[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Flashback Malware Puts Apple in Security Spotlight: Experts Weigh In here

[Boletusedulis]

Ripe for the picking, and laden with fruit... what's not to love for a scammer?

If we can dumb-down the computing experience even more (MS and Apple are both doing this, IMO), there will be no lack of grist for the mill.

"See, you just press this button, and it works! Now you're a computer expert too. Now just enter your bank account information here, and we'll make everything wonderful for you. See how easy that was?"

[Clive49]

Boletusedulis, on 13 April 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

Ripe for the picking, and laden with fruit... what's not to love for a scammer?

If we can dumb-down the computing experience even more (MS and Apple are both doing this, IMO), there will be no lack of grist for the mill.

"See, you just press this button, and it works! Now you're a computer expert too. Now just enter your bank account information here, and we'll make everything wonderful for you. See how easy that was?"

+1 These days, not only do we have people that won't take responsibility for their actions, but they have lost the capacity to think for themselves. They actually enjoy being spoon fed. Why exercise your brain if you don't have to.

[oztied]

Yes,
Jobs is dead.
Time for the eye-holes,
to turn off their reality distortion fields.
All software can be exploited,
by money grubbing hard fingers.

Yes, just like the everwidening gap between rich and poor,
there are a small amount of highly corrupt and educated computer geniuses,
and a large amount of numb users with simple software,
unable to figure out they are being taken for a ride.

[ClausLohmar]

It's all about FUD - what percentage is 600.000 Infected Mac's ? Sure it's a quite small one.
Hen Message is clear to see - By Anti-Virus Software when you have a Mac, you are not save! - But is that so? Not easy to say, but the Security wholes are not Apples - Flash and Java belong to independent companies, the use of this Applications makes a Mac vulnerable. Many complains that in OSX 10.7 Java was removed but as you see, there was a reason.
Blaming now Apple is unfair.

[Thai]

ClausLohmar, on 14 April 2012 - 12:17 AM, said:

It's all about FUD - what percentage is 600.000 Infected Mac's ? Sure it's a quite small one.
Hen Message is clear to see - By Anti-Virus Software when you have a Mac, you are not save! - But is that so? Not easy to say, but the Security wholes are not Apples - Flash and Java belong to independent companies, the use of this Applications makes a Mac vulnerable. Many complains that in OSX 10.7 Java was removed but as you see, there was a reason.
Blaming now Apple is unfair.

FYI, most of Windows' exploits are 3rd party applications such as Adobe or Java. By saying "the security holes (not wholes) are not Apple" is simply not true since Apple was the one released and maintained the infected Java not Oracle! To make matter worse, Apple delayed Java's fix more than 2 months ago when Oracle released it. They only had to send out the fix when more than half of million Mac got infected! So you think it's not Apple's fault?
Remember in Windows, Adobe Flash and Java are also NOT installed by Microsoft either! Users have to do it themself.
Anyway, did PCWorld have an article that said this "Flashback infection" even bigger than Windows Conficker, which was the biggest one of Windows, by percentage?

[artzy65]

Clive49, on 13 April 2012 - 07:20 PM, said:

Boletusedulis, on 13 April 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

Ripe for the picking, and laden with fruit... what's not to love for a scammer?

If we can dumb-down the computing experience even more (MS and Apple are both doing this, IMO), there will be no lack of grist for the mill.

"See, you just press this button, and it works! Now you're a computer expert too. Now just enter your bank account information here, and we'll make everything wonderful for you. See how easy that was?"

+1 These days, not only do we have people that won't take responsibility for their actions, but they have lost the capacity to think for themselves. They actually enjoy being spoon fed. Why exercise your brain if you don't have to.

Actually, they should be spoon-fed. Why should they have to dive into tech? They are generally not interested in tech. The people who build computers and design software should be making everything as simple and as transparent as possible. Apple must protect their customers without forcing them to deal with the techie details.

The general public wants to view their computing devices as appliances... non-computers.

[Boletusedulis]

artzy65, on 14 April 2012 - 07:56 AM, said:

Clive49, on 13 April 2012 - 07:20 PM, said:

Boletusedulis, on 13 April 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

Ripe for the picking, and laden with fruit... what's not to love for a scammer?

If we can dumb-down the computing experience even more (MS and Apple are both doing this, IMO), there will be no lack of grist for the mill.

"See, you just press this button, and it works! Now you're a computer expert too. Now just enter your bank account information here, and we'll make everything wonderful for you. See how easy that was?"

+1 These days, not only do we have people that won't take responsibility for their actions, but they have lost the capacity to think for themselves. They actually enjoy being spoon fed. Why exercise your brain if you don't have to.

Actually, they should be spoon-fed. Why should they have to dive into tech? They are generally not interested in tech. The people who build computers and design software should be making everything as simple and as transparent as possible. Apple must protect their customers without forcing them to deal with the techie details.

The general public wants to view their computing devices as appliances... non-computers.

And 8-year olds want to drive cars. Should we design cars for them? It is strictly my opinion, but I believe some learning should be considered the required price of admission. But hey, maybe the world needs more idiots with computing devices; the scammers sure like it that way.

