×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

455 comments

OSX (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170280)

OSX and Linux are far more secure than Windows. They have BSD and UNIX in the background, not the buggy and insecure kernel that Windows has. This is just mindless astroturfing from Windows users who try to make Apple experience look bad because they are jealous for us. What do you take to a coffee place when you go hang around there, your PC? Apple has iPad. iPhone looks cool. Mac doesn't have the same malware problems like Microsoft Windows. For years Windows has been plagued with viruses, exploits and malware. That is not true for OSX or Linux. Only an idiot would use Microsoft Windows now - I keep to my OSX thank you very much.

Re:OSX (0)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 2 years ago | (#36170318)

I cant tell if this is serious apple delusion based on keywords directly from the apple membership card, or if I am having a woosh to a sarcastic post

I have mac, I have linux, I have pc's ... they are all a pain in the ass in their own special way

Re:OSX (4, Insightful)

zonky (1153039) | about 2 years ago | (#36170338)

I realise you're trolling but there are two common malware paths these days: (1) Drive by Downloads - where exploits in things like PDFs, or Flash cause Remote Code Execution on the affected users box, by exploiting flaws in installed software. Hopefully privileged elevation requiriring sudo or UAC will prevent these programs running as admin/root, but often it's just enough that these apps run as a user class. (2) Stupid Users- people who have been trained to download anything from anywhere and just run it. OSX, like Windows, is vulnerable to both, because the software distribution model is totally broken. The app store may help, but i'll still put my trust, for now, in the linux repo model.

Re:OSX (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170432)

Linux is just as well vulnerable. If it would have more users and apps and games, most of the software would come outside repos.

Re:OSX (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170468)

but i'll still put my trust, for now, in the linux repo model.

The repo model that brought you the Debian OpenSSL fiasco or where Red Hat had someone steal their private signing key and using it to sign malicious packages? Or where UnrealIRCD had a trojan in the Linux version for many months?

Re:OSX (1)

zonky (1153039) | about 2 years ago | (#36170494)

Did i claim it was perfect? The centralised app store model has the same risks, but they are quantifiably lower than downloading and executing a file on a random website.

Re:OSX (5, Funny)

EraserMouseMan (847479) | about 2 years ago | (#36170740)

I would like it if all apps had to get vetted through an app store process for OSX just like the iPhone/iPad. The solution is to give up control to Apple. Steve Jobs is the smartest person. And routing all decisions through him will make sure that the best decisions are made quickly and then pushed out to all Apple controlled devices ASAP. I never understand why people want the ability to make decisions that will harm themselves when Apple is telling them that they'll handle it. The nerds need to get a life.

Re:OSX (2)

oakgrove (845019) | about 2 years ago | (#36170604)

You are up to three examples on. There are 30,000 packages available for Ubuntu. Sounds like a pretty good ratio to me.

Re:OSX (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170516)

I read about one of the drive by downloads for OS X. It made you type in your password to install it, it made you click through the installer, and basically do 90% of the work for it. You can't defend against that grade of absolute ignorance except by giving that guy a stone slab and telling him to go chisel away.

Re:OSX (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170372)

Windows is much more robust that it used to be, and becomes moreso every time a Tuesday patch is released. The kernel is only a small part of the OS as a whole, and OSX has not been battle-hardened nearly as much as Windows has been. As Apple becomes more popular and even somewhat useful for those of us who are not the hipster content creator types, you will see that bullseye become larger and larger and I for one cannot wait for that first killer virus that spreads like wildfire, steals data and wipes machines across the world, and wipes that smug grin off of every Apple user's goatee-decorated face.

Re:OSX (3, Insightful)

Targon (17348) | about 2 years ago | (#36170412)

That is a foolish way to look at it, since there are so many layers between the kernel and the user at this point. You can take a great foundation and put something with a poor structure on top of it, or you can work around a weak foundation with a lot of engineering on top to avoid problems. MacOS X has been proven to have a lot of weaknesses, and while the CORE of the OS may be good, there are many flaws on top that can be infected or exploited. Only an idiot would assume that they are safe with MacOS right now since Apple takes years to fix any vulnerability that is found.

