Macs don't have viruses?

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

  1. Sorry for the string of posts, but I am tired and as soon as I click send I
    think of something I forgot to mention. I realize of course there is a risk
    that my virus scanner does not yet recognize the virus (I do update virus
    def's frequently).
    shawn modersohn, Sep 22, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. What platform were you using it on? I've used it on both Linux and Windows
    with no problems at all. But I use the browser only because I don't like
    the Mozilla mail or newsreader either.
    Indigo Moon Man, Sep 22, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. Martin C.E.

    newstome Guest

    If you go to, you'll see exactly that definition, except
    with one change: the "Plural" line you have above is missing. Fess
    up -- you added that yourself, didn't you?
    newstome, Sep 22, 2003
  4. Martin C.E.

    Guillermito Guest

    Haha, that is true, indeed.

    "When reality does not fit to what you believe it should be, change
    the reality"
    Guillermito, Sep 22, 2003
  5. Martin C.E.

    Peter Young Guest

    Yes. At least so long as you use the Auto-Preview window:

    Outlook Express is designed for ease-of-use with little-to-no eye towards
    security. The fact that it uses InternetExploder to preview HTML emails is a
    weakness that has been and will continue to be exploited. It's a decent
    email client from a useability standpoint, but secure it is not.
    Peter Young, Sep 22, 2003
  6. Martin C.E.

    Peter Young Guest

    Autoexecute of attachments feature? Since when?

    And you're accusing others of not knowing of what they speak?
    Peter Young, Sep 22, 2003
  7. Martin C.E.

    Peter Young Guest

    Autoexecute of attachments feature? Since when?

    And you're accusing others of not knowing of what they speak?
    Peter Young, Sep 22, 2003
  8. It is, it is slang for more than one computervirus. what's the latin word for computervirus?
    FromTheRafters, Sep 22, 2003
  9. Yes, much more difficult.
    If we are talking about "viruses", then the spreading vector would
    more likely be from "known and trusted" senders anyway. Even
    e-mail vector worms can and do come from known senders on
    Yes, much is due to their coding, and general lack of security concerns.
    Isn't there a stupid user somewhere in that scenario?
    FromTheRafters, Sep 22, 2003
  10. Martin C.E.

    Terry Austin Guest

    He's full of shit.

    Larry Flynt for Governor
    Bringing dignity back to the Governor's Mansion

    Terry Austin
    Terry Austin, Sep 22, 2003
  11. Martin C.E.

    Jim Watt Guest

    I have a Z80 based CP/M machine and there are no virus's for that
    as its obsolete junk too.
    Jim Watt, Sep 22, 2003
  12. ***
    What do you mean about the outlook response being "sure no problem"? I
    use Outlook Express and I am well aware of its common perception as being
    the worst in terms of security.

    Outlook and Outlook Express are different programs. I use OE also,
    but I do apply patches when I feel the need to. I haven't had any of
    the problems with autoexecuting that both O and OE have because
    I have applied most of the critical patches.


    Plenty of malware can be autoexecuted on your machine if you
    neglect to apply critical patches. The exploit that Blaster used
    could be used to run *anything* that the intruder wanted to run.
    It just so happened that the worm's creator wanted to run the
    worm executable via the exploit.
    Proper configuration, and patches again would be more important
    than AV in preventing another malware from using the exploit(s) that
    this worm uses. The AV would only intervene for *that* malware
    and be blind to any *new* ones.
    There is still a wide open window of opportunity for malware to
    get active on your machine if all you depend upon is AV to save
    your butt. I think that you should rethink your considerations
    with regard to patches.
    FromTheRafters, Sep 22, 2003
  13. There is no such thing as an MSBlast patch.

    There was a vulnerability brought to light, then exploit code written,
    then pretty quickly a patch was made available. The exploit code
    was used to introduce worm code to the processor (Blaster), but
    the patch was made (and named) before Blaster even existed, so
    it could hardly be a MSBlast patch.

    It is important to distinguish between vulnerabilty patches and
    AV definitions so that some users don't think that they are okay
    not to apply the patch because they have updated their AV to
    catch the worm.

    The vulnerability is more important to address than the worm is.
    As is the case with Blaster. Sometimes the worm creator doesn't
    even make trivial changes to the exploit code (such as label names
    or text strings in script exploit code).
    FromTheRafters, Sep 22, 2003
  14. Martin C.E.

    JR Guest

    OpenBSD came from FreeBSD when Theo got pissed off with the FreeBSD people.
    So the OS X could have came from either as their roots are the same.
    JR, Sep 22, 2003
  15. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    Y'know, it's weird, but *my* edition of Webster's International doesn't
    have this line. Must be defective, huh?

    Chris Mattern
    Chris Mattern, Sep 22, 2003
  16. Martin C.E.

    Martin C.E. Guest

    It's nearly impossible to infect a linux/unix system (which
    What you write might be suggesting that the Mac OS is in some way
    connected to Unix.

    Is this correct? is there a conection?
    Martin C.E., Sep 22, 2003
  17. Not only that, but you couldn't even get the format
    correct. Here's how Mirriam-Webster *actually*
    denotes irregular plurals...

    Main Entry: oc·to·pus
    Pronunciation: 'äk-t&-p&s, -"pus
    Function: noun
    Inflected Form(s): plural -pus·es or oc·to·pi /-"pI/

    Chris Mattern
    Chris Mattern, Sep 22, 2003
  18. Martin C.E.

    Robert Lee Guest

    Uh, yeah. OS X is based on Free BSD. The Mac is now a *NIX system.

    --Robert (where have you been?)
    Robert Lee, Sep 22, 2003
  19. I think he refers to the inline content feature being abused via
    the "Incorrect MIME type" vulnerability. Calling it an autoexecute
    of attachments feature is a bit of a troll I think.
    FromTheRafters, Sep 23, 2003
  20. Martin C.E.

    Moonlit Guest


    I think the roman used to call that

    abacus virus.

    When there abacus was infected again by some barbarian virus writer.

    Regars, Ron AF Greve.

    Moonlit, Sep 23, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.