Macs don't have viruses?

Discussion in 'Computer Security' started by Martin C.E., Sep 21, 2003.

  1. Martin C.E.

    Martin C.E. Guest

    A friend of mine is very proud of his Mac and makes the claim that
    Macs don't get viruses.

    Is this true? Or is he kidding me?
     
    Martin C.E., Sep 21, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. He's full of sh!t !

    There are infectors on MACs, just not as many target that platform.

    Dave

    "Martin C.E." <> wrote in message news:93FDA7FB6660B835A@130.133.1.4...
    | A friend of mine is very proud of his Mac and makes the claim that
    | Macs don't get viruses.
    |
    | Is this true? Or is he kidding me?
     
    David H. Lipman, Sep 21, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Martin C.E.

    J J Guest

    Ja,

    There are quite a few and more often than not more likely to cause larger
    scale damage - i mean, less virii which are more deadly as more can be
    achieved on Unix based platforms.... mind you, to date... if my MSc
    lecturers are correct, then Linux in general has only ever had 4 known
    viruses... might bee bull$hit
     
    J J, Sep 21, 2003
    #3
  4. Martin C.E.

    Dudhorse Guest

    "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in message
    news:aCjbb.6327$...
    > He's full of sh!t !
    >
    > There are infectors on MACs, just not as many target that platform.
    >
    > Dave
    >
    > ... some people call it security thru obscurity.
    >
     
    Dudhorse, Sep 21, 2003
    #4
  5. In article <aCjbb.6327$>, David H. Lipman
    <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in part:

    > There are infectors on MACs, just not as many target that platform.


    ....and we might see a substantial rise in Mac infections as Unix-based
    OSX gains popularity.

    Nigel

    >
    > Dave
    >
    > "Martin C.E." <> wrote in message
    > news:93FDA7FB6660B835A@130.133.1.4...
    > | A friend of mine is very proud of his Mac and makes the claim that
    > | Macs don't get viruses.
    > |
    > | Is this true? Or is he kidding me?
    >
    >


    --
    "It is criminal to steal a purse, daring to steal
    a fortune, a mark of greatness to steal a crown.
    The blame diminishes as the guilt increases."
    -- Schiller
     
    Nigel Blatheringstock, Sep 21, 2003
    #5
  6. Martin C.E.

    Moonlit Guest

    Hi,

    The more popular a system is the more virusses it will have (because then it
    becomes more interesting to write it in the first place). This is the reason
    MS based systems have the most virusses not because the technology is worse
    thann *nix like systems. A virus writer obviously wants to have maximum
    impact, therefore he writes his stuff for the most popular OS.

    Regards, Ron AF Greve.



    "Martin C.E." <> wrote in message
    news:93FDA7FB6660B835A@130.133.1.4...
    > A friend of mine is very proud of his Mac and makes the claim that
    > Macs don't get viruses.
    >
    > Is this true? Or is he kidding me?
     
    Moonlit, Sep 21, 2003
    #6
  7. Martin C.E.

    optikl Guest

    "Moonlit" <> wrote in message
    news:3f6de328$0$58698$4all.nl...
    > Hi,
    >
    > The more popular a system is the more virusses it will have (because then

    it
    > becomes more interesting to write it in the first place). This is the

    reason
    > MS based systems have the most virusses not because the technology is

    worse
    > thann *nix like systems. A virus writer obviously wants to have maximum
    > impact, therefore he writes his stuff for the most popular OS.
    >
    > Regards, Ron AF Greve.
    >
    >
    >
    > "Martin C.E." <> wrote in message
    > news:93FDA7FB6660B835A@130.133.1.4...
    > > A friend of mine is very proud of his Mac and makes the claim that
    > > Macs don't get viruses.
    > >
    > > Is this true? Or is he kidding me?

    >
    >

    There are some number of Mac specific viruses; I think the number is around
    40 to 50. Mac's can receive macro viruses which will infect Word, Excel and
    Power Point (assuming they have imbedded macros) files. By and large though,
    because the operating system isn't built on a house of cards (dll files),
    it's much less susceptible to malicious coding. Too, the Mac Operating
    System isn't licensed the way Windows is and that may be a factor, as well.
    If there were more software applications available for Mac's, I'd turn in
    these Windows boxes in a heart-beat.
     
    optikl, Sep 21, 2003
    #7
  8. In article <3f6de328$0$58698$4all.nl>,
    Moonlit <> wrote:
    :The more popular a system is the more virusses it will have (because then it
    :becomes more interesting to write it in the first place). This is the reason
    :MS based systems have the most virusses not because the technology is worse
    :thann *nix like systems. A virus writer obviously wants to have maximum
    :impact, therefore he writes his stuff for the most popular OS.

