Report from Russian security and anti-virus firm Dr. Web claims that over 550,000 Macs worldwide are infected with malware, using it as part of a bot net and potentially allowing individuals to gain acccess to the computer. Looks like Mac will have to finally give up their absurd claim that viruses and malware don't affect their devices.
From the BBC:
More than half a million Apple computers have been infected with the Flashback Trojan, according to a Russian anti-virus firm.
Its report claims that about 600,000 Macs have installed the malware - potentially allowing them to be hijacked and used as a "botnet". ... Dr Web said that once the Trojan was installed it sent a message to the intruder's control server with a unique ID to identify the infected machine.
"By introducing the code criminals are potentially able to control the machine," the firm's chief executive Boris Sharov told the BBC. ... Dr Web also notes that 274 of the infected computers it detected appeared to be located in Cupertino, California - home to Apple's headquarters. .... Java's developer, Oracle, issued a fix to the vulnerability on 14 February, but this did not work on Macintoshes as Apple manages Java updates to its computers.
Apple released its own "security update" on Wednesday - more than eight weeks later. It can be triggered by clicking on the software update icon in the computer's system preferences panel.
From the report by the Russian Anti-virus company:
Doctor Web exposes 550 000 strong Mac botnet April 4, 2012
Doctor Web—the Russian anti-virus vendor—conducted a research to determine the scale of spreading of Trojan BackDoor.Flashback that infects computers running Mac OS X. Now BackDoor.Flashback botnet encompasses more than 550 000 infected machines, most of which are located in the United States and Canada. This once again refutes claims by some experts that there are no cyber-threats to Mac OS X.
Systems get infected with BackDoor.Flashback.39 after a user is redirected to a bogus site from a compromised resource or via a traffic distribution system. JavaScript code is used to load a Java-applet containing an exploit. Doctor Web's virus analysts discovered a large number of web-sites containing the code. ... The exploit saves an executable file onto the hard drive of the infected Mac machine. The file is used to download malicious payload from a remote server and to launch it. Doctor Web found two versions of the Trojan horse: attackers started using a modified version of BackDoor.Flashback.39 around April 1. Similarly to the older versions, the launched malware first searches the hard drive for the following components:
The virus is actually a few months old, having been first discovered back in September. But apparently the individuals behind it have in the last few months started using fake websites and malicious website ads to exploit the Java plugin to install the malware. It's about time the software world woke up and realized what an unsecure mess Java is, it's been used to install viruses quite easily on PCs for years but now it's being exploited for use with Macs too, wonderful.
Since this hack can potentially allow outside individuals access to your personal data, mac users would be well advised to take action. Apple does have a patch that fixes the loophole, but you have to actually go install it. More critically, as the bolded section shows, Java actually released a fix weeks ago that stops websites from being able to install the code on your device. Apparently Apple knew about the vulnerability, had the update, but refused to push it out to users for another 8 weeks.
editorializing: But at least now anytime a mac users claims they can't get viruses, you can tell them they are completely full of nonsense. And Apple's delay in releasing the Java patch makes me wonder just how seriously they take security.
I am glad that finally this absolutely ridiculous claim by Apple that their computers don't get viruses has been publicly debunked. There have been other viruses but usually they get zero attention. I hate that so-called reason to get a Mac, and hate it when people rub it in my face.
But personal prejudices aside.
I wonder why Apple waited so long to release this patch? Were they hoping that the Java patch would fix it quietly or what?
On April 07 2012 04:39 CyDe wrote: I wonder why Apple waited so long to release this patch? Were they hoping that the Java patch would fix it quietly or what?
Well my understanding is Apple has to approve and push out all updates to Java for their devices. Oracle released the fix for Java in early February. But because Apple has control over all the updates for their devices, Mac users didn't get access to the Java fix for another 8 weeks while Apple sat on it.
Not the right approach to dealing with malware that could steal personal information. Even if it's risking breaking apps, you take the risk and release critical security updates like that ASAP.
It is always a cause of particular satisfaction, when a pretentious and arrogant ego-identity of people/some of my friends gets shoved up theirs. "we're so much better than you because of X" ~ well, suck it Circle-jerks aren't that fun once someone turns the lights on!
I wouldn't say that Java is an "unsecure mess". Yes, there are exploits, but as long as you either steer clear of suspicious websites, or have NoScript running when you do visit them, you are absolutely fine.
On April 07 2012 04:53 Millitron wrote: I wouldn't say that Java is an "unsecure mess". Yes, there are exploits, but as long as you either steer clear of suspicious websites, or have NoScript running when you do visit them, you are absolutely fine.
Wait, Mac does have a NoScript equivalent right?
They do, at least, I have it on my macbook.
I never thought that the claim that macs get no viruses held any water to begin with, and this just confirms that for me.
The only reason MAC didn't get hit by the virsus-storms yet, is that the majority didn't use MAC. A developer of a virus ultimately wants to create as much damage or trouble as possible, so why would you write a virus for MAC when you can try to hit Windows. -_-
On April 07 2012 04:53 Millitron wrote: I wouldn't say that Java is an "unsecure mess". Yes, there are exploits, but as long as you either steer clear of suspicious websites, or have NoScript running when you do visit them, you are absolutely fine.
Wait, Mac does have a NoScript equivalent right?
By default the Java plugin allows any website to automatically download files to your user directory and execute them, all without your knowledge. Yeah, that's a bit of a problem.
-edit:
On April 07 2012 04:56 Type|NarutO wrote: The only reason MAC didn't get hit by the virsus-storms yet, is that the majority didn't use MAC. A developer of a virus ultimately wants to create as much damage or trouble as possible, so why would you write a virus for MAC when you can try to hit Windows. -_-
Yes and no.
Mac is built on a unix platform that give it certain advantages in terms of security (can't fuck the entire OS install by changing one reg key for example). But Apple also really locks down what users can modify whicht also gives a bit of an advantage.
But, you are correct, as Mac continues to increase market share I think we will for sure
On April 07 2012 04:56 Type|NarutO wrote: The only reason MAC didn't get hit by the virsus-storms yet, is that the majority didn't use MAC. A developer of a virus ultimately wants to create as much damage or trouble as possible, so why would you write a virus for MAC when you can try to hit Windows. -_-
this. Thanks for the heads up OP. I'll make sure to be extra careful from now on
On April 07 2012 04:56 Type|NarutO wrote: The only reason MAC didn't get hit by the virsus-storms yet, is that the majority didn't use MAC. A developer of a virus ultimately wants to create as much damage or trouble as possible, so why would you write a virus for MAC when you can try to hit Windows. -_-
this. Thanks for the heads up OP. I'll make sure to be extra careful from now on
Make sure you run Mac's Software Updater to get the patch, otherwise it may not matter how careful you are.