[nonseq]

Boletusedulis, on 14 April 2012 - 08:17 AM, said:

And 8-year olds want to drive cars. Should we design cars for them? It is strictly my opinion, but I believe some learning should be considered the required price of admission. But hey, maybe the world needs more idiots with computing devices; the scammers sure like it that way.

A 40 year old wants to drive cars. Should he be forced to learn every part and it's function before he can drive? Should he have to wade through a bewildering array of models that may or may not work in the same way. Should he have to tweak the car to get from point A to point B?

This post has been edited by nonseq: 14 April 2012 - 08:21 AM

[Boletusedulis]

nonseq, on 14 April 2012 - 08:20 AM, said:

Boletusedulis, on 14 April 2012 - 08:17 AM, said:

And 8-year olds want to drive cars. Should we design cars for them? It is strictly my opinion, but I believe some learning should be considered the required price of admission. But hey, maybe the world needs more idiots with computing devices; the scammers sure like it that way.

A 40 year old wants to drive cars. Should he be forced to learn every part and it's function before he can drive? Should he have to wade through a bewildering array of models that may or may not work in the same way. Should he have to tweak the car to get from point A to point B?

No, but he should be aware of the rules of the road and the dangers inherent with driving and capable of driving responsibly.

[nonseq]

Boletusedulis, on 14 April 2012 - 09:23 AM, said:

nonseq, on 14 April 2012 - 08:20 AM, said:

Boletusedulis, on 14 April 2012 - 08:17 AM, said:

And 8-year olds want to drive cars. Should we design cars for them? It is strictly my opinion, but I believe some learning should be considered the required price of admission. But hey, maybe the world needs more idiots with computing devices; the scammers sure like it that way.

A 40 year old wants to drive cars. Should he be forced to learn every part and it's function before he can drive? Should he have to wade through a bewildering array of models that may or may not work in the same way. Should he have to tweak the car to get from point A to point B?

No, but he should be aware of the rules of the road and the dangers inherent with driving and capable of driving responsibly.

I totally agree. It's been my experience that the problems that I have encountered trying to use Linux, peripherals, and OS software are far more profound than "rules of the road". Your experience may be different but for me, the challenges that I have faced with linux apps are more akin to tires out of alignment than to buckle up.

[Boletusedulis]

nonseq, on 14 April 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

Boletusedulis, on 14 April 2012 - 09:23 AM, said:

nonseq, on 14 April 2012 - 08:20 AM, said:

Boletusedulis, on 14 April 2012 - 08:17 AM, said:

And 8-year olds want to drive cars. Should we design cars for them? It is strictly my opinion, but I believe some learning should be considered the required price of admission. But hey, maybe the world needs more idiots with computing devices; the scammers sure like it that way.

A 40 year old wants to drive cars. Should he be forced to learn every part and it's function before he can drive? Should he have to wade through a bewildering array of models that may or may not work in the same way. Should he have to tweak the car to get from point A to point B?

No, but he should be aware of the rules of the road and the dangers inherent with driving and capable of driving responsibly.

I totally agree. It's been my experience that the problems that I have encountered trying to use Linux, peripherals, and OS software are far more profound than "rules of the road". Your experience may be different but for me, the challenges that I have faced with linux apps are more akin to tires out of alignment than to buckle up.

But I assume you know that there are not 10,000 Nigerian princesses pulling email addresses out of hats and choosing you to help them save their fortunes. This is the kind of basic stuff I am talking about. No company can design a completely idiot-proof device, nor should they try, IMO.

[nonseq]

Boletusedulis, on 14 April 2012 - 09:45 AM, said:

nonseq, on 14 April 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

Boletusedulis, on 14 April 2012 - 09:23 AM, said:

nonseq, on 14 April 2012 - 08:20 AM, said:

Boletusedulis, on 14 April 2012 - 08:17 AM, said:

And 8-year olds want to drive cars. Should we design cars for them? It is strictly my opinion, but I believe some learning should be considered the required price of admission. But hey, maybe the world needs more idiots with computing devices; the scammers sure like it that way.

A 40 year old wants to drive cars. Should he be forced to learn every part and it's function before he can drive? Should he have to wade through a bewildering array of models that may or may not work in the same way. Should he have to tweak the car to get from point A to point B?

No, but he should be aware of the rules of the road and the dangers inherent with driving and capable of driving responsibly.

I totally agree. It's been my experience that the problems that I have encountered trying to use Linux, peripherals, and OS software are far more profound than "rules of the road". Your experience may be different but for me, the challenges that I have faced with linux apps are more akin to tires out of alignment than to buckle up.

But I assume you know that there are not 10,000 Nigerian princesses pulling email addresses out of hats and choosing you to help them save their fortunes. This is the kind of basic stuff I am talking about. No company can design a completely idiot-proof device, nor should they try, IMO.

On this we agree totally but I'm hoping that Mrs Charles Taylor is still going to deposit $112 million in my checking account. So far no deposits but some strange withdrawals

[kennyrosenyc]

Boletusedulis, on 13 April 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

Ripe for the picking, and laden with fruit... what's not to love for a scammer?