Re:OSX (0)

stanlyb (1839382) | about 2 years ago | (#36170424)

I kind of mistrust a guys, using only one-button mouse, and touchpad without buttons. Do you really have only one big dumb thumb to operate with???

Re:OSX (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 2 years ago | (#36170466)

Unfortunately, this is Jobs' secret plan to promote iDevices at the expensive of the horrible, relatively open, sometimes even expandable devices that the shareholders keep forcing him to sell. All the poor guy wants to do is create devices of timeless perfection, immune to user tampering and free of the slightest chink in their perfectly smooth shell.

He has been stockpiling vulnerabilities for years, waiting for the day when he could wait no more...

Don't underestimate stupidty (2)

Shivetya (243324) | about 2 years ago | (#36170498)

and don't underestimate the effect of the over confidence many Mac users have towards these events.

Hell, just attending a local users group was more than enough to convince me we have a sufficient number of idiots to open the door. Far too many reflexively type their password in when prompted it makes you realize nothing is secure with a user

I type with my thumbs. (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170304)

/Sent from my high horse.

The Only Feasible Strategy... (3, Insightful)

Azadre (632442) | about 2 years ago | (#36170322)

Make everything install through the OS X App Store ;)

Re:The Only Feasible Strategy... (4, Interesting)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 2 years ago | (#36170436)

There's stories floating around about companies complaining because Apple is not distributing available security updates to their products [sophos.com], supposedly because of approvals. The App store is apparently not a good solution currently.

Re:The Only Feasible Strategy... (1)

zonky (1153039) | about 2 years ago | (#36170530)

Linux has similar problems - i.e, Ubuntu can "lag" a firefox release for hours or days behind a general security release.

Re:The Only Feasible Strategy... (1)

oakgrove (845019) | about 2 years ago | (#36170664)

Er, if it bothers you that much, go to getfirefox.com and download the latest version like I did?

Re:The Only Feasible Strategy... (1)

dingen (958134) | about 2 years ago | (#36170700)

That's fine if the only software you're running is Firefox.

Re:The Only Feasible Strategy... (1)

oakgrove (845019) | about 2 years ago | (#36170756)

Where do think any linux software comes from? Chrome/chromium comes from Google. Adobe reader comes from Adobe Flash comes from Adobe. All of it can be downloaded from the respective websites the second it is released.

Re:The Only Feasible Strategy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170732)

How do you know that version doesn't have a malware in it?

The only way to win is to not play.

Re:The Only Feasible Strategy... (2)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 2 years ago | (#36170682)

Yes, but you can add the Firefox PPAs directly. I think Opera has one as well. Apple doesn't currently let you do that, nor are they likely to in the future.

Re:The Only Feasible Strategy... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170506)

I seriously think this should be an option for some users. Maybe "Lion" should work that way out of the box. Can't install anything unless it runs through some technically competent channel...

Of course, for those of us who support "non technically-oriented" users, we have always had the option of converting their user accounts into Standard accounts. Now that i've seen first hand how convincing the "Apple Web Security" page is, I'll be sure to do that.

and what do Mac users need to do?... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170326)

Switch to Linux?

Hardly surprising (4, Funny)

LunaticTippy (872397) | about 2 years ago | (#36170342)

I would expect as Apple becomes more popular it will become more of a target for malware. This is not very surprising. I just hope Linux never becomes popular!

Not A Virus (4, Insightful)

GFLPraxis (745118) | about 2 years ago | (#36170550)

The thing to keep in mind is that this malware going around is a trojan. The user has to enter a username and password to install the malware. It can't propagate itself nor install itself automatically from a web site. People are just blindly typing their password to anything asking. Interestingly, it claims to be an antivirus suite and uses SEO to show up on searches for Mac antiviruses per Arstechnica (http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/05/fake-mac-defender-antivirus-app-scams-users-for-money-cc-numbers.ars), so ironically, the people getting infected are people who think they need virus protection on a Mac. Expect to hear people continuing to proclaim this as the beginning of Mac viruses, however.

