infected macs ..

[Jeepers]

so ya macs cant get virus or malware .........

A virus infecting Macintosh computers is picking Google's pocket by hijacking advertising "clicks," tallying as much as $10,000 daily, according to Internet security firm Symantec.
A component of the widespread Flashback virus targets Google search queries made using Chrome, Safari, or Firefox browsers and directs people to pages dictated by the hackers, Symantec said Tuesday in a blog post.
Those clicking online ads can be re-routed to websites of different merchants or publishers, with hackers getting paid the eight cents or so that would have been paid to Google for the referral, analysis of the virus showed.
"Google never receives the intended ad click," Symantec researchers said.

[Nose Nuggets]

As an IT professional you always have to pick your words. The statement "Mac's can't get viruses" is completely wrong, and never true. However, "Not as many viruses effect macs" or "You are less likely to get a virus on a mac" are both true.

It's all about market share, and Mac's don't have it.

[Librarian]

Always helpful to provide complete info - http://phys.org/news/2012-05-hackers...mac-virus.html
including

Hackers tricked Mac users into downloading the virus by disguising it as an update to Adobe Flash video viewing software.

Disguising the malware as a usually trusted utility is very good 'social engineering' - and all operating systems are subject to user intervention.

(But the java problem for MacOS is all Apple.)

See also http://www.besttechinfo.com/apple-re...ombat-malware/

[DaveInOroValley]

As with anything else that starts to get more people using a product the Mac OS is not immune from anything but having used and worked on both platforms I'll take OSX over any flavor of Windoze just because it is and always will be the better of the two operating systems not counting Linux or other not so main stream flavors.

[ibanezfoo]

Sad thing is, once the ball starts rolling Apple is a number of years behind M$ as far as experience with dealing with this crap... Mac users, in my experience, seem to be more ignorant to these things too as they generally aren't as "computer savvy" as others have been "forced" to be (buying the latest cool gadget does not actually make one computer savvy, no matter what the hipsters think). We had a meeting about this today actually.

[ocabj]

Mac users, in my experience, seem to be more ignorant to these things too as they generally aren't as "computer savvy" as others have been "forced" to be (buying the latest cool gadget does not actually make one computer savvy, no matter what the hipsters think). We had a meeting about this today actually.

I definitely would not say Mac users are less "computer savvy" than other users. I believe that the percentage of stupid users is pretty much the same on all platforms.

[ibanezfoo]

I definitely would not say Mac users are less "computer savvy" than other users. I believe that the percentage of stupid users is pretty much the same on all platforms.

Yes, but windows users are used to getting malware and can generally tell when their computer is not behaving correctly. Doesn't mean they don't click on every attachment they get, but it means they are able to recognize something is wrong later. Mac users seem to actually believe the "theres no viruses on a Mac" and have no clue whats going on other than "Its a mac, it always just works". Thats what I meant by that.

[dem0critus]

I've always tried to make it a point to correct people who make the claim that macs are impervious to viruses. I can't even count how many times I've heard this and it's always been something that frustrates me. I use os x, win7 and linux, and all of them have their purposes. I'm actually glad something like this happened because now I might not have to hear so many people boasting about how os x "can't get viruses" lol

[ocabj]

I've always tried to make it a point to correct people who make the claim that macs are impervious to viruses. I can't even count how many times I've heard this and it's always been something that frustrates me. I use os x, win7 and linux, and all of them have their purposes. I'm actually glad something like this happened because now I might not have to hear so many people boasting about how os x "can't get viruses" lol

What frustrates me is how everyone uses 'virus' as an all encompassing term for malware. There is a difference between a virus, trojan, and worm.

As far as I know, there isn't any actual virus in the wild for OS X. There were a couple of OS X specific worms, but they were short lived and if I recall correctly, still required user intervention.

As far as viruses or worms for OS X, we're probably never going to see any. Trojans? Definitely. Simply because malware authors are too lazy to write self-propagating code. It's easier to rely on the stupidity of users opening email attachments or clicking on links in emails to go to trojan sites in order to initiate replication.

If and when a true worm hits OS X hosts, I'm sure it will target a specific service like sshd, samba/cups, etc, with some soft of unpatched bug that is remote exploitable.

[dem0critus]

What frustrates me is how everyone uses 'virus' as an all encompassing term for malware. There is a difference between a virus, trojan, and worm.

As far as I know, there isn't any actual virus in the wild for OS X. There were a couple of OS X specific worms, but they were short lived and if I recall correctly, still required user intervention.

As far as viruses or worms for OS X, we're probably never going to see any. Trojans? Definitely. Simply because malware authors are too lazy to write self-propagating code. It's easier to rely on the stupidity of users opening email attachments or clicking on links in emails to go to trojan sites in order to initiate replication.

If and when a true worm hits OS X hosts, I'm sure it will target a specific service like sshd, samba/cups, etc, with some soft of unpatched bug that is remote exploitable.

