PCWorld Forums: New Breed Of Mac Defender Skips Past Apple's Latest Patch - PCWorld Forums

Post your comments for New Breed of Mac Defender Skips Past Apple's Latest Patch here

So it has begun....

and this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Sooner or later Apple's going to have to advise it's users to get a security app.

KLanD, on 01 June 2011 - 03:04 PM, said:

It is not true - all the stories about Mac's trojans and viruses are false - they are being spread by jealous windows users who want to damage apple's reputation. No virus or trojan will ever infect a mac, an ipad or an iphone because apple's code is far superior to anything in the whole world and hackers cannot break into its secure environment. People need to stop spreading false rumors because apple products have never been infected and will never be infected in any way. Only windows devices gets viruses and trojans - I swear.

Could this mean that Apple will have a "Patch Tuesday" every week with security updates. Wow, Apple software engineers will have to think of security in user space now. Welcome to the big time guys.

Wow,I can see it now, a regular "Secret Sunday" patch day. New security fixes weekly. Welcome to the big time.

Ubuntu guys, stop looking so smug, if you ever break into the desktop market in any significant way, you too will have the same issues, of course the ubuntu guys already have a sort of lame anti virus check or two.

ginkessler, on 01 June 2011 - 05:48 PM, said:

Hackers can't break in? Are you really that brainwashed? Latest PAWN2OWN - Hackers who worked on an exploit for 2 weeks broke into a Mac in less than 30 secs. Same hackers worked on an exploit for Windows too them 5 weeks and still took 30 mins for them to break in.

Jailbreaks are hacks. or didn't you know that? UNIX requiring an admin password doesn't mean much, you are aware of that right? Especially fi the user is stupid enough to type it in when asked.

There have been trojans on Mac software for years. Just Google it.

Apple beat Microsoft and had the largest single patch every to the OS X platform. That patch consisted of over 240 updates, with more than half being for security. How do you explain that? The iOS updates always break jailbreaks bec they close the holes use to HACK the iOS code. Every single version of iOS has been jailbroken since the very first iPhone OS. It gets broken even before Apple releases the code.

How can you claim that is more secure? You think a door is any more secure than a windows? It isn't...it just takes something bigger and better to break it.

Stop laying on Steve Jobs couch and allow him to feed you that BS you just spewed from your mouth. Its so sickening to think you think code, which is written by a person who is not perfect, is completely safe?

Macs just don't matter and aren't worth the time an effort. This has been factually proven for 30 years. Mac's aren't use in the types of businesses where information is worth stealing. Mostly audio/video professionals and college kids use macs. Do I really need to break into your machine and steal a song or movie that I can just steal once you release it? And sure why would I want some college kids computer where all he has is porn stashed all over it. There is plenty of that junk online already.

Thieves want something worth stealing. since Windows is used by the gov't, banks, hospitals and other secure type businesses, the threat is more open bec of so much usage. 90% of the world can't be wrong.

And let me ask you, if this isn't such a big deal, why is Apple working so hard to get it under control? Bec he knows if he stands and does nothing, his precious Mac will die. You really think Mac’s are better than any other PC? Can you prove that beyond reasonable doubt? Bec I can certainly prove they are not better.

Just FYI, price is not a sole way of saying this is better. The cost is high because people are willing to pay more for false perceptions. Are Mac’s more secure bec the code is better, or bec the Mac’s market penetration has been so small no one cared?

Its like saying a Porsche is better than a Toyota. Sure it is at SOME things, but crash both cars at 60 mph and see which one is more likely to save your life. That $30,000 Toyota will pass a 5 star crash test while that Porsche won't.

Macs aren't better, they just cost more when they break. And machines break no matter who logo lights up on the back
.

This post has been edited by QUADICON: 02 June 2011 - 06:23 AM

QUADICON, on 02 June 2011 - 06:16 AM, said:

Pretty sure ginkessler's post was meant as a joke.

linuxrants7xpg, on 02 June 2011 - 07:44 AM, said:

I concur.

I'd also like to note that I am an audio/video professional and I use a PC, for many reasons.

ginkessler, on 01 June 2011 - 05:48 PM, said:

If you believe that, you are a fool.

waldojim, on 02 June 2011 - 10:47 AM, said:

Jim, I don't think he/she believes that at all. I certainly don't and I have been branded and Apple zealot by most in these forums. ginkessler's post is ironic and kinda funny.

Does it seem like the person(s) responsible for the original version, the second iteration, and now this version, are just warming up with some proof of concept malware; testing the waters before they unleash a storm upon the Mac community?

Secondly: Is this a person or group that feel the Mac is a large enough audience to attack or is it possibly a more personal vendetta?

chosenson, on 02 June 2011 - 11:23 AM, said:

Maybe just tired of the 'There are no viruses for Mac' crowd, commercials, sales peoples, etc.

waldojim, on 02 June 2011 - 12:45 PM, said:

That's what has been running around my mind too. Which leans towards the vendetta thought.

QUADICON, on 02 June 2011 - 06:16 AM, said:

I think the "It is not true - all the stories about Mac's trojans and viruses are false..." was sarcasm as nobody can be that blinded.

Sorry, but you exposed yourself as being a Mac hater when you got to "Macs just don't matter and aren't worth the time an effort." Your argument to that point wasn't bad but the rest of your anti-Mac rant shows you are extremely biased at best and hurts your overall credibility..

waldojim, on 02 June 2011 - 12:45 PM, said:

Jim there is no way for them to claim the moral high ground regardless of the provocation. They are cyber bullies and muggers and are doing it for financial gain.

nonseq, on 02 June 2011 - 02:27 PM, said:

Never claimed they were looking for moral high ground. Only trying to find a reason for the 'why bother'.

Though in a way it would be nice to be rid of the 'it can't happen to us' crowd.

QUADICON, on 02 June 2011 - 06:16 AM, said:

I did. In fact, I monitor the site that covers most of those supposed trojans and guess what it said?

" The new version has a more complicated installation process that requires physical access to the computer, so SecureMac continues to rate this as a low threat."

I'm not arguing that trojans are a problem, what I'm arguing is the statement that these trojans have been a significant issue for some time, yet until this most recent MacDefender noise, none were truly effective--infecting less that 1/20th of 1% of all Macs in use or about 60 thousand out of some 150 million or more total Macs.

As you say, this trojan, like all the previous ones, required user input before it could install. Apparently until now Mac users were smart enough to avoid the trojans in general, but as we get more Windows users switching, we're getting more of that 'Just Click OK' mindset.

In case y'all didn't know, Apple slammed the door again almost as quickly as the new one was opened.

Guess it's going to be a game of Who Will Hold Out the Longest?

nonseq, on 02 June 2011 - 11:10 AM, said:

Zealot.. hardly. I'd probably go as far as Apple Lover, cause you defiantly haven't drunk all the iKoolaid or jumped off the cliff into fanboy.