... Also, isn't Apple OS always the first to go down on those Pwn2Own contest? So in reality those hackers COULD have created a virus or something but just decided not to right? ...
They couldn't, otherwise you would have Mac viruses by now.
But apart from this rather obvious meta argument other reasons exist why a virus cannot be (easily) created for the Mac.
A virus has to be able to spread automatically (that's its definition) and that's not demonstrated in the Pwn2Own contest.
Whats demonstrated is that a specific Mac OS X system can be 'hacked' (broken into) if someone really tries for several months, but this only compromises one system. When you look at the Pwn2Own cases - as I did - its clear that such a breached system isn't even 'hacked' fully, because even if an administrator account is compromised Mac OS X needs elevated rights to be able to do harmful things like reading the keychain and installing software.
This means that a user must acknowledge all harmful actions with his user name and passwords via a pop-up.
But even if a user acknowledges everything its still not compromising other systems and in no way in an automatic way as is required for a virus (by definition) and is required for it to be effective, that is to have a high enough yield to be a compensation for the effort and the risk that's involved in creating a virus.
Mac OS X security feature list is somewhat less complete than that of Windows7 (with Lion its on par).
But the point is that having a full featured check list is one thing, but implementing it is another.
No one but MS (and I am not even sure of that) knows what the quality is of this code.
My impression is - as is articulated elsewhere in this thread - that W7 security is compromised several times in a way that should be prevented by the security features advertised by the check list.
Mac OS X source code (Darwin, Webkit) is in contrast to MS's source code open for inspection and can be judged on its quality. Its also corrected and inspected by Apple and the open source community and that's a big plus for Apple.
"Removing "MAC Defender" after inadvertently installing it is as simple as quitting the app..." Yeah, I don't think so. As someone who had to fix his wife's Mac, I promise you there is nothing "simple" about removing MAC Defender. Here's the website that helped me get rid of it. http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/viru...e-mac-defender
You sent me a link to apple.com? I just did a quick search on RECENT articles and I still think a lot of Apple fans are still bias. Please send me a recent link proving OS X uses the most recent security methods.
FYI I also use Windows and have never had a virus. I just like the Mac OS X experience better. But I always wonder about these people claiming you'll get a virus just by using Windows. Yeah maybe if you download illegal things or you're constantly searching for porn. Other then that I think as long as you don't use an admin account and you use some antivirus you're pretty safe.
As an example - a few years ago for my teenage son I set up a Dell Latitude lappy, WXP - current update, Norton AV, BlackIce firewall, Adaware and Spybot, and some additional trials of private 3rd party devs I know trying to build better more robust and less resource intensive malware fighting engines for Windows. Knowing what I know about XP and the utilities installed, AND his browsing habits, I suggested that he had about 30 days or so before the laptop was tanked. I gave him three discs I made for recovering - automated two-pass HD scrubber, automated BIOS updater, auto-installer for a fresh disc image of the OS, apps and utilities. I have a secured server that I use for homing my anti-attack and disc images, and running routine hack attacks against a new reconfig so everything is solid prior to releasing it back on the interwebs.
He tanked it in 28 days - brought it to me and said it wouldn't even boot anymore. I told him how to use the discs and had him run through the reconfig himself as a lessons-learned. I then told him that the discs removed IE and replaced it with a current copy of Firefox for Windows. He was relieved until I told him it would only buy him another 10 days or so, maybe 45 days total before it was tanked again. He didn't believe me. And I was wrong - it took 48 days. At which point he came back and begged for a Mac instead. Because non of our MacOSX machines have ever had virii, trojans or malware issues in the ten years they have been in use, except for one isolated Excel macro-virus problem that was quickly secured.
Moral of the story - XP (and its earlier iterations) was a security nightmare. Period. I can build a secure Windows machine on Vista or Win 7, adding in only a few extras to ensure a high degree of security for the average user. I don't have to even think about it on my current Macs, because its not just the Unix core, its not just the mach kernel - it is the intelligence that went into the build itself - that keeps getting better. Not perfect, not 100% proof against any attempt. And sure, the open source bits are in fact problematic. But the fact that MacOS was rewritten "in wartime" it was built to operate in a hostile environment. Not even the NT kernel reflects that. Longhorn might have. But it remains securely on the shelf at Redmond, to be peeled apart for future iterations of Win 7.
But I have to admit, the last virus on one of my Macs I had in 1987...
You need to point out, for the sake of the younger viewers, is that a Mac infected in 1987, was pre-OS X. OS X has been solid, but the viruses transmitted by floppy disc on the old Mac OS, pre-dated, and perhaps, were easier to create than the Windows viruses.
Comments
... Also, isn't Apple OS always the first to go down on those Pwn2Own contest? So in reality those hackers COULD have created a virus or something but just decided not to right? ...