Re:Not A Virus (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170626)

You do realize this was a malware [i]kit[/i], meaning that many will be spawned from this...?

Re:Not A Virus (2)

amliebsch (724858) | about 2 years ago | (#36170652)

OP didn't even mention the word "virus." Nobody really cares what technical category it falls into. It is malware.

Re:Not A Virus (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170676)

People are just blindly typing their password to anything asking.

Mac users doing that? Noo.... I refuse to believe it.

Re:Not A Virus (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170762)

Beginning of Mac viruses?

A Mac-Plus, what, 25 years ago, could get viruses via the floppy drive. (Probably so could the orginal Mac. At least I never saw a Mac virus propagate over the Appletalk network ... unless someone copied a file.)

Re:Hardly surprising (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about 2 years ago | (#36170584)

Linux is already popular - on servers. The ones that hold vast quantities of valuable information.

Re:Hardly surprising (1)

wagnerrp (1305589) | about 2 years ago | (#36170644)

And just the same, there's a crapflood of compromised Linux servers out on the internet. Those hundreds of brute force SSH attacks you get daily are proof of that.

Re:Hardly surprising (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170650)

The ones that don't have retarded users to click I Agree on everything.

Switch to PCs to avoid viruses? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170346)

NT

Re:Switch to PCs to avoid viruses? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170476)

But NT sucks and is barely better than the 9x kern--

Oh, I see what you did there.

What do? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170348)

Switch to Linux, of course!

Then everyone can say, "This is the year of Linux [umm, on the Mac] desktop.

Macs have never been malware/virus proof (2, Insightful)

Bloodwine77 (913355) | about 2 years ago | (#36170354)

PC users knew all along that the only reason Mac users went relatively unscathed throughout all those years is that the Mac install base was too small to bother. The more popular Macs became, the bigger the target on their backs.

Likewise, if Linux ever became a big contender on the desktop, you would see a surge in Linux rootkits.

Being unpopular does not mean you are safe, but it doesn't hurt. Crackers, virus writers, malware creators, and botnets target the path of least effort.

Re:Macs have never been malware/virus proof (4, Insightful)

migla (1099771) | about 2 years ago | (#36170548)

>Likewise, if Linux ever became a big contender on the desktop, you would see a surge in Linux rootkits.

Yes. But I think it would be easier to get Linux users to just stay with the repositories of open source code, than to download all kinds of crap from everywhere. Not all users, but a lot of them.
That should disarm the threat somewhat.

Re:Macs have never been malware/virus proof (1)

memyselfandeye (1849868) | about 2 years ago | (#36170570)

Linux may not be popular on the desktop, but I'd say Linux has a very high percentage of servers since roughly 60% [securityspace.com] of mail server responses are exim, postfix, and sendmail, while microsoft continues to decline. My own vanity domain is "tested" daily hundreds of times, and let me tell you, Iptables and ACL keep my server secure, not obscurity.

Re:Macs have never been malware/virus proof (1)

b0bby (201198) | about 2 years ago | (#36170706)

I've got a vanity domain too (on an old PIII Linux box) and I'm always amazed at the number of attempts at attacking it. A server does have a lot less attack vectors, though; I'm not browsing from it, I'm not adding software to it, I'm not opening email attachments on it. So it's a less attractive target than a desktop machine from that point of view.

Re:Macs have never been malware/virus proof (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170754)

Oh so you are downloading random crapware onto your mail servers? Yeah didn't think so. Apples and oranges.

Re:Macs have never been malware/virus proof (-1)

Talderas (1212466) | about 2 years ago | (#36170620)

You could describe the protection Mac and Linux have enjoy as security through obscurity.

Re:Macs have never been malware/virus proof (2)

Haedrian (1676506) | about 2 years ago | (#36170668)

Open source software enjoying security through obscurity? What?