On April 07 2012 04:53 Millitron wrote: I wouldn't say that Java is an "unsecure mess". Yes, there are exploits, but as long as you either steer clear of suspicious websites, or have NoScript running when you do visit them, you are absolutely fine.
Wait, Mac does have a NoScript equivalent right?
By default the Java plugin allows any website to automatically download files to your user directory and execute them, all without your knowledge. Yeah, that's a bit of a problem.
On April 07 2012 04:56 Type|NarutO wrote: The only reason MAC didn't get hit by the virsus-storms yet, is that the majority didn't use MAC. A developer of a virus ultimately wants to create as much damage or trouble as possible, so why would you write a virus for MAC when you can try to hit Windows. -_-
Yes and no.
Mac is built on a unix platform that give it certain advantages in terms of security (can't fuck the entire OS install by changing one reg key for example). But Apple also really locks down what users can modify whicht also gives a bit of an advantage.
But, you are correct, as Mac continues to increase market share I think we will for sure
But like I said, NoScript protects you from all that. I wouldn't want my computer to be impervious to everything without any effort for two reasons.
First, the more security features it has, the more often it will prevent something benign from running. I'm sure we've all had problems getting a multiplayer game to run across a firewall.
Second, if all your security worries are taken care of for you, you get really complacent. You let your guard down, and stop avoiding those malicious sites. Eventually, because you aren't protecting yourself, one of them will hit you, and hard.
And my family friends wanted me to get a Mac. Guess their want of attention has finally attracted the virus makers. @ LoLAdriankat,thanks for clarifying
Trojans technically aren't viruses. Viruses replicate themselves and spread to multiple computers, this looks to be a trojan horse. So no, Macs still don't get viruses, but that isn't to say they can't get viruses. After this, I think there will be many more to come.
On April 07 2012 05:13 LoLAdriankat wrote: Trojans technically aren't viruses. Viruses replicate themselves and spread to multiple computers, this looks to be a trojan horse. So no, Macs still don't get viruses, but that isn't to say they can't get viruses. After this, I think there will be many more to come.
That's really splitting hairs.
But I would also point out that if the Macs in question are part of a botnet, they are being used to send out spam and more malware, so in a sense it is like a virus.
Also the title of the thread clearly says malware and not virus. However I should point out if there's a backdoor on the computer that lets an intruder install all sorts of scripts, they could easily place a virus on the machine; so this is really a rediculous assertion.
On April 07 2012 05:09 Reaper9 wrote: And my family friends wanted me to get a Mac. Guess their want of attention has finally attracted the virus makers. @ LoLAdriankat,thanks for clarifying
i definitely find it funny how knee-jerk a lot of these responses are.
person 1: "woah mac got ONE trojan. obviously can't buy a system that can be easily compromised."
person 2: "windows gets trojans all the time."
person 1: "yeah but you just have to protect yourself and buy security software. no big deal."
Being a windows/android person I'm almost happy this happened. I'm not happy for the people - but for the attention this will create and clarify for people claiming Maxs are immune and virusfree
On April 07 2012 05:09 Reaper9 wrote: And my family friends wanted me to get a Mac. Guess their want of attention has finally attracted the virus makers. @ LoLAdriankat,thanks for clarifying
i definitely find it funny how knee-jerk a lot of these responses are.
person 1: "woah mac got ONE trojan. obviously can't buy a system that can be easily compromised."
person 2: "windows gets trojans all the time."
person 1: "yeah but you just have to protect yourself and buy security software. no big deal."
person 2: -.-
I think the real issue here is the 8 week Apple sat on this and did nothing. That's not the way a responsible company responds to security issues. Even Microsoft releases updates faster than that.
Also, Apple is constantly touting that one of the things that makes their OS better than Windows is the lack of viruses and malware and this disproves them big time. Also every PC user has had to at one point deal with the snobby hipster Mac user who love to rub the "security" of OSX in their faces.
On April 07 2012 05:09 Reaper9 wrote: And my family friends wanted me to get a Mac. Guess their want of attention has finally attracted the virus makers. @ LoLAdriankat,thanks for clarifying
i definitely find it funny how knee-jerk a lot of these responses are.
person 1: "woah mac got ONE trojan. obviously can't buy a system that can be easily compromised."
person 2: "windows gets trojans all the time."
person 1: "yeah but you just have to protect yourself and buy security software. no big deal."
person 2: -.-
It's not so knee jerk when they literally say my computer is a piece of junk. My cousins too. Fine, I get your hardware is superior to mine, but I weighed the cost and benefits of getting a Mac, and I still want to stick with windows. If they kept chanting it like a mantra in your ear every time the topic of computers was mentioned, I'm sure you'd get extremely annoyed too. One of their main arguements was "it can't get malware or viruses."
On April 07 2012 05:09 Reaper9 wrote: And my family friends wanted me to get a Mac. Guess their want of attention has finally attracted the virus makers. @ LoLAdriankat,thanks for clarifying
i definitely find it funny how knee-jerk a lot of these responses are.
person 1: "woah mac got ONE trojan. obviously can't buy a system that can be easily compromised."
person 2: "windows gets trojans all the time."
person 1: "yeah but you just have to protect yourself and buy security software. no big deal."
person 2: -.-
It's not so knee jerk when they literally say my computer is a piece of junk. My cousins too. Fine, I get your hardware is superior to mine, but I weighed the cost and benefits of getting a Mac, and I still want to stick with windows.
Dunno what you're talking about. PC hardware will always be superior to Mac hardware if you're just analyzing cost. It's the interface/brand name of Mac that's adding a significant premium (you get superior hardware for a PC because you aren't paying the premium and there's a lot more competition between part makers for PCs)
If they kept chanting it like a mantra in your ear every time the topic of computers was mentioned, I'm sure you'd get extremely annoyed too. One of their main arguements was "it can't get malware or viruses."
It's always been wrong. All you gotta do is dig up a few cases of it and just keep turning the tables on them every time they try to bring it up.
I already see this turning into a giant circle jerk ;_;.
I really can't beleive that they sat on that knowledge for eight weeks and just like yesterday released the software update... Time to go see if I have been infected.
On April 07 2012 05:09 Reaper9 wrote: And my family friends wanted me to get a Mac. Guess their want of attention has finally attracted the virus makers. @ LoLAdriankat,thanks for clarifying
i definitely find it funny how knee-jerk a lot of these responses are.
person 1: "woah mac got ONE trojan. obviously can't buy a system that can be easily compromised."
person 2: "windows gets trojans all the time."
person 1: "yeah but you just have to protect yourself and buy security software. no big deal."
person 2: -.-
It's not so knee jerk when they literally say my computer is a piece of junk. My cousins too. Fine, I get your hardware is superior to mine, but I weighed the cost and benefits of getting a Mac, and I still want to stick with windows.