They couldn't, otherwise you would have Mac viruses by now.
But apart from this rather obvious meta argument other reasons exist why a virus cannot be (easily) created for the Mac.
A virus has to be able to spread automatically (that's its definition) and that's not demonstrated in the Pwn2Own contest.
Whats demonstrated is that a specific Mac OS X system can be 'hacked' (broken into) if someone really tries for several months, but this only compromises one system. When you look at the Pwn2Own cases - as I did - its clear that such a breached system isn't even 'hacked' fully, because even if an administrator account is compromised Mac OS X needs elevated rights to be able to do harmful things like reading the keychain and installing software.
This means that a user must acknowledge all harmful actions with his user name and passwords via a pop-up.
But even if a user acknowledges everything its still not compromising other systems and in no way in an automatic way as is required for a virus (by definition) and is required for it to be effective, that is to have a high enough yield to be a compensation for the effort and the risk that's involved in creating a virus.
J.
Mac OS X is more secure by design.
Unfortunately Apple doesn't use a lot of the security built in by default
But I have to admit, the last virus on one of my Macs I had in 1987...
Charlie Miller (the man behind this piece)
begs to differ....he always has...
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/hac...pard,8704.html
Charlie Miller (the man behind this piece)
begs to differ....he always has...
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/hac...pard,8704.html
Mac OS X security feature list is somewhat less complete than that of Windows7 (with Lion its on par).
But the point is that having a full featured check list is one thing, but implementing it is another.
No one but MS (and I am not even sure of that) knows what the quality is of this code.
My impression is - as is articulated elsewhere in this thread - that W7 security is compromised several times in a way that should be prevented by the security features advertised by the check list.
Mac OS X source code (Darwin, Webkit) is in contrast to MS's source code open for inspection and can be judged on its quality. Its also corrected and inspected by Apple and the open source community and that's a big plus for Apple.
J.
You sent me a link to apple.com? I just did a quick search on RECENT articles and I still think a lot of Apple fans are still bias. Please send me a recent link proving OS X uses the most recent security methods.
FYI I also use Windows and have never had a virus. I just like the Mac OS X experience better. But I always wonder about these people claiming you'll get a virus just by using Windows. Yeah maybe if you download illegal things or you're constantly searching for porn. Other then that I think as long as you don't use an admin account and you use some antivirus you're pretty safe.
http://www.edibleapple.com/apple-ask...ine-os-x-lion/
http://www.dailytech.com/Apples+OS+X...ticle21097.htm
As an example - a few years ago for my teenage son I set up a Dell Latitude lappy, WXP - current update, Norton AV, BlackIce firewall, Adaware and Spybot, and some additional trials of private 3rd party devs I know trying to build better more robust and less resource intensive malware fighting engines for Windows. Knowing what I know about XP and the utilities installed, AND his browsing habits, I suggested that he had about 30 days or so before the laptop was tanked. I gave him three discs I made for recovering - automated two-pass HD scrubber, automated BIOS updater, auto-installer for a fresh disc image of the OS, apps and utilities. I have a secured server that I use for homing my anti-attack and disc images, and running routine hack attacks against a new reconfig so everything is solid prior to releasing it back on the interwebs.
He tanked it in 28 days - brought it to me and said it wouldn't even boot anymore. I told him how to use the discs and had him run through the reconfig himself as a lessons-learned. I then told him that the discs removed IE and replaced it with a current copy of Firefox for Windows. He was relieved until I told him it would only buy him another 10 days or so, maybe 45 days total before it was tanked again. He didn't believe me. And I was wrong - it took 48 days. At which point he came back and begged for a Mac instead. Because non of our MacOSX machines have ever had virii, trojans or malware issues in the ten years they have been in use, except for one isolated Excel macro-virus problem that was quickly secured.
Moral of the story - XP (and its earlier iterations) was a security nightmare. Period. I can build a secure Windows machine on Vista or Win 7, adding in only a few extras to ensure a high degree of security for the average user. I don't have to even think about it on my current Macs, because its not just the Unix core, its not just the mach kernel - it is the intelligence that went into the build itself - that keeps getting better. Not perfect, not 100% proof against any attempt. And sure, the open source bits are in fact problematic. But the fact that MacOS was rewritten "in wartime" it was built to operate in a hostile environment. Not even the NT kernel reflects that. Longhorn might have. But it remains securely on the shelf at Redmond, to be peeled apart for future iterations of Win 7.
But I have to admit, the last virus on one of my Macs I had in 1987...
You need to point out, for the sake of the younger viewers, is that a Mac infected in 1987, was pre-OS X. OS X has been solid, but the viruses transmitted by floppy disc on the old Mac OS, pre-dated, and perhaps, were easier to create than the Windows viruses.