Obscurity means "Stuff Hidden in Code" not "Not so used"

Re:Macs have never been malware/virus proof (1)

Bert64 (520050) | about 2 years ago | (#36170622)

Linux however, has long been a big contender on the server... The difference however, is that a linux server typically has a completely different set of packages installed, whereas a windows "server" (and i use the term loosely) basically is a desktop with a few extra background processes.

Nothing New (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170356)

I say this is nothing new for OSX in terms of their risk level just new for the obvious to be true. Apple has falsely advertised about the security of OSX. It is true that Apple has less incidents but users are just as vulnerable as any person with any OS. If anyone really wants your stuff they can get it. It's just a matter of how hard and the return of investment.

Apple Fans please feel free to spew spin on this story also.

Simple really... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170360)

...don't give it your fscking admin password you dolt!

But seriously, this has mostly hit Safari users because Apple, in their glorious wisdom, has decided not to include a opt out warning before a download occurs.

Only one Firefox on Mac user got suckered, the rest just Canceled the download and went right on surfing.

So Apple when are you going to wake the fsck up and join the rest of the world?

mainstream media touting more big explosions fear (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170362)

see you on the other side of it? still waiting? more stand-up talknician routines. more threatening now? will the FSF guys be arrested for sex crimes too? julians, adrians, everybody's at risk, of being arrested, or worse. scary? 13 year old tagged by ss.gov at school for unapproved tweeting. so we're safe from him now. the key to the bells & whistles of just one city is way too much trust to put in one human. our/our planet's fate however, is different?

same old; how many 1000 babys going up in smoke again today? how many 1000's of just folks to be killed or displaced again today? hard to put $$ on that. the cost of constant deception, to our spirit? paying to have ourselves constantly spied on & lied to by freaky self chosen neogod depopulationers? the biblically styled fatal distraction holycost is all encompassing, & never ends while we're still alive, unless we cut them/ourselves off at the wmd. good luck with that, as it's not even a topic anywhere we get to see, although in real life it's happening everywhere as our walking dead weapons peddlers are being uncontracted. you can call this weather if it makes you feel any better. no? read the teepeeleaks etchings.

so, once one lie is 'infactated', the rest becomes just more errant fatal history.

disarm. tell the truth. the sky is not ours to toy with after all?

  you call this 'weather'? what with real history racing up to correct
itself, while the chosen one's holycostal life0cider mediots continually
attempt to rewrite it, fortunately, there's still only one version of the
truth, & it's usually not a long story, or a confusing multiple choice
fear raising event.

wouldn't this be a great time to investigate the genuine native elders social & political leadership initiative, which includes genuine history as put forth in the teepeeleaks etchings. the natives still have no words in their language to describe the events following their 'discovery' by us, way back when. they do advise that it's happening again.

who has all the weapons? who is doing MOST of the damage? what are the motives? are our intentions & will as the ones who are supposed to be being represented honestly & accurately, being met? we have no reference to there being ANY public approval for the current mayhem & madness pr firm regime style self chosen neogod rulership we've allowed to develop around us, so we wouldn't have to stop having fun, & doing things that have nothing to do with having to defend from the smoke&mirrors domestic frenetics, of the unproven genocides. rockets exploding in syria fired from Libya? yikes?

  the zeus weather weapon is still being used indiscriminately against the population, our rulers' minions are fleeing under fire.

the whore of babylon has been rescued by the native elders. she has the papers of challenge authored by the hymenical council, & is cooperating wholeheartedly with the disarmament mandate.
disarm. thank you.

censorship, or convenience?
Due to excessive bad posting from this IP or Subnet, anonymous comment
posting has temporarily been disabled. You can still login to post.
However, if bad posting continues from your IP or Subnet that privilege
could be revoked as well. If it's you, consider this a chance to sit in
the timeout corner or login and improve your posting. If it's someone
else, this is a chance to hunt them down. If you think this is bogus, you are right moderation@slashdot.org with your MD5'd IPID and SubnetID, (which have been maliciously edited from time to time for effect by /.censory)
which are always changing, you butthead

Serves you right. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170364)

Mac Zealots have been asking for it for years. I am a virus writer by the way and I am making Linux versions of my viruses.