Dunno what you're talking about. PC hardware will always be superior to Mac hardware if you're just analyzing cost. It's the interface/brand name of Mac that's adding a significant premium (you get superior hardware for a PC because you aren't paying the premium and there's a lot more competition between part makers for PCs)
Mac also does some weird things with hardware, I know someone in Tech Support a few days ago was asking about ECC memory in his macbook. ECC or error correcting memory is more expensive and is usually only reserved for usage on servers where a system crash could take down an entire website. Really kind of pointless to put it in a desktop, but that's the kind of stuff that Apple does.
But for the most part you are paying a huge premium for the same hardware. An interesting aside, did you know that it's technically illegal (against the EULA) to run an Apple OS on anything other than Apple hardware?
The only reason macs "never had viruses" was because PC has always bene so much more popular. Anyone taking time to craft a virus would have been wasting their time on a mac in like 2004 or before. But now, making viruses for a mac is actually worth your time. I can't believe anyone would think that macs were somehow superior because they had less viruses.
Your typical Mac user is the kind of person who, with a PC, would be calling you asking why their Internet Explorer runs so slow and why it has 50 toolbars installed taking up 3/4th the screen. These are the kind of people who actually swallow the stuff about 'Macs can't get viruses' or 'You need to BUY anti-virus software for PCs!', the kind of people who download "hotbarelylegal18.avi.exe" and double-click it and then wonder why their computer isn't working.
Hmm used that link to check if I have that virus and it says not. I've always had anti virus detection on my mac and I always make sure I give permission if my browser downloads/streams anything so maybe that also helps (I hope it does) too. Most people I know didn't knew there were anti-virus applications for the Mac (I didn't either until I searched for it).
On April 07 2012 05:57 Hinanawi wrote: Your typical Mac user is the kind of person who, with a PC, would be calling you asking why their Internet Explorer runs so slow and why it has 50 toolbars installed taking up 3/4th the screen. These are the kind of people who actually swallow the stuff about 'Macs can't get viruses' or 'You need to BUY anti-virus software for PCs!', the kind of people who download "hotbarelylegal18.avi.exe" and double-click it and then wonder why their computer isn't working.
I have 2 friends who use Mac's and I can personally testify to this fact. I like the hands-on approach of windows. Even though every OS is more dumbed down than the previous, it is still nothing like Mac. It's like owning an old VW, part of the fun is being able to do almost everything yourself.
On April 07 2012 05:57 Hinanawi wrote: Your typical Mac user is the kind of person who, with a PC, would be calling you asking why their Internet Explorer runs so slow and why it has 50 toolbars installed taking up 3/4th the screen. These are the kind of people who actually swallow the stuff about 'Macs can't get viruses' or 'You need to BUY anti-virus software for PCs!', the kind of people who download "hotbarelylegal18.avi.exe" and double-click it and then wonder why their computer isn't working.
Sums up soo well. The irony of how true it is the sad part. Lol none the less less reason for the know it all smug Mac users to get knocked of their little pedestals.
On April 07 2012 05:59 shannn wrote: Hmm used that link to check if I have that virus and it says not. I've always had anti virus detection on my mac and I always make sure I give permission if my browser downloads/streams anything so maybe that also helps (I hope it does) too. Most people I know didn't knew there were anti-virus applications for the Mac (I didn't either until I searched for it).
Just run the Software Updater and you should be protected, at least against this particular malware.
From my understanding, Java code is suppose to be independent of operating system. So wouldn't that mean any Java-based threat can also affect macs? Why hasn't there be something like this before?
On April 07 2012 05:59 shannn wrote: Hmm used that link to check if I have that virus and it says not. I've always had anti virus detection on my mac and I always make sure I give permission if my browser downloads/streams anything so maybe that also helps (I hope it does) too. Most people I know didn't knew there were anti-virus applications for the Mac (I didn't either until I searched for it).
Just run the Software Updater and you should be protected, at least against this particular malware.
Already up to date. :p But thanks for letting me know for sure.
On April 07 2012 05:52 CursOr wrote: The only reason macs "never had viruses" was because PC has always bene so much more popular. Anyone taking time to craft a virus would have been wasting their time on a mac in like 2004 or before. But now, making viruses for a mac is actually worth your time. I can't believe anyone would think that macs were somehow superior because they had less viruses.
That was always one popular theory.
But the truth is; a few years ago no one knew why Mac's had a lower incident rate of getting viruses than PCs.
Another theory was the MacOS was/is more secure (it is a unix derivative after all =p). You can guess which view Apple favored.
And yes, a lot of fanboys mistook causality with correlation on this one.
On April 07 2012 06:03 B1nary wrote: From my understanding, Java code is suppose to be independent of operating system. So wouldn't that mean any Java-based threat can also affect macs? Why hasn't there be something like this before?
Well Java code is, but the malware downloaded has to be tailored to a unix based operating system specifically or it won't work. So even though a Java exploit to infect a computer with malware might exist on both Windows and Mac, you need separate malware for each to be able to infect them successfully.
Was one of their big "selling points" years ago and arguments that many mac users have used for years. I never cared much for the mac vs. pc debates, they each have their pluses and minues. When your stock is 600+, I'm surprised malware attacks on macs didn't happen sooner.
On April 07 2012 05:52 CursOr wrote: The only reason macs "never had viruses" was because PC has always bene so much more popular. Anyone taking time to craft a virus would have been wasting their time on a mac in like 2004 or before. But now, making viruses for a mac is actually worth your time. I can't believe anyone would think that macs were somehow superior because they had less viruses.
That was always one popular theory.
But the truth is; a few years ago no one knew why Mac's had a lower incident rate of getting viruses than PCs.
Another theory was the MacOS was/is more secure (it is a unix derivative after all =p). You can guess which view Apple favored.
And yes, a lot of fanboys mistook causality with correlation on this one.
In the past MacOS was not userfriendly, you had to do alot of stuff your self. That resulted in a very small userbase with a decent understanding of how not to get infected since they were more tech savy(Same can be applied to unix distros). Since there were so few people, no one would care to design a virus for it(Why make it for a small portion of the market when you can hit the other 95%) Now you see alot of "dumb" people switch over who were amongst the usergroup who were the ones getting malware on their PCs switching over to Macs which have resulted in a much higher % of the market using macs. This is making it alot more attractive for people who design these malware to target it since it has alot more users and it is growing rapidly. Combined with the usergroup who are really fucking stupid with how they go abouts on the internet you will see a increase of malware in the future for mac
On April 07 2012 05:52 CursOr wrote: The only reason macs "never had viruses" was because PC has always bene so much more popular. Anyone taking time to craft a virus would have been wasting their time on a mac in like 2004 or before. But now, making viruses for a mac is actually worth your time. I can't believe anyone would think that macs were somehow superior because they had less viruses.