If we can dumb-down the computing experience even more (MS and Apple are both doing this, IMO), there will be no lack of grist for the mill.

"See, you just press this button, and it works! Now you're a computer expert too. Now just enter your bank account information here, and we'll make everything wonderful for you. See how easy that was?"

Absolutely right. Couldn't have said it better. And with that I'll go. LOL

[Boletusedulis]

[/quote]
On this we agree totally but I'm hoping that Mrs Charles Taylor is still going to deposit $112 million in my checking account. So far no deposits but some strange withdrawals
[/quote]

Don't worry, you will later be contacted by the FBI, who will ensure you get your contract funds/inheritance/lottery winnings once you have given them your bank account info.

[Kahuna]

" "Last year, there were 114,000 known viruses for PCs." And Justin Long (as the Mac) replies, "PCs, but not Macs." "

It was true back then and it is true now. Flashback was not a virus. Anyone who makes the mistake of referring every kind of malware as a virus reveals his ignorance and/or stupidity.

I fault Apple for waiting SIX WEEKS to come up with a solution for a problem they were well aware of.

I fault Mac USERS for not being proactive and installing appropriate security software.

(My personal preference is Sophus Anti-Virus for the Mac. It is free and it works.)

[YellowEagle]

It's everyone's responsibility to protect themselves on the Net no one else.

That's just plain old Net 101.

Company's are people and people are fallible. Even Apple.

[HilaryDentz]

ClausLohmar, on 14 April 2012 - 12:17 AM, said:

It's all about FUD - what percentage is 600.000 Infected Mac's ? Sure it's a quite small one.
Hen Message is clear to see - By Anti-Virus Software when you have a Mac, you are not save! - But is that so? Not easy to say, but the Security wholes are not Apples - Flash and Java belong to independent companies, the use of this Applications makes a Mac vulnerable. Many complains that in OSX 10.7 Java was removed but as you see, there was a reason.
Blaming now Apple is unfair.

just keep drinking that apple juice and you'll be alright.

[artzy65]

Boletusedulis, on 14 April 2012 - 08:17 AM, said:

And 8-year olds want to drive cars. Should we design cars for them? It is strictly my opinion, but I believe some learning should be considered the required price of admission. But hey, maybe the world needs more idiots with computing devices; the scammers sure like it that way.

It's bad enough having to dodge people texting while they drive; even walking down the street, wavering around like they're drunk. And you want to make computing devices tougher to figure out? But you are right about too many idiots out there... all the more reason to produce tech stuff that is as simple as possible. Do you want your kid run over by a distracted texter?

And forget trying to warn friends or clients about security... if you help them, the very next time something goes wrong on their computer, they'll blame you. It's not worth the aggravation.

This post has been edited by artzy65: 15 April 2012 - 11:01 AM

[ks2problema]

artzy65, on 14 April 2012 - 07:56 AM, said:

Clive49, on 13 April 2012 - 07:20 PM, said:

Boletusedulis, on 13 April 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

Ripe for the picking, and laden with fruit... what's not to love for a scammer?

If we can dumb-down the computing experience even more (MS and Apple are both doing this, IMO), there will be no lack of grist for the mill.

"See, you just press this button, and it works! Now you're a computer expert too. Now just enter your bank account information here, and we'll make everything wonderful for you. See how easy that was?"

+1 These days, not only do we have people that won't take responsibility for their actions, but they have lost the capacity to think for themselves. They actually enjoy being spoon fed. Why exercise your brain if you don't have to.

Actually, they should be spoon-fed. Why should they have to dive into tech? They are generally not interested in tech. The people who build computers and design software should be making everything as simple and as transparent as possible. Apple must protect their customers without forcing them to deal with the techie details.

The general public wants to view their computing devices as appliances... non-computers.

I totally agree that MS and Apple and Google (as the Android developer) should try to give their users as easy, straightforward operation as possible. Nothing really earthshaking with the notion.

But, sadly, ideals and goals are one thing and reality is another. And, from what I can see, the reality is a bit of a ditch that the big guys drive their work tractors into more often than we'd like.

I have a friend and client who used to ride me (rather mercilessly but, hey, I knew he didn't know anything about computers) about my "odd" choice of a Windows machine for web developing. But in the time we've been friends, since 2004, I've been using the same laptop; in 2006 I bought a $400 refurbished 'beater box,' slapped a 1.2 TB of drives in it, added a Firewire card for my pro audio rig (I'm also a songwriter and former studio engineer) and have been delighted by its steadfast, quiet efficiency. No plans on supplanting it. The laptop could use a new battery -- and I really MUST remove iTunes -- which is a serious drag on system performance -- but it's still solid and, aside from the iTunes vampire on its back, runs great. Unfortunately, in the same time, my pal has been through 3 iMacs and 2 Macbooks in the same period -- and says he is having problems on the remaining iMac and Macbook. (That he wants *me* to fix, despite my continual protestations that I don't know anything about the guts of Macs. But since everytime he takes a Mac into the Genius bar, he seems to walk out with a new Mac, he's resistant to going down that route again.)