Re:Serves you right. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170394)

Go fuck yourself.

Re:Serves you right. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170736)

and I am making Linux versions of my viruses.

Then you're an idiot, much easier to tailor malware to a specific platform and there is less effort and less risk in attacking users on more popular platforms. A greater amount of effort is required to attack a wide spectrum of linux platforms because of a lack of homogeneity. The only linux systems which are worth the effort to attack , in this current environment, are servers because they could contain profitable data and can be used for distribution of your other malware. You'd just use or make an application specific worm (PHP+cURL+Injection Payload Exploit of some type or something) or do a manual attack on the system. Although it's much more likely you're an idiot and a liar.

ZDnet (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170378)

A pillar of truth and justice in the reporting world. Wake me when it's something beyond a trojan that requires a users password to install.

zdnet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170384)

I'd be intrested in some data, timestamps, records over time to show these issues pop up.

Finally! (-1, Flamebait)

diskofish (1037768) | about 2 years ago | (#36170396)

Finally! I am so sick of smug Mac users talking about how Macs can't get viruses because they're so secure.

Re:Finally! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170452)

Finally! I am so sick of smug Mac users talking about how Macs can't get viruses because they're so secure.

Well, this still is no virus... Manually installing malware and typing in the administrator password to do it is bad. But no virus.

Re:Finally! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170456)

I guess you weren't first in line when they were passing out brains, were you now!?!

Re:Finally! (5, Insightful)

0racle (667029) | about 2 years ago | (#36170480)

It's not a virus, it's a trojan. You can't technically fix stupid; users that install everything they see will always be the weakest point in system security.

Re:Finally! (1)

Haedrian (1676506) | about 2 years ago | (#36170580)

It doesn't help if your advertisers/marketting drones boast how the system they're buying won't get viruses does it.

False sense of security. Is far worse than running a system you know might get sick.

Re:Finally! (1)

0racle (667029) | about 2 years ago | (#36170670)

No matter what the marketing says, the user is still responsible for themselves.

Oh, and not that it would have helped in this case, but Apple does recommend Anti-Virus for OS X.

Re:Finally! (1)

Volante3192 (953645) | about 2 years ago | (#36170646)

For what it's worth, in the layman world, virus, malware, trojan, worm are interchangeable. It's pretty damn rare to find an honest-to-Vishnu virus in the wild anymore, least from the systems I've cleaned up, ones with moderate defenses. It's basically malware/spyware across the board.

And 98% (+/- 2%) of that would be solved by people not clicking YES/OK to everything...

Protect users from themselves? (4, Informative)

gilesjuk (604902) | about 2 years ago | (#36170400)

Is it possible to protect a user from themselves? If a user chooses to install some software and it turns out to be rogue then that's not the fault of the OS, it is the nativity of the user.

If Apple made the installation of non-App Store software on the Mac possible then it would stop a lot of rogue applications. But then people would complain about lack of freedom.

The security model of OSX is fairly proven, Windows struggles due to backward compatibility at times.

Re:Protect users from themselves? (2)

Burz (138833) | about 2 years ago | (#36170590)

it is the nativity of the user.

Wait - You're saying the user is Baby Jesus??!

Re:Protect users from themselves? (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 2 years ago | (#36170608)

Is it possible to protect a user from themselves? If a user chooses to install some software and it turns out to be rogue then that's not the fault of the OS, it is the nativity of the user.

Well, one approach would be to have the browser pop up scary looking warning boxes, and if the user clicked 'okay' then refuse to download any executable files for the next 24 hours...

Re:Protect users from themselves? (1)

Volante3192 (953645) | about 2 years ago | (#36170690)

What, the user needs to take responsibility for the actions they perform, and that those actions can damage their security on their computer? What are you, some European Socialist pig?!