That was always one popular theory.
But the truth is; a few years ago no one knew why Mac's had a lower incident rate of getting viruses than PCs.
Another theory was the MacOS was/is more secure (it is a unix derivative after all =p). You can guess which view Apple favored.
And yes, a lot of fanboys mistook causality with correlation on this one.
In the past MacOS was not userfriendly, you had to do alot of stuff your self. That resulted in a very small userbase with a decent understanding of how not to get infected since they were more tech savy(Same can be applied to unix distros). Since there were so few people, no one would care to design a virus for it(Why make it for a small portion of the market when you can hit the other 95%) Now you see alot of "dumb" people switch over who were amongst the usergroup who were the ones getting malware on their PCs switching over to Macs which have resulted in a much higher % of the market using macs. This is making it alot more attractive for people who design these malware to target it since it has alot more users and it is growing rapidly. Combined with the usergroup who are really fucking stupid with how they go abouts on the internet you will see a increase of malware in the future for mac
So you just repeated the same argument the first guy did. You're still talking about an OS with a market share of less than 15%. It's growing for sure, but industry experts think the entire PC market is going to shrink as people start moving towards tablets (which the iPad *is* far and away the most used). So I guess if iPads start getting infected left and right then we can probably assume it was Mac's obscurity that protected it.
Previously the stereotype for Mac users were graphic/artistic types, back when Adobe and Apple were BFFs. I do use a Mac for programming though (it's nice to have a polished *nix machine), so if you told me it was a stereotype that didn't support demographics I might believe you. Except I also grew up in a world where plenty of educational institution used Macs b/c of Apple's great educational outreach (at least in the US). So again, hardly only the choice of tech savvy people.
On April 07 2012 04:39 CyDe wrote: I am glad that finally this absolutely ridiculous claim by Apple that their computers don't get viruses has been publicly debunked. There have been other viruses but usually they get zero attention. I hate that so-called reason to get a Mac, and hate it when people rub it in my face.
But personal prejudices aside.
I wonder why Apple waited so long to release this patch? Were they hoping that the Java patch would fix it quietly or what?
I agree this is great for debunking that silly myth that anyone who knows why it was so knows Apple is simply misinforming uneducated people, but don't people know the reason why Apple computers supposedly do not get viruses? The thing is you have to tailor viruses for a specific platform/operating system. Since Macintosh is such a tiny share of OS usage compared to Windows, why the heck is anyone going to make viruses for Apple systems? All that happened here is one group decided for whatever reasons to make viruses for Mac OS, and they were obviously extremely successful.
I was always waiting for this day it had to come eventually, but people will probably still continue to purchase Mac's just for the brand name.
Edit:
Also to be honest i always wondered why no hackers bothered to make a virus for Mac's i mean they are expensive as fuck compared to a PC so most people who buy them will probably be well off. I mean why not just rob rich people instead of little old poor me.
I'm glad to see that this is getting some attention, I mean Mac desktops are ridiculously overpriced so maybe this and other future more destructive mac-specific malware will help people realize their emotional/impulse-driven purchasing mistakes.
On April 07 2012 09:57 WniO wrote: how many pcs percentage wise get infected by malware vs macs? to me this seems like a really small amount.
Because there are more pcs, malware developers would rather target pcs. If you work on writing a virus, you want to get the most effect for your effort, so targeting pcs is more effective.
The whole "Macs are more secure" thing was never true. Just look at Safari's patch record for one. And while you're at it, look at the dates between those patches. You think 2 months is bad? Apple have gone years with lingering bugs. In fact, for the longest time they were actively hostile to people finding them, which in combination with their huge patch windows didn't help matters at all.
The reason this is happening now is of course partially because of the popularity of Macs, but also because this kind of activity has just picked up immensely across the board. Everyone's clamoring about cyberwar, but the much bigger problem for quite a while has been cybercrime. But governments don't really get tech yet and still think they can just legislate things secure, whereas the companies who should be helping us are way more interested in acquiring shiny big new budgets. So, while I must admit some glee about seeing this kind of thing hit the news so all those "I don't need AV I have a Mac people" need to reconsider things, it's really a big problem and not just limited to a specific OS.
Java's platform independentness is of course a catalyst here as well, but you can't just put it at it's feet. The whole plugin based browser extension thing has always been a problem. Just look at the security nightmare ActiveX made Internet Explorer and Outlook, or at the problems Adobe has been having keeping things sealed for years. And it's not limited to the browser either. Bugs in the handling of Office documents, video files, flaws in PDFs and Flash.. it's sad but the more userfriendly direct interaction with the web becomes, the harder it becomes to keep your system clean.
So yeah, you should probably not have Java on your box if you're not using it. But that goes for a LOT of other stuff too. And you need to update and periodically check up your system, regardless of your OS. Hygiene people, it's not just about the occassional shower. Though I guess taking your machine into the shower'd fix the problem too.
The real problem of course is, how many regular users are going to do that? So I guess that's probably the biggest plus of stories like this, misleading as they are really, they bring attention to the problem. But even then, we've got a pretty long road ahead.
On April 07 2012 09:57 WniO wrote: how many pcs percentage wise get infected by malware vs macs? to me this seems like a really small amount.
That's a good question, I don't know.
However I'm not sure that they can be compared apples to oranges (no pun intended). A very high percentage of the world's PCs infected with malware are actually using illegal versions of Windows, that for years Microsoft has refused to provide updates for causing them to be filled with security holes. Many of them are in Asian or Eastern Europe, and there are a lot of them out there. Microsoft has finally started to reverse their policy for providing updates to illegal Windows installs though, so I'd guess that the percentage of infected PCs is dropping.
550,000 is a hell of a lot of Macs given their smaller market share, and that's just from this one piece of Malware, There could be others that haven't gotten any attention yet.
Well that is not much. So why is this even news??? There are hunderd of millions of people who own a mac. So it is probably not even 0,00000000000000000000000000001%
On April 07 2012 10:15 Heouf wrote: Well that is not much. So why is this even news??? There are hunderd of millions of people who own a mac. So it is probably not even 0,00000000000000000000000000001%
So the article says most of the 550k infected machines are in the US or Canada, so in that sample pool of 310mil +35mil
If 100% of people in the US and canada used macs, that would be more like 1.5%, but in reality apple has somewhere around 5-10% of the market share, and over half of that population (which includes children and the elderly) either do not have private internet access or own a computer at all. that 550k could potentially represent 15-30% of all macs in use over the last few months. That's actually an incredibly high amount for a single peice of malware.