    That's a fallacy.

    To quote myself from another posting in another group a month ago:

    Microsoft until a year ago had a policy of emphasizing
    features over security. Read Gate's interview with a German
    computer magazine a few years ago: he outright said that people
    should not obtain MS software upgrades expecting bugs to be fixed,
    because "no-one buys security" so MS changes were aimed at new
    features and any bug fixes were incidental.

    Microsoft has now implimented a policy of security-first, but
    you don't reverse 15+ years of bad coding in just one year.
    Windows is *huge* (something like 55 million lines) and is not
    internally well compartimentalized. Retrofitting security seldom
    works: if it isn't designed in from the beginning, you're probably
    better to re-write the whole thing.

    Mac OS X, though, is based upon OpenBSD, the authors of which
    take pride in security, and whom have spent years specifically
    designing and testing for security. With all these exploits being
    exposed over the years, less than half a dozen of them have applied
    to OpenBSD. And the OpenBSD people keep actively thinking about how
    they could do better. It's hard to say, though, how well Apple is
    carrying those security concerns over into its customized version.
    --
    How does Usenet function without a fixed point?
     
    Walter Roberson, Sep 21, 2003
    #8
  9. Martin C.E.

    Guillermito Guest

    -cnrc.gc.ca (Walter Roberson) :

    >That's a fallacy. [...]
    >Mac OS X, though, is based upon OpenBSD [...]

    .... [and that's why there are fewer viruses, to make it short]

    This is not a good argument, for historical reasons.

    There was less viruses for Mac even when MacOS was not Unix-based,
    and, according to MrSandman, an excellent virus coder who coded a few
    bugs for Mac, DOS and Win32, it was actually much easier to code
    viruses for for Mac than for PCs. But most virus writers didn't care
    (or didn't have a Mac).

    So obviously the popularity of a computer system has an impact on the
    number of viruses written. If you want to make headlines (and that's
    the goal of some coders), you need a certain critical mass.

    --
    Guillermito
    http://www.guillermito2.net
     
    Guillermito, Sep 21, 2003
    #9
  10. Martin C.E.

    Tommy Guest

    Walter Roberson wrote:

    > Mac OS X, though, is based upon OpenBSD, the authors of which
    > take pride in security, and whom have spent years specifically
    > designing and testing for security. With all these exploits being
    > exposed over the years, less than half a dozen of them have applied
    > to OpenBSD. And the OpenBSD people keep actively thinking about how
    > they could do better. It's hard to say, though, how well Apple is
    > carrying those security concerns over into its customized version.


    www.openbsd.org
    Only one remote hole in the default install, in more than 7 years!


    I dropped windblows about two monthes ago and have been useing FreeBSD. I
    Couldn't be happier, It's super secure and very stable. Not to mention you
    have a whole world of free software..BSD also has a port system that has
    thousands of programs.

    Don't have to worry about viruses or Trojans, the good points go on and on..
     
    Tommy, Sep 21, 2003
    #10
  11. Martin C.E.

    Dudhorse Guest

    "Walter Roberson" <-cnrc.gc.ca> wrote in message
    news:bkksci$nbk$...
    > In article <3f6de328$0$58698$4all.nl>,
    > Moonlit <> wrote:
    > :The more popular a system is the more virusses it will have (because then

    it
    > :becomes more interesting to write it in the first place). This is the

    reason
    > :MS based systems have the most virusses not because the technology is

    worse
    > :thann *nix like systems. A virus writer obviously wants to have maximum
    > :impact, therefore he writes his stuff for the most popular OS.
    >
    > That's a fallacy.
    >
    > To quote myself from another posting in another group a month ago:
    >
    > Microsoft until a year ago had a policy of emphasizing
    > features over security. Read Gate's interview with a German
    > computer magazine a few years ago: he outright said that people
    > should not obtain MS software upgrades expecting bugs to be fixed,
    > because "no-one buys security" so MS changes were aimed at new
    > features and any bug fixes were incidental.
    >
    > Microsoft has now implimented a policy of security-first, but
    > you don't reverse 15+ years of bad coding in just one year.
    > Windows is *huge* (something like 55 million lines) and is not
    > internally well compartimentalized. Retrofitting security seldom
    > works: if it isn't designed in from the beginning, you're probably
    > better to re-write the whole thing.
    >
    > Mac OS X, though, is based upon OpenBSD, the authors of which
    > take pride in security, and whom have spent years specifically
    > designing and testing for security. With all these exploits being
    > exposed over the years, less than half a dozen of them have applied
    > to OpenBSD. And the OpenBSD people keep actively thinking about how
    > they could do better. It's hard to say, though, how well Apple is
    > carrying those security concerns over into its customized version.
    > --
    >