Oh, as far as security models? Security models mean squat when you hand over all the keys to Spunky the Spyware...

Re:Protect users from themselves? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170726)

naïveté

Re:Protect users from themselves? (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | about 2 years ago | (#36170778)

Is it possible to protect a user from themselves?... If Apple made the installation of non-App Store software on the Mac possible then it would stop a lot of rogue applications.

That's how you protect users from themselves.

But then people would complain about lack of freedom.

Unfortunately, iPhones are still selling like hotcakes, so I'm not convinced this is the reason. But I really, really don't like either direction. If people could be bothered to learn anywhere near as much about their computers as they typically understand about their cars, we wouldn't have this situation.

A conspiracy theory (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170410)

Isn't it interesting that Mac malware is suddenly on the rise not long after the Mac App Store comes out. Now I'm not saying that Apple is creating or encouraging the creation of malware to try to scare people into using their walled garden. I'm just saying, isn't the timing interesting?

If they keep taking 8 months to fix security bugs (0, Flamebait)

Myria (562655) | about 2 years ago | (#36170422)

...then it is no surprise that malware is about to explode on Macs. I submitted a local privilege exploit in Mac OS that allowed any process to get kernel privilege at least 8 months ago, and they still haven't released a fix for it. This is even though the fix is only a few lines of code.

If the exploit had not been x86-specific, I would have given it to the iPhone jailbreakers instead of Apple.

Re:If they keep taking 8 months to fix security bu (5, Informative)

MartinSchou (1360093) | about 2 years ago | (#36170640)

This isn't exploiting privileges.

"Your computer has been infected. Please install this program to clean it."

It's social engineering, and you can't protect against that. The installer needs admin rights to install, so people have to enter their password - and they do.

Seriously - how are you supposed to protect against that?

Re:If they keep taking 8 months to fix security bu (1)

Haedrian (1676506) | about 2 years ago | (#36170688)

Seriously - how are you supposed to protect against that?

It involves a very large hammer...

Re:If they keep taking 8 months to fix security bu (1)

Vitriol+Angst (458300) | about 2 years ago | (#36170764)

EASY; Re-Install a new user.

I think it probably would be more profitable, however, to have the Malware be a P0rn video, and the app that allows it to play would turn on the Web Cam on EVERYONE's new powerbook. That way, you can extort them for money after 5 minutes when you hear a "ZIPP!" on the microphone.

Suddenly, .... I think I've found a new way to quit my day job....

The answer is simple (1, Troll)

XxtraLarGe (551297) | about 2 years ago | (#36170444)

I know this isn't going to be popular here, but if you don't want problems, don't download warez, stay within the walled garden. There are thousands of titles available from the Apple store, games available from sites like MacGameStore [macgamestore.com] or Steam and others, as well as many independent software authors.

Re:The answer is simple (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170508)

And that protects you from a drive-by download you got from visiting a site which had an ad which was exploiting a Flash/PDF vulnerability... how?

Oh! That's right! It doesn't...

Re:The answer is simple (1)

Haedrian (1676506) | about 2 years ago | (#36170536)

Don't visit websites which could have code in them specifically to dump viruses in your system ("Drive by downloads").

Don't visit websites which have advertisers which could have been compromised to do the above.

Pretty simple innit.

Mac users don't need to do anything (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170512)

OSX was engineered from the ground up to be secure.

OSX simply cannot be exploited.

Easy... (1, Funny)

Haedrian (1676506) | about 2 years ago | (#36170520)

"and what do Mac users need to do?"

Switch to Linux.

Re:Easy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170634)

So... switch from *nix to *nix?

Re:Easy... (4, Insightful)

MartinSchou (1360093) | about 2 years ago | (#36170712)

How does Linux prevent you from installing bad stuff onto your computer?

The installer asks the user to enter their admin password - and they do. That's why they get infected.

