Slashdot Mirror
Apple Says Macs Are Safe, No Antivirus Needed
lobridge writes "Over the last two days multiple news feeds (and Slashdot) have been reporting that Apple has been quietly recommending antivirus software for their machines. It appears now that Apple has deleted an entry on their forums that suggested this and are saying that Mac computers are 'safe out of the box.'"
Safe out of the box... that is until a user starts clicking on things.
First, that article had been there for quite some time (but was just updated in the last week of November, when the IT press noticed it), and was just a generic recommendation for antivirus software on Mac OS X, and pointed at some third parties who provide such software. Second, the representative did NOT say "No Antivirus Needed"; on the contrary, the representative said antivirus software offers additional protection.
Antivirus software has always been recommended in our environment on all systems, including Mac OS X. But the very real fact is that -- for whatever reasons, many of which can be argued to no end -- Macs have far less problems with malware and serious security vulnerabilities that have a real impact on users.
As Macs are increasingly used in mixed environments, antivirus software is always prudent, as Mac antivirus software also recognizes and captures Windows viruses in addition to Mac, stopping inadvertent spread. For example, Symantec's full array of virus definitions for Windows and Mac OS are included in the definitions on both platforms.
Malware exists for Mac OS X (and Mac OS before), and always has in various forms. Nearly all of them -- even the recent highly publicized cases -- are trojans requiring deliberate user interaction, and have no mechanism for mass-propagation. The proliferation of hardware- and software-based firewalls and other changes have helped the situation on all platforms.
Porn video codec trojans requiring user interaction -- even as their prevalence increases as Mac marketshare grows -- do not rise to the level of vulnerabilities potentially allowing remote administrative control of all versions of Windows without any user interaction or knowledge, nor the massive worms of old costing untold manhours and untold billions in recovery and lost productivity.
Macs have very real security problems, and Macs have malware specifically targeted at the platform. But for a variety of reasons, Mac OS X is, in a very real sense, a more secure computing platform with respect to malware. This does not mean there are not legitimate concerns and gripes, does not mean Apple has made some poor decisions with respect to security, and does not excuse gloating fanboys.
But frankly, Mac users always should have been running some kind of antivirus software, even if only to prevent unknowing propagation of Windows malware, and institutions such as ours have recommended this as policy for years. But since Apple updated a knowledgebase article, and since the trend has been to give an inordinate level of coverage to any Mac security issue, however minor, I'm sure this will continue to be melodramatically blown out of proportion.
Macs have far less problems with "malware" and related issues than Windows. Not all of this is only due to marketshare. Some is due to changing strategies of malware writers, new attacks on browsers and other cross-platform applications, increased attention to network security, better user education, and number of other factors. But even as Mac marketshare grows and the platform is increasingly targeted, there still have not been any high-impact massive issues with malware and/or severe security vulnerabilities as there have been on Windows.
Apple has come a long way on security response from its attitudes even a couple of years ago, and still has a long way to go. But if a benign recommendation for AV software get blown up into a huge issue with media extrapolating that this must mean Apple is under heavy attack, and indeed, Apple may even be aware of an impending flood of malware, I'm not surprised Apple responded by simply pulling the article altogether. The perception in the marketplace is that Macs have a lot less problems with malware. That's completely accurate. Why would Apple want that correct perception tarnished by a bunch of sensationalism?
If you're on the internet, you're vulnerable. Period.
I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.
"Apple quietly makes up its mind"?
Seriously, though. There might not be much out there in the wild, but it would certainly nice to see all computer come with anti-virus software that checks for the virii of other platforms, to reduce overall infection rates.
The whole story about Apple encouraging anti-virus software was severely over-hyped anyway. There are malicious bits out there that will damage your system if you do something stupid, like install a Trojan or run an untrusted Office macro. OS X is still quite secure out-of-the-box and *this* is where it is most different to Microsoft's offerings.
I mean is there? Anti-virus programs work by looking for specific code. If that code doesn't exists yet what does it look for? Windows viruses?
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
I guess this is knee-jerk reaction to bad PR. Really, the way most viruses work today, Windows machines are the most susceptible. OS X (and other BSD based OS) and Linux are based on different design principles and mostly immune to viruses. Trojans are probably more likely for these systems. I think having a virus check now and then is beneficial in removing those Windows viruses that manage to get onto a Mac so they don't become repositories.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Not actual validation, but a good starting point for Apple's argument:
http://milw0rm.com/platforms/osX
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
The fact that they publish security updates proves them wrong.
Maybe there aren't many (or any) viruses, worms and whatnot targeting the platform today, but they will come, and when they arrive, it will be a good idea to have some protection installed beforehand. A relative few will still get infected before the AV industry can react, but the rest will be safe as soon as a definition update appears that detects the threat.
Even if there has not been great threats to Mac in the past regarding malicious programs and viruses, the increase in Mac users should still bring attention to the possibility of such attacks like AppleScript.THT. The attention brought by Apple on the subject of virus software the last few days may have just increased the possibility of one.