    .... have to agree with you - in order to kill off Netscape and any other
    browsers Micro$oft made Explorer part of the OS - so all a hacker has to do
    is crack Explorer and then they are in Windows and they own the system. They
    also bundled a "free" version of Internet Explorer(Outlook Express)with
    their OS which just about everyone uses(including me). Outlook Express is
    one big magnet for spyware, viruses/worms whatever. So we all are paying
    the price for Micro$oft wanting to kill off the competition. From what I
    have read OSX keeps every app. separate from the OS so they are more
    bulletproof(they make hackers work harder or they have to rely on the
    stupidity of the user). Suspect that vulnerability is the biggest reason
    why the next version of Windows(codenamed Longhorn) release date keeps
    getting pushed back; they are having to totally rewrite Windows and have
    Explorer separate and away from Windows. Also wonder if Linux wasn't around
    and taking business away from Micr$oft would they be all that concerned
    about security?
    Seriously thinking of downloading/installing Mozilla but I know nothing of
    its newsgroup abilities.
     
    Dudhorse, Sep 21, 2003
    #11
  12. Martin C.E.

    E. Guest

    Martin C.E. wrote:

    > A friend of mine is very proud of his Mac and makes the claim that
    > Macs don't get viruses.
    >
    > Is this true? Or is he kidding me?

    TRanslation: even virus writers don't support mac's anymore...
    E.
     
    E., Sep 21, 2003
    #12
  13. Martin C.E.

    kurt wismer Guest

    Martin C.E. wrote:

    > A friend of mine is very proud of his Mac and makes the claim that
    > Macs don't get viruses.
    >
    > Is this true? Or is he kidding me?


    its not true... but he's probably not kidding either... he's probably
    just ignorant of the fact that there are mac viruses...

    not surprising since the number of mac viruses is far, far less than
    the number of pc viruses, and the likelihood of getting one is much,
    much less (in part because there are fewer of them and because there
    are fewer mac computers from which mac viruses can spread)...

    --
    "hungry people don't stay hungry for long
    they get hope from fire and smoke as the weak grow strong
    hungry people don't stay hungry for long
    they get hope from fire and smoke as they reach for the dawn"
     
    kurt wismer, Sep 21, 2003
    #13
  14. Martin C.E.

    kurt wismer Guest

    Walter Roberson wrote:

    > In article <3f6de328$0$58698$4all.nl>,
    > Moonlit <> wrote:
    > :The more popular a system is the more virusses it will have (because then it
    > :becomes more interesting to write it in the first place). This is the reason
    > :MS based systems have the most virusses not because the technology is worse
    > :thann *nix like systems. A virus writer obviously wants to have maximum
    > :impact, therefore he writes his stuff for the most popular OS.
    >
    > That's a fallacy.


    no it's not...

    > To quote myself from another posting in another group a month ago:
    >
    > Microsoft until a year ago had a policy of emphasizing
    > features over security.


    while this is true it's also a non-sequitur... when one releases a
    virus, the hope is that it will have a big impact... the single most
    important consideration in maximizing the impact is to go after the
    largest userbase...

    --
    "hungry people don't stay hungry for long
    they get hope from fire and smoke as the weak grow strong
    hungry people don't stay hungry for long
    they get hope from fire and smoke as they reach for the dawn"
     
    kurt wismer, Sep 21, 2003
    #14
  15. "Moonlit" <> wrote in message news:3f6de328$0$58698$4all.nl...
    > Hi,
    >
    > The more popular a system is the more virusses it will have (because then it
    > becomes more interesting to write it in the first place). This is the reason
    > MS based systems have the most virusses not because the technology is worse
    > thann *nix like systems. A virus writer obviously wants to have maximum
    > impact, therefore he writes his stuff for the most popular OS.