But I'm sure you can explain exactly how Linux' security model prevents a user from using sudo to install rogue programs. And if you can't come up with something better than "the user account shouldn't have have wheel rights", then you need explain how the user is ever going to install useful stuff that requires sudo.

You cannot protect a user from himself - at most you can make it difficult for him.

Obviously untrue (1, Funny)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | about 2 years ago | (#36170544)

Apple products are the best things ever, and obviously more secure than everything else. Everyone knows these are never compromised during pwn2own.

Re:Obviously untrue (1)

cruelworld (21187) | about 2 years ago | (#36170714)

They're only compromised cause no one wants the windows machines! At least that's what my kool aid told me.

Social Engineering (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170554)

From the family members and friends who have come to me with viruses, the vast majority (all, in fact) were installed by social engineering. What this means is that any and all operating systems are vulnerable, as the users are willfully installing what they don't know is a virus. It's just a matter of virus makers caring about the number of users in a given install base. The only protection these days are education and common sense, and if you don't have those, an updated virus protection program.

Growth of Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170576)

PC's are still far outselling Apple computers. Apple may have double digit growth numbers compared to the previous year but that does not directly relate to sales of other things like PC sales.

10 one year and 20 the next is 200% growth. 500 one year compared to 550 the next is only 10% growth but overall, there was 10 more Apple computers then the previous year and 50 more PCs. A grand total of 20 Apple machines and 550 total PCs.

Apple computer sales have been growing in double digits for the last 10 years (and some high double digits) and somehow still only accounts for about 10-15% of the overall market depending on who you ask.

Mark as troll or overrated all you want but you can just use single growth numbers in any useful manner. That would like taking the average of a bunch of averages. It doesn't represent anything logical in a mathematical sense.

Tempest in a teapot (4, Insightful)

doggo (34827) | about 2 years ago | (#36170636)

Pffft! Whatever.

At work I worry about our Dells running Windows. But not our Red Hat server.

But hey, we use AV on our machines.

At home I don't worry about my Mac.

Much ado about one malware kit. Overblown.

And the air positively reeks in here of anti-Mac schadenfreude. Sour grapes, I say. Xenophobia, I say. Dumbassedness, I say.

Viruses are a social disease (1)

harl (84412) | about 2 years ago | (#36170680)

Assuming they're similar to windows "viruses" Mac users will have to adjust their behavior.

Practice mindful computer use.
Don't download every little amusing flashing light.
Is this really something your friend would be sending you?

Install a JS blocker. Simply the best thing I've ever done to better my web browsing experience. The majority of JS on a page are the things on a page you hate. Many many pages work perfectly well without it and the rest work with white listing the main domain and maybe a resource domain.

What is ZERO to TEN? (4, Insightful)

Vitriol+Angst (458300) | about 2 years ago | (#36170704)

When they "explosion", do they mean more than a dozen?

Because if there weren't ANY Malware calls last month, and a dozen script kiddies used the new "Home Malware Kit" du jour,... then indeed, numerically we have an "explosion."

I'd also have to say there are an explosion of explosions as well. Because of course -- last month there were NO explosions, and this month there is ONE.

>> The problems for Apple don't end, however, since the iPad market caught up with back-orders, there has been an IMPLOSION of orders. In other words, less people are buying, than last month.

I think I'll implode and explode my lungs ten times, before I act on this urgent matter, however.

What Mac users need to do. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#36170738)

Eat crow. Does it taste good, fanboys?

Where can I get a copy? (1)

pseudorand (603231) | about 2 years ago | (#36170758)

From one of TFAs: AppleCare: Well, Iâ(TM)m sure youâ(TM)re aware of what Mac Defender pops up on your screen if you donâ(TM)t buy it. Last call i got before the weekend was a mother screaming at her kids to get out of the room because she didnâ(TM)t want them seeing the images.

Those stupid virus writers got it backwards. They're supposed to ask you for money *before* they show you the dirty pictures. That's the time-tested strategy for making a profit on the Internet.

Also, I don't have Mac. Are you /sure/ it's not available for PCs?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...