild but none known) but the page he linked to said it was…
in fact it’s both an instant messaging worm and an overwriting file infector (it would have been a companion infector if it had managed to successfully save a copy of the original host program it infects)… the symantec write-up lists the category as worm because they don’t support multiple categorization and because they correctly realize that worms are the bigger threat, but they are quite clear about it being a file infector as well…
also, you have a seriously borked idea of what proof of concept means… wm/concept was both a proof of concept (the first word macro virus ever) and a virus in the wild (very much in the wild)… proof of concept does not mean not a threat or not a real virus, it only means that it’s proof that a particular concept is feasible…
Kurt,
I appreciate your input and I do understand what \”proof of concept\” means. I am aware of the osx.leap.a. I will point out that his threat was introduced thru iChat as a file called latestpics.tgz, promising pictures of MacOS X Leopard. The worm required the user to download, decompress and execute the file then enter their admin password to cause any damage at all! Most users would be smart enough to realize you do not need an admin password to see a picture.
As I agree that users should not get complacent to socially engineered malware.
osx.leap.a cannot run without an administrator password on standard account types, but can when run in an administrator account. The main user account is by default an administrator account.
I think you may have to admit that the osx.leap.a being an actual virus is a bit controversial as even Apple said \”\”Leap-A is not a virus, it is malicious software that requires a user to download the application and execute the resulting file.\” The threat of this was greatly over-hyped by the non Mac users. As well as the people that sell anti-virus software.
Finding anyone actually infected by this is hard, if not actually impossible. I have to agree with Apple on this one, if I build an AppleScript that overwrites some files and \”fool\” people into running it, is this a virus? No. It may be a pain for the person that does it, but not much of a threat to anyone else. Viruses spread. There is little proof that the osx.leap.a spread to anyone.
I say, if this is BIG news to the Windows community, well so be it. OS X is still the safest platform for average users and this was my original point. I never said that a virus for OS X was impossible.
When a \”real\” threat exists for OS X, I will yell it from the rooftops. I only wish Windows security was anyway near as robust as OS X or Linux. Why do I care, I use Windows daily, that\’s why.
As far as my preference for OS X, I will take my security built-in, NOT bolted on! What I see is lots of Window apologists types trying to feel better, by yelling you too! Even with Microsoft\’s long history of dismal security with over a 100,000 viruses for Windows.
Still a bit ridiculous, don\’t you think?
my last attempt got flagged as spam (even though there were no links?) so i’ll try to be brief and hope it finds nothing to complain about…
a) i’m not a windows advocate – although i use it, it is not my preferred platform… ergo, there are no windows apologists here…
b) just because apple says something isn’t a virus doesn’t make it so… microsoft tried to do the same thing with wm/concept… it’s nothing more than denial and PR spin and i would be worried about the fact that apple is treating the issue the same way MS did – as a PR problem…
c) a virus is a self-replicating program that infects other host programs – osx.leap.a meets both of those requirements regardless of how big a threat it is or how widespread…
Kurt,
Thanks for your insight. It is nice having a rational conversation on this issue. I spend too much time sometimes dealing with what I call “Windows Apoligists” that make excuses for everything Microsoft. That “title” was not meant for you.