On April 07 2012 10:15 Heouf wrote: Well that is not much. So why is this even news??? There are hunderd of millions of people who own a mac. So it is probably not even 0,00000000000000000000000000001%
It's *1* piece of malware. It's not "only this many Macs have been hacked". The story is misleading.
On April 07 2012 04:39 CyDe wrote: I wonder why Apple waited so long to release this patch? Were they hoping that the Java patch would fix it quietly or what?
Not the right approach to dealing with malware that could steal personal information. Even if it's risking breaking apps, you take the risk and release critical security updates like that ASAP.
According to you. Apple has more then 500,000 customers to look after and if they pushed out a buggy security update that broke millions of peoples macs for 500,000.. that wouldn't make sense right?
On April 07 2012 10:15 Heouf wrote: Well that is not much. So why is this even news??? There are hunderd of millions of people who own a mac. So it is probably not even 0,00000000000000000000000000001%
Math fail. It's actually .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001%
On April 07 2012 09:36 DannyJ wrote: This just proves Mac is more successful than ever. People are bothering to put viruses on it. Good for Apple!
Yeah, it's not the $100 billion cash they have in the bank telling them they're successful, it's that a trojan has surfaced on their platform.
To be fair, most of that money is most likely from their mobile/iPods, and not from their MACs.
Most of it is yeah. But those are connected to the net as well these days. Those unattended iPhone jailbreaks and such? They use security vulnerabilities in the software to get those to work.
On April 07 2012 10:15 Heouf wrote: Well that is not much. So why is this even news??? There are hunderd of millions of people who own a mac. So it is probably not even 0,00000000000000000000000000001%
So the article says most of the 550k infected machines are in the US or Canada, so in that sample pool of 310mil +35mil
If 100% of people in the US and canada used macs, that would be more like 1.5%, but in reality apple has somewhere around 5-10% of the market share, and over half of that population (which includes children and the elderly) either do not have private internet access or own a computer at all. that 550k could potentially represent 15-30% of all macs in use over the last few months. That's actually an incredibly high amount for a single peice of malware.
Well the US Census bureau's statistics seem to focus more on individuals with access to PCs and the internet and not specifically numbers of computers. So it's hard to make any determinations. But apparently 230,387,000 people in the US report to have access to a computer somewhere (home, work school). Considering that most people have more than one computer, 300 million seems like a fair though very rough estimate. source: http://www.census.gov/hhes/computer/publications/2007.html
What we do know for certain is that 55% of these infections are from the US according to this security company. So that's 302,500 infected Macs in the US. Wikipedia puts the market share of OS X installed devices at 14%. If there are 300 million computers, that's 42 million OS X devices which is an infection rate of around one percent.
Of course I'm essentially making an educated guess here. And that's just from this one piece of malware, I'd be willing to bet that there are far more that haven't caught anyone's attention yet. And as I said before, I think the real issue here is how poorly Apple handled the situation.
On April 07 2012 04:39 CyDe wrote: I wonder why Apple waited so long to release this patch? Were they hoping that the Java patch would fix it quietly or what?
Not the right approach to dealing with malware that could steal personal information. Even if it's risking breaking apps, you take the risk and release critical security updates like that ASAP.
According to you. Apple has more then 500,000 customers to look after and if they pushed out a buggy security update that broke millions of peoples macs for 500,000.. that wouldn't make sense right?
Well no, but neither does waiting 8 weeks to push out a critical security update. Besides, I'm sure Oracle does thoroughly test their patches before they release them so it shouldn't take this long. Waiting eight weeks when you know there is a critical security flaw in the software and already have the fix for it, that's pretty irresponsible.
On April 07 2012 04:39 CyDe wrote: I wonder why Apple waited so long to release this patch? Were they hoping that the Java patch would fix it quietly or what?
Not the right approach to dealing with malware that could steal personal information. Even if it's risking breaking apps, you take the risk and release critical security updates like that ASAP.
According to you. Apple has more then 500,000 customers to look after and if they pushed out a buggy security update that broke millions of peoples macs for 500,000.. that wouldn't make sense right?
Well no, but neither does waiting 8 weeks to push out a critical security update. Besides, I'm sure Oracle does thoroughly test their patches before they release them so it shouldn't take this long. Waiting eight weeks when you know there is a critical security flaw in the software and already have the fix for it, that's pretty irresponsible.
That is true however without knowing apple's procedures I don't think you can call it irresponsible. In theory yes, they should push it out as soon as possible. However I'm sure they have very strict security update processes that must be followed in order to ensure all of the updates have been thoroughly tested on a range of mac's etc. For all we know 8 weeks could be apple's cycle time from last code commit to production release.
This all comes back to what customers expect from apple, quality. Should they improve this turn around time? absolutely but not if it means sacrificing good software engineering principles.
On April 07 2012 04:39 CyDe wrote: I wonder why Apple waited so long to release this patch? Were they hoping that the Java patch would fix it quietly or what?
Not the right approach to dealing with malware that could steal personal information. Even if it's risking breaking apps, you take the risk and release critical security updates like that ASAP.
According to you. Apple has more then 500,000 customers to look after and if they pushed out a buggy security update that broke millions of peoples macs for 500,000.. that wouldn't make sense right?
Well no, but neither does waiting 8 weeks to push out a critical security update. Besides, I'm sure Oracle does thoroughly test their patches before they release them so it shouldn't take this long. Waiting eight weeks when you know there is a critical security flaw in the software and already have the fix for it, that's pretty irresponsible.
That is true however without knowing apple's procedures I don't think you can call it irresponsible. In theory yes, they should push it out as soon as possible. However I'm sure they have very strict security update processes that must be followed in order to ensure all of the updates have been thoroughly tested on a range of mac's etc. For all we know 8 weeks could be apple's cycle time from last code commit to production release.
This all comes back to what customers expect from apple, quality. Should they improve this turn around time? absolutely but not if it means sacrificing good software engineering principles.
I bet they don't have strict procedures in place. At least that's what I assume based on what I know of their app vetting process. Someone I know who develops apps for a major company tells me quite often when they submit their apps for publishing the files aren't even opened--no one even looks at them. I can't tell you who this is or for what company because, get this, it's against Apples TOS to talk about the vetting process for apps. They've had a number of embarrassments over the years to with apps clearly violating their TOS or installing malware getting posted to the app store. So no, I don't have much confidence in them.