He was separating out the false believers from the flock.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
...or does it sound like Apple's tempting virus/malware writers to come up with something for Mac OS X? "This Just In: Massive Mac Malware Epidemic"
"Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
Could you have maybe said that shorter? Something like "Hey, they're only suggesting that you wrap your system before practicing unsafe hex. But we have a lower rate of hexually transmitted malware than Windows. We do advise that you contact your vendor immediately if you have a software install lasting longer than four hours as this could indicate a more serious technical condition."
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
Lately I've seen a few of these posts on various sites. I think it's the case of Apple being big enough and successful enough over the past few years that they fall into the same category as Google, Microsoft, etc.: no longer a cute underdog, no longer immune from attacks. There's always been some anti-Apple sentiment ("one button mouse!" etc.), but lately it seems more pointed and directed, more tactical.
-- http://ninthagenda.com/
The Mac is designed with built-in technologies that provide protection against malicious software and security threats right out of the box. However, since no system can be 100 percent immune from every threat, running antivirus software may offer additional protection.
Windows Vista is full of "protection", but I use antivirus on that as well. I love MacOS X, and I'm sure it's more secure, but there will be viruses and other malware on MacOS sooner or later.
By the way, isn't it ironic that Apple is still offering ClamXav for download on their own website?
when they arrive, it will be a good idea to have some protection installed beforehand
Antivirus software has to by its very nature integrate itself deeply into the OS and libraries and modify many many calls to insert checks for viruses. Even setting aside the fact that these programs are using unsupported and internal APIs, and the OS vendor does not get to update them as they update the APIs they depend on, they are additional code in a critical path AND they are designed to make normal operations by applications fail when they trigger a signature.
The result is that it is impossible for this kind of software to NOT reduce the performance and stability of your system. Installing AV software WILL cause a certain amount of failures and data loss among the people who use it. Until the risk of data loss from malicious worms and viruses (currently zero) increases to the point where it's greater than the risk from antivirus software (currently non-zero), you are better off without AV software.
This is not theoretical: antivirus companies have been pushing AV software for Palms and Windows CE handhelds since about 2000. In that time there have been zero examples of malware for these handhelds propagating in the wild, and a number of cases where false positives led to data loss.
The fact that they had it up there just says they want their users to be safer and just in case kind of security. i think a lot of people overreacted to the issue. yes they are more resilient to viruses and malware, but not immune. and the fact that they took it down shows that Apple likes their users to remain in the dark on the issues, no matter how unlikely.
Nothing to see here! Please move along!
So what Windows is safer left in the box!
This just in, the Special Olympics are cool and it's impressive to win...but being in it still makes you a....(think about it and this joke is highly relevant...and not in the bashing sorta way)
Seriously, anybody who suggests not using AV software is an idiot. Anybody who falsely claims somebody else is recommending people to not use AV software should be treated equally so. The article doesn't have anything about avoiding AV software, and it's only reasonable to assume that no press release from apple would make such a foolish recommendation, at least for the sake of liability.
You can find all the past worms and exploit code on any of the antivirus vendor's websites. Most of them are so old and have been patched for years.
And who's going to reimburse me for the 7 AV programs I just ordered?
That's what I've been using with various versions of Windows the last 12 years and I've never had any problems.
Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
Good point, after reading your post I ran Software Update on my Tiger machine at work and found a 72.5 MB security update waiting to be downloaded and installed.
And most of the updates seem to be the kind of stuff that gets patched on Windows machines.
I guess Apples and PCs have many of the same security issues, the difference is that fewer people care to exploit them on Macs and also that it's easier to take advantage of click-happy users on a Windows computer to pull off an exploit. "Durr... naked pictures of Britney? CLICKCLICKCLICKCLICKpwned."
The more they say how secure OSX is, the more people might flock to it. In turn, that will increase the potential market of users on the system and will likely increase the number of hackers roaming through OSX's code for vulnerabilities. I don't believe OSX is THAT more secure (sure, UNIX is more secure than Windows, but not by the huge margin some are trying to push) and I'm sure a dedicated, interested person would find some exploits to use which would cause a huge panic among the OSX hordes.
But for the time being, OSX is pretty safe. It's all dependent on how far they grow! The larger they are, the bigger target they get...
The anti-virus recommendation was over a year old
http://gizmodo.com/5100996/false-alarm-apple-mac-os-x-anti+virus-recommendation-is-old
MAC: Can't even get negative attention.
Picture
Eschew Obfuscation
Even if they were safe before, they won't be for long. That's just asking for it!
I have an all-in-one solution for you, it may be 4 times more expensive than the 7 you just purchased, but if you purchase this solution, we'll gladly reimburse you for your troubles, and you will just have one program to manage.
//Nothing to see here, please move along.
With the 'huge' gains in Mac market share in the last view years anti-virus companies are looking to a new market to grow their brands into. What better way than for some blogger and Mac noob like Brian Krebs -owner of his first Mac for three weeks- to slip them a bone by getting the other Mac noobs and recent Windows converts into a lather over some less than spectacular information. Granted, most Unixes and Unix-like OSes have a great deal more security 'out-of-the-box' than the other 'leading brand', to run anti-virus software is just being a good citizen, especially on a corporate network. Anyway, at least the wags over at ElReg apologized and they included a cute little bit of parody in their apology, Mr. Krebs and the other wonks haven't.