    While this is true, there is also the fact that when an OS
    bundles so many utilities and applications with it, it creates
    a wider platform to attack. If we were all running a wide
    disparity of utilities and applications, even on Windows
    machines, we wouldn't be as likely to see phenomena
    such as this. Since almost *every* Windows machine has
    a honeypot of addresses available in .dbx files, worms
    have a good meal waiting for them in every Windows
    lunchbox.

    Linux distros may suffer the same fate if one becomes
    too much more popular than another, and they bundle
    too much application software.
     
    FromTheRafters, Sep 21, 2003
    #15
  16. "J J" <> wrote in message
    news:3f6dcd09$0$269$...
    | Ja,
    |
    | There are quite a few and more often than not more likely to cause larger
    | scale damage - i mean, less virii which are more deadly as more can be
    | achieved on Unix based platforms.... mind you, to date... if my MSc
    | lecturers are correct, then Linux in general has only ever had 4 known
    | viruses... might bee bull$hit
    |
    |
     
    David H. Lipman, Sep 21, 2003
    #16
  17. JJ:

    There is no such term as virii - the term is viruses - PERIOD !

    Please read the following URL which relates the subject far better than I could ...

    http://www.perl.com/language/misc/virus.html

    Dave


    "J J" <> wrote in message
    news:3f6dcd09$0$269$...
    | Ja,
    |
    | There are quite a few and more often than not more likely to cause larger
    | scale damage - i mean, less virii which are more deadly as more can be
    | achieved on Unix based platforms.... mind you, to date... if my MSc
    | lecturers are correct, then Linux in general has only ever had 4 known
    | viruses... might bee bull$hit
    |
    |
     
    David H. Lipman, Sep 21, 2003
    #17
  18. Martin C.E.

    mhagen Guest

    snip

    > Seriously thinking of downloading/installing Mozilla but I know nothing of
    > its newsgroup abilities.
    >
    >
    >

    Mozilla's news capabilities are excellant. Go for it! 1.5 rc 1 is the
    current flavour.
     
    mhagen, Sep 21, 2003
    #18
  19. David H. Lipman <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> spake thusly:
    >
    > There is no such term as virii - the term is viruses - PERIOD !
    >
    > Please read the following URL which relates the subject far better than I
    > could ...
    >
    > http://www.perl.com/language/misc/virus.html
    >


    Thanks for posting this. I too was under the mistaken impression that virii
    was a word.

    --
    Remove BLINDERS to email me.
    Audio Bible Online:
    http://www.audio-bible.com/
     
    Indigo Moon Man, Sep 21, 2003
    #19
  20. Martin C.E.

    KRF Guest

    On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 16:30:47 +0100, Martin C.E. wrote:

    > A friend of mine is very proud of his Mac and makes the claim that Macs
    > don't get viruses.
    >
    > Is this true? Or is he kidding me?


    False. He may be kidding you or he may just be ignorant.

    ANY, operating system, including mainframes, can be attacked by a virus if
    there is an infection point, and that is a negative that can't be proven
    until a successful attack occures.

    Both Mac and Linux machines have far fewer successful virii attacks,
    mainly because there are far fewer Mac's and Linux machines and writers go
    after the most numerous targets. That and the fact that both OSs are
    quite a bit more rationally written than the warmed-over-from-DOS days
    versions from Redmond. Unfortunately the swiss cheese attributes of
    Windows are not going to be fixed in the forseeable future just because of
    the huge size of the task. Bill Gates policy of quantity over quality has
    come home to roost.

    However, I would suggest that Linux and Mac users slow down on the
    hoorawing of the current WinSituation that has almost closed down Al
    Gore's invention. It is just a matter of time until someone finds a
    massive hole in one of their favorites and the horselaughs from the other
    side of the fence are going to be hughly enjoyed.

    KRF
     
    KRF, Sep 21, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jack B
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    525
    Ron Martell
    Oct 11, 2003
  2. JamesTaylor

    Broadband / Viruses have killed my machine?

    JamesTaylor, Feb 7, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    697
    Star@*.*.invalid
    Feb 8, 2005
  3. Au79
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    405
    Fuzzy Logic
    Oct 16, 2006
  4. Peter

    viruses for Macs

    Peter, May 3, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    410
    Alastair McAllister
    May 4, 2005
  5. fashion t shirts seller
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,577
    fashion t shirts seller
    Jun 13, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page