On April 07 2012 04:39 CyDe wrote: I wonder why Apple waited so long to release this patch? Were they hoping that the Java patch would fix it quietly or what?
Not the right approach to dealing with malware that could steal personal information. Even if it's risking breaking apps, you take the risk and release critical security updates like that ASAP.
According to you. Apple has more then 500,000 customers to look after and if they pushed out a buggy security update that broke millions of peoples macs for 500,000.. that wouldn't make sense right?
Well no, but neither does waiting 8 weeks to push out a critical security update. Besides, I'm sure Oracle does thoroughly test their patches before they release them so it shouldn't take this long. Waiting eight weeks when you know there is a critical security flaw in the software and already have the fix for it, that's pretty irresponsible.
That is true however without knowing apple's procedures I don't think you can call it irresponsible. In theory yes, they should push it out as soon as possible. However I'm sure they have very strict security update processes that must be followed in order to ensure all of the updates have been thoroughly tested on a range of mac's etc. For all we know 8 weeks could be apple's cycle time from last code commit to production release.
This all comes back to what customers expect from apple, quality. Should they improve this turn around time? absolutely but not if it means sacrificing good software engineering principles.
Well, Oracle does take their sweet time with patches as well (usually releasing big batches of em 2-3 times a year), but they do claim 3 billion Java installs. Pretty safe to assume they'll test a bit at least.
In Apple's defense, this response was actually kind of quick, usually they lag about 6 months behind Oracle, but this was an urgent issue. Because it's an urgent issue 8 weeks is still kind of too long though, the exploit for this has been out for.. something like a month I think.
I don't really understand why they need to roll their own besides being control freaky however, I don't think Java even comes bundled with their latest OS anymore.
On April 07 2012 05:09 Reaper9 wrote: And my family friends wanted me to get a Mac. Guess their want of attention has finally attracted the virus makers. @ LoLAdriankat,thanks for clarifying
i definitely find it funny how knee-jerk a lot of these responses are.
person 1: "woah mac got ONE trojan. obviously can't buy a system that can be easily compromised."
person 2: "windows gets trojans all the time."
person 1: "yeah but you just have to protect yourself and buy security software. no big deal."
person 2: -.-
It's not so knee jerk when they literally say my computer is a piece of junk. My cousins too. Fine, I get your hardware is superior to mine, but I weighed the cost and benefits of getting a Mac, and I still want to stick with windows. If they kept chanting it like a mantra in your ear every time the topic of computers was mentioned, I'm sure you'd get extremely annoyed too. One of their main arguements was "it can't get malware or viruses."
I'm confused, you could get a Mac that's better than a PC for equal money? Did you buy at the most expensive store ever, or am I missing something?
On April 07 2012 05:09 Reaper9 wrote: And my family friends wanted me to get a Mac. Guess their want of attention has finally attracted the virus makers. @ LoLAdriankat,thanks for clarifying
i definitely find it funny how knee-jerk a lot of these responses are.
person 1: "woah mac got ONE trojan. obviously can't buy a system that can be easily compromised."
person 2: "windows gets trojans all the time."
person 1: "yeah but you just have to protect yourself and buy security software. no big deal."
person 2: -.-
It's not so knee jerk when they literally say my computer is a piece of junk. My cousins too. Fine, I get your hardware is superior to mine, but I weighed the cost and benefits of getting a Mac, and I still want to stick with windows. If they kept chanting it like a mantra in your ear every time the topic of computers was mentioned, I'm sure you'd get extremely annoyed too. One of their main arguements was "it can't get malware or viruses."
I'm confused, you could get a Mac that's better than a PC for equal money? Did you buy at the most expensive store ever, or am I missing something?
He is probably talking about hardware quality, not hardware specs. Everyone knows Macs are a joke when it comes to price/performance, but the build quality on their Macbooks is something to at least bear in mind. The desktops however IMO are inferior to a custom-built PC desktop in literally every way.
Wow apple haters out in force. Apple does not claim that macs are immune from viruses. It just is way more likely to get one on a Windows computer. From what I remember of setting up my grandmas laptop a year or two ago they recommended free antivirus
On April 07 2012 05:09 Reaper9 wrote: And my family friends wanted me to get a Mac. Guess their want of attention has finally attracted the virus makers. @ LoLAdriankat,thanks for clarifying
i definitely find it funny how knee-jerk a lot of these responses are.
person 1: "woah mac got ONE trojan. obviously can't buy a system that can be easily compromised."
person 2: "windows gets trojans all the time."
person 1: "yeah but you just have to protect yourself and buy security software. no big deal."
person 2: -.-
It's not so knee jerk when they literally say my computer is a piece of junk. My cousins too. Fine, I get your hardware is superior to mine, but I weighed the cost and benefits of getting a Mac, and I still want to stick with windows. If they kept chanting it like a mantra in your ear every time the topic of computers was mentioned, I'm sure you'd get extremely annoyed too. One of their main arguements was "it can't get malware or viruses."
I'm confused, you could get a Mac that's better than a PC for equal money? Did you buy at the most expensive store ever, or am I missing something?
He is probably talking about hardware quality, not hardware specs. Everyone knows Macs are a joke when it comes to price/performance, but the build quality on their Macbooks is something to at least bear in mind. The desktops however IMO are inferior to a custom-built PC desktop in literally every way.
100% agree if your getting a tower build a windows yourself. For laptops there is something to be said for Apples build quality.
On April 07 2012 16:14 Hokay wrote: Pretty wack that people are happy us mac owners are getting malware. :[
I think the reason they are happy has more to do with them having more information at their disposal to discourage their friends considering purchasing a mac who are basing their purchase on rampant misinformation that apple's marketing department and many of apples more computer illiterate supporters seem so willing to spread.
Nice wake-up call to Mac owners. Just because virus authors target the majority of the population, doesn't mean you are immune.
This would be a non-story if I hadn't personally experienced so many MAC-users say to me that I was unduly exposing myself to so many exploitations by operating a PC. Well, wake up and smell the coffee. Hackers attempting to profit from security vulnerabilities affects all computer owners. I'm hoping this scare catalyzes others to timely update their systems and practice safe habits.
People are stupid. Back when macs first started advertising that they couldn't get "viruses" people found many ways to execute simple shellcode injections through many of their basic processes. The issue was that it was far more worth your time to make and deliver one for windows as its much easier to get a windows machine through simple propagation of your virus.