I use the word virus because people have an idea of what that means. If you think there aren't "viruses" or "worms" currently in existence that os x is vulnerable to, then sorry but you're just naive. Have you seen one? I don't know, but there is absolutely no fundamental aspect of OS X that makes it somehow invulnerable or impervious to this kind of thing..

And every single solitary attack out there targets specific services, so there's nothing profound about that whatsoever.. That's like saying if I see a person in my house, he likely came through a door or a window to get in.

Bottom line is this: Windows users are more prone to "infection" than os x users simply because it dominated the personal computing marketplace for so long that there's more malware out there, and it's a lot more documented. It has nothing to do with the OS itself.

[ocabj]

I use the word virus because people have an idea of what that means. If you think there aren't "viruses" or "worms" currently in existence that os x is vulnerable to, then sorry but you're just naive. Have you seen one? I don't know, but there is absolutely no fundamental aspect of OS X that makes it somehow invulnerable or impervious to this kind of thing..

I said that there isn't an OS X virus or worm in the wild at this moment in time. I didn't say that they didn't exist (which is why I cited knowledge of two OS X worms in the past).

No where did I indicate that I feel that OS X is "invulnerable or impervious" to malware. If I had that kind of tunnel vision, I wouldn't have been hired by my employer.

Bottom line is this: Windows users are more prone to "infection" than os x users simply because it dominated the personal computing marketplace for so long that there's more malware out there, and it's a lot more documented. It has nothing to do with the OS itself.

I don't know about Windows 7, but Windows XP pre SP3 definitely was fundamentally flawed. The fact that you could install Windows up to and including SP2 fresh, plug it into a network, and have it rooted inside five minutes by a worm was definitely an issue. I'm sure everyone in here who had any sort of involvement in Windows installs made a custom Windows XP ISO slipstreamed with service packs and all the various patches to cover all the RPC exploits for dissemination to all their users and support personnel.

At a institution with two class B networks and an huge network topology, even firewalling all the RPC ports at the border wasn't good enough to stop all the RPC worms at an infrastructure level back then.

[dem0critus]

I said that there isn't an OS X virus or worm in the wild at this moment in time. I didn't say that they didn't exist (which is why I cited knowledge of two OS X worms in the past).

No where did I indicate that I feel that OS X is "invulnerable or impervious" to malware. If I had that kind of tunnel vision, I wouldn't have been hired by my employer.

I wasn't pointing the finger at you. I was just venting my frustration on the same tunnel vision you're describing lol. Sorry, I guess it's a sensitive subject for me

[Rivers]

Great timing as I just spoke with three reps from one of the major malware security software developers. They make for both Win and Mac. I showed one of the guys this thread and he clarified some things.

When OS X first came out, since it is based on UNIX, it had a HUGE advantage over any version of XP. XP was both more common and inherently more vulnerable than OS X.

With Win 7, the gap has narrowed significantly but not entirely. There are far fewer weaknesses in the OS and there are a lot more Mac users. OS X has tightened up as well.

With both the upcoming Win 8 and OS 10.8, the operating systems are getting much tougher to hack. Unfortunately, if the user is sloppy or careless, even the best OS can be vulnerable. Learning and practicing good cybersecurity habits is the best way to avoid becoming a victim.

[dem0critus]

Great timing as I just spoke with three reps from one of the major malware security software developers. They make for both Win and Mac. I showed one of the guys this thread and he clarified some things.

When OS X first came out, since it is based on UNIX, it had a HUGE advantage over any version of XP. XP was both more common and inherently more vulnerable than OS X.

With Win 7, the gap has narrowed significantly but not entirely. There are far fewer weaknesses in the OS and there are a lot more Mac users. OS X has tightened up as well.

With both the upcoming Win 8 and OS 10.8, the operating systems are getting much tougher to hack. Unfortunately, if the user is sloppy or careless, even the best OS can be vulnerable. Learning and practicing good cybersecurity habits is the best way to avoid becoming a victim.

Ya, I've been curious about windows 8. I've seen bootlegs floating around but I'm just not really interested.

Afaik OS X mach kernel works in two pieces, one of which is basically unix as you mentioned. From the get go XP was poorly designed. I was told by a prof of mine in college that different parts of the XP OS were designed separately by different groups of people, which apparently was one of the reasons it came out so badly.

Also the fact that BSD is open source helps it a lot.

I totally agree. Safe web browsing habits and the like are what will protect you the most.

just ma 2 cents!

[yellowsulphur]

If and when a true worm hits OS X hosts, I'm sure it will target a specific service like sshd, samba/cups, etc, with some soft of unpatched bug that is remote exploitable.

Just curious, why would someone write malware for a print service? I can understand sshd,smb, or nfs. Since OS X is based off, I believe, BSD is there something like SELinux where you can lock everything with permissions?