Anyways the key figure here is that I could make a mac "Virus" back in 2005 the fact that the general public is just catching on now is hilarious. I remember spending more time in my high school computer programming class making remote rootkits for macs than actually focusing on the lesson. I also read someone earlier posted that mac is more secure and you can't fuck it up by changing 1 registry code, that's a laughable joke because you can simply delete a key start up process and render the computer just as obsolete and require another os install, except you can't do that on a mac.
Mac is quite frankly a watered down unix, but without the openness to fix your own problems that comes with unix. At least with windows if you really are incompetent and fuck it up you can simply reinstall windows over your fucked up installation and be fine and if you are somewhat computer literate you can easily close and remove a trojan on your own, where Macs is in such control freak mode (who wouldn't be when all you did was rip unix off for your operating system) that they won't allow you to do that.
Anyways the dangers of this false sense of security is what is the problem anyways since if you use simple settings you won't have to worry about anything anyways. The main use for a "virus" nowadays is usually a keylogger to see if they can grab an account to a video game or something similar and these can usually check the registry for usernames if you can save them.
However anyone who is more than a script kiddie or an overly protective parent will use a remote admin trojan so that they can install botnet software which basically is a process that is named closely after a normal operating process or even injected into it perhaps that basically connects them to an IRC channel and waits for commands. Upon receiving a command it usually results in your computer and any other infected computer pinging an ip address over and over and over which will result in any legitimate in or outbound requests taking forever to process as well as putting a gigantic strain on the processor which can cause them to melt from overheating and possibly starting a fire. This is how crew like anonymous are able to take down websites through massive amounts of ping spams.
However that is still merely how a script kiddie operates, anyone who is smart will scout the website out first and look for a search function (or a similar function that is demanding of the processor of the server), then again use the botnet to send tons of requests to the server which will again cause an overload.
However if you want to go one step further you can check out the software the board is using (assuming its public software like vbulletin or phpbb or some CMS system) and scour the code for vulnerabilities and then use every bot to attack the vulnerabilites. To put this into perspective a vulnerability in the code of an application is the kind of stuff that makes your entire computer lockup, and can allow shellcode to be injected. A single computer can crash a server with a Denial of Service exploit, but imagine if you had 100 computers doing this simultaneously or what about 1,000 or 10,000 or 100,000?
The last sort of use for a compromised computer is obviously to do the dirty work for you. Instead of using your Ip or using a proxy (which makes shit take forever to load) why not just get this bot or zombie to do it for you, it leaves no traceable link. This is how credit card fraud is usually done, they get your infected PC to do all of their buying for them and get all of their stuff sent to a public place or an abandoned house and nobody can find out who did it or even have enough proof to convict them if they did.
I went of on a bit of a tangent but that's why I feel like mac is irresponsible when they advertise that they can't get viruses because that ultimately leads their users to become accomplices to crimes and potentially even become falsely accused of crimes. I just wish more people in the cyber security business knew what they were doing and didn't simply have a stupid title that meant the installer of useless firewalls and easily backdoored networking. For example someone hacked into NASA network in 2005 by going to each individual computer on their intranet and seeing if the admin on that computer had a password and some of the computers didn't then hopped over trusted networks and THIS IS A GOVERNMENT AGENCY.
Hmm. My family favored macs when I was growing up, so I've had a good amount of experience on both mac & PC. In any case, just in response to some posts here, I don't think us mac users think "no macs can gt viruses"...that's illogical. It's not like macs have special virus shields, with magic. It's just that less people used to own macs, so developers of viruses and that sort of shit had no incentive to waste their time prying into mac owners' stuff. Now there are a lot of mac users doing a lot more stuff on the web, so it makes sense that eventually some bigger viruses make their way into the mac realm.
The mac users telling people that mac doesn't get viruses are kind of cutting corners. Here is what Apple actually has on their site:
It doesn’t get PC viruses.
A Mac isn’t susceptible to the thousands of viruses plaguing Windows-based computers. That’s thanks to built-in defenses in Mac OS X that keep you safe, without any work on your part.
Of course it doesn't get PC viruses, as they are aimed at Windows computers =____= 'Built-in defenses' my ass, that's just because it's unix based.
It also gives users a false sense of security, which makes them in turn not actively take good security measures. And there isn't much they can do once they do get hit, I think.
On April 07 2012 16:14 Hokay wrote: Pretty wack that people are happy us mac owners are getting malware. :[
I think the reason they are happy has more to do with them having more information at their disposal to discourage their friends considering purchasing a mac who are basing their purchase on rampant misinformation that apple's marketing department and many of apples more computer illiterate supporters seem so willing to spread.
Rampant misinformation?
"Is a Mac safe from PC viruses? Yes. The OS X operating system isn’t susceptible to the thousands of viruses plaguing Windows-based computers. And although no computer connected to the Internet is completely immune to all viruses and spyware, OS X has built-in defenses designed with your safety in mind. The Mac web browser, Safari, alerts you whenever you’re downloading an application — even if it’s disguised as a picture or movie file. And Apple continually makes free security updates available for Mac owners. You can even have them download automatically."
This is exactly the quote from Apple.com. How is this misinformation? People's rampant hating on both Macs and Windows is absolutely stupid. I'm posting this from a Macbook Pro that's running a Window's partition. People should use whatever system is best for their needs.
On April 07 2012 20:21 Fryght wrote: The mac users telling people that mac doesn't get viruses are kind of cutting corners. Here is what Apple actually has on their site:
A Mac isn’t susceptible to the thousands of viruses plaguing Windows-based computers. That’s thanks to built-in defenses in Mac OS X that keep you safe, without any work on your part.
Of course it doesn't get PC viruses, as they are aimed at Windows computers =____= 'Built-in defenses' my ass, that's just because it's unix based.
It also gives users a false sense of security, which makes them in turn not actively take good security measures. And there isn't much they can do once they do get hit, I think.
Of course everyone should take the ordinary security measures, and this is one thing Apple should def promote more.
I have had a mac laptop for 4 years now because I was forced to buy one for university (literally that model from shop X... yeah lame).
-Can't put things on my external HD from it because of the format --- tells me it's a read only device (NTFS because I store large files on it; mac doesn't like that) -Optical drive is broken despite me having used it like 1 time total, and my mac mostly just sitting on a table never being touched 99% of the time. -It cost me about 3x what a PC would've cost for the same specs (and these days the price difference would be like 5x, it's a bad mac). -It does it's job decently as far as reading word files, pdf and ppt... that's about all I can say though. All the useful programs I use for windows (music players, etc) are either replaced by worse versions for mac or unexistant. It's sad when I have trouble playing music and videos (flv) on a freaking computer. -Can't use it for fun during trips because the only games that fucking work on it are SNES roms pretty much.
So yeah, to all those defending macs, there's really no reason. I HAVE both. It's just a popularity/hipster thing in my honest opinion; macs are worthless to anyone making real use of their computer beyond doing work in microsoft office; and that's a microsoft program.
So it started as a flash exploit, and then moved on to Java. Software prejustuce CONFIRMED!
It's sad when I have trouble playing music and videos (flv) on a freaking computer.
Try using VLC, it will literally play anything. Its very true that itunes sucks, so just dont use it.
'Built-in defenses' my ass, that's just because it's unix based.
Not true as it turns out. OSX has built in and auto-updating virus definitions via ClamAV (which is a great AV system).
Since this thread has turned into a mac vs windows ragefest (as ALL threads that have the word mac turn into), Im just going to throw in my 2 cents. Ive spent the last 8 months reaserching and writing rootkit software to attack windows (not because Im some haxxor, but because system architecture is fun to fuck with), and let me just say that attacking a fully patched windows machine is pretty damn easy. I could teach you how to get root access on any PC you come across in about an hour, but attacking a mac is a LOT more difficult.
-Can't put things on my external HD from it because of the format --- tells me it's a read only device (NTFS because I store large files on it; mac doesn't like that)
'Built-in defenses' my ass, that's just because it's unix based.
Not true as it turns out. OSX has built in and auto-updating virus definitions via ClamAV (which is a great AV system).
Since this thread has turned into a mac vs windows ragefest (as ALL threads that have the word mac turn into), Im just going to throw in my 2 cents. Ive spent the last 8 months reaserching and writing rootkit software to attack windows (not because Im some haxxor, but because system architecture is fun to fuck with), and let me just say that attacking a fully patched windows machine is pretty damn easy. I could teach you how to get root access on any PC you come across in about an hour, but attacking a mac is a LOT more difficult.
I feel like this statement is disingenuous, attacking a mac is "harder" only because of a lack of software that you can look for memory to inject shellcode into. The shellcode is out for any platform and is the actual attack, its just finding a way in. Also the statement is disingenuous because there are much more of the basic platform processes that are vulnerable to shellcode injections and Denial of Service attacks than on a windows machine.
-Can't put things on my external HD from it because of the format --- tells me it's a read only device (NTFS because I store large files on it; mac doesn't like that)
reformatting is a pain in the ass a lot of the times because for me personally, i have like 700gb stored on my drive and it just takes ages to move everything.
Is this a nasty backdoor trojan or a trojan you have to install yourself and type your own password to give permission to it? If its the former, its interesting but if its the later then who gives a shit. There are dumb people everywhere.
Lols aside, I never realized that a lot of Mac people thought they were actually IMMUNE to a virus? All it means is that whoever created it - would almost always go for Windows because there are way more people who use windows.
^ I got the impression that it was the latter because it said "about 600,000 Macs have installed the malware", implying that it's something that tricked the users into installing.
I know its bad and stuff, but i'm somewhat glad this happened, not just because of silly pc fanboyism but because I really dislike the greedy bussiness model of apple.
Kinda funny but I still don't think that it compares to the amount of PCs that are infected by malware. It would just be ignorant to think that any computer is immune to any sort of malware on their comp, even though most of those users who think that are probably no even going to see this article
On April 07 2012 05:09 Reaper9 wrote: And my family friends wanted me to get a Mac. Guess their want of attention has finally attracted the virus makers. @ LoLAdriankat,thanks for clarifying
i definitely find it funny how knee-jerk a lot of these responses are.
person 1: "woah mac got ONE trojan. obviously can't buy a system that can be easily compromised."
person 2: "windows gets trojans all the time."
person 1: "yeah but you just have to protect yourself and buy security software. no big deal."
person 2: -.-
person 3: shut up there is no home system that can't be easily compromised
On April 08 2012 10:52 Celestia wrote: I know its bad and stuff, but i'm somewhat glad this happened, not just because of silly pc fanboyism but because I really dislike the greedy bussiness model of apple.
Yup, Apple is right up there with McDonalds to me.
-Can't put things on my external HD from it because of the format --- tells me it's a read only device (NTFS because I store large files on it; mac doesn't like that)
reformatting is a pain in the ass a lot of the times because for me personally, i have like 700gb stored on my drive and it just takes ages to move everything.
Well, for me it was also a matter of file size. It came in FAT32 but I had big files I couldn't put on it so I put it in NTFS.
I'm not really aware of any other format (nor do I really care, I don't download anything on my mac; just an annoyance for people with both PC and mac).
On April 07 2012 05:09 Reaper9 wrote: And my family friends wanted me to get a Mac. Guess their want of attention has finally attracted the virus makers. @ LoLAdriankat,thanks for clarifying
i definitely find it funny how knee-jerk a lot of these responses are.
person 1: "woah mac got ONE trojan. obviously can't buy a system that can be easily compromised."
person 2: "windows gets trojans all the time."
person 1: "yeah but you just have to protect yourself and buy security software. no big deal."
person 2: -.-
person 3: shut up there is no home system that can't be easily compromised
On April 08 2012 10:52 Celestia wrote: I know its bad and stuff, but i'm somewhat glad this happened, not just because of silly pc fanboyism but because I really dislike the greedy bussiness model of apple.
Yup, Apple is right up there with McDonalds to me.
Thank you person 3, everyone seems to think that writing a trojan is sooooo difficult for a mac. Its not hard, neither is writing one for nix systems, just why would you do it, if you want zombies best bet is to make a windows trojan.
On April 08 2012 10:52 Celestia wrote: I know its bad and stuff, but i'm somewhat glad this happened, not just because of silly pc fanboyism but because I really dislike the greedy bussiness model of apple.
Yup, Apple is right up there with McDonalds to me.
Idk if this is serious or not, Apple is way worse than McDonald's.
When Steve Jobs died all the crap about how much of a "visionary" he was and how much he did for the technology world was such complete crap. Steve jobs did only two successful things in his life, 1. he realized people would pay a primium for pre-built PCs (a the time most came in do-it-yourself kits). And 2. he realized that with good marketing you could sell just about anything. Including grossly overpriced computers with an OS not so different from free counterparts like Ubuntu (the new unity shell is very much like mac).
Everything else he did was pretty much a failure. Most people don't realize he nearly bankrupted Apple in the 90s and the board of directors actually forced him out. He also started and subsequently bankrupted his own computer company after that. It wasn't until the milenium when Apple started advertising like crazy (something he may have learned from Microsoft...) that they were able to effect this modern hipster cool image that drove millions to go out and buy whatever crap Apple was selling them. Before that, as anyone old enough will remember, Apple was synonomous with those big chunky iMacs, lovingly dubbed "boat anchors" by some in IT.