I've got your sig, right here.
"We definitely recovered the remains of a flying disk near Roswell, New Mexico."
"It was not a flying disk that was recovered at Roswell. It was in fact a US Air Force weather balloon."
C'mon apple, get real!
Everyone needs anti-virus software these days!
Apple, Linux, *BSD and Unix included.
I don't care what apple or anyone else says, you need all the protection you can get.
I have been using anti-virus software on *nix systems for years and will continue to do so.
Semper Fi!
The strength of Mac against viruses lays solely in the use of very stable FOSS solutions for the basics (very close to stable Debian versions) and then building on top of that (Aqua, CoreAudio, CoreImage etc. don't have any links to sockets). Really, what services CAN lay bare on a Mac to the internet: SSH (OpenSSH), E-mail (Postfix), Webserver (Apache). On the program side, you have Safari (Webkit) or Mozilla with Flash (Adobe) or Java (Sun) and those don't come above user level without requiring extreme interaction from the user (passwords). There is no such thing as ~/Library/StartupItems or ~/Library/LaunchDaemons and you need to become root to put stuff in /Library.
Of course as soon as a vulnerability is reported the community fixes it which trickles down to other vendors like Apple, RedHat etc. and many of those vulnerabilities for Apache or Postfix are hardly exploitable or only for rare setups (usually buffer overflows which could lead to an exploit if somebody was savvy enough to analyze all of them and see where they have space enough to load their own stuff and then call it too).
To have a successful attack on a Mac would also mean that you can successfully attack Linux or other Unixes or it would require a serious bug in certain programs (like Safari or Mail) which also allows to unnoticeable have a huge payload to replace things like Safari with a 'hacked' version or implement a plugin that does something weird.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
i got this virus on my vista machine. It runs at boot. It's constantly trying to install other software like mobile me and safari. It constantly tries to reboot my machine at the worst times. And worst of all half of my music files won't play on any other machine since i got this virus.
It seems likely that osx is also susceptable to the itunes virus
Don't you guys get it? Mac OSX IS the virus!
an attempt by Apple to say something that Apple politically couldn't say: Mac antivirus software primarily protects against Windows viruses.
Are you serious?
Apple has spent the last several years directly bashing Microsoft and especially Windows through something close at times to saturation advertising. There's been a complete and total lack of subtlety. This being the case, I can't see Apple being too worried about political correctness and not trodding on the toes of MS. ;)
I've been meaning to ask, this is as good a time and place as any - where did you get this quote for your sig?
All difficult things have their origin in that which is easy, and great things in that which is small. ~ Lao Tzu
I have studied The Old Man for 35 years and have no idea where he said this. It's not in the Tao Te Ching. Neither are these quotes:
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength; loving someone deeply gives you courage." http://www.whatquote.com/quotes/Lao-Tzu/1399-Being-deeply-loved-b.htm
"Ambition has one heel nailed in well, though she stretch her fingers to touch the heavens." http://www.whatquote.com/quotes/Lao-Tzu/24946-Ambition-has-one-hee.htm
It would be ludicrous to attribute either of the above to Lao Tse.
Your quote is more akin to this passage from the Hagakure:
Among the maxims on Lord Naoshige's wall there was this one: ''Matters of great concern should be treated lightly.''
Master lttei commented, "Matters of small concern should be treated seriously."
http://www.rosenoire.org/archives/Hagakure.pdf
In fact, I dispute virtually all of these quotes attributed to The Old Man - http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/l/lao_tzu.html - cleverly, there are a few of his actual quotes there - not very many.
In keeping with the spirit of the Hagakure - GirlInTraining wrote that if you have to scroll a comment, chances are good it's a religious/fanboy posting. To which EarlyMon commented that if you believe ahead of time that long comments are religious/fanboy ones, you will scroll them.
Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
Does ANYONE RTFA?
Oh, I forgot! This is Slashdot.
Apple pulled the tech note because it was OUTDATED, not because they wanted to "censor" it.
The "real" question is "Why was this a 'story' in the first place?" I believe it was 'planted' by Microsoft, to attempt to derail serious holiday Mac purchasing, by sowing the seeds of FUD.
Show me even ONE true worm-type virus for OS X, and I will entertain the idea that there is something "there".
Until then, it's just disingenuous FUD. (Which I think is the only kind of FUD available)...
Reply to That ||
Any PC, Mac or otherwise, is 'safe out of the box'. It's not until you plug them in to the internet that you start to have problems. Looks like Apple is going to have to learn the hard way.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
There are malicious bits out there that will damage your system if you do something stupid, like install a Trojan or run an untrusted Office macro.
Saying they require the user to do something stupid doesn't mean much because users do stupid things all the time. If you've ever tried to clean up someone's malware-laden Windows PC, you can usually track it down to something they did. Systems that were actually remotely exploited with no user interaction are rare in my experience.
Microsoft can't or won't fix the security holes.
Really? What are all those security updates on windows update then?
I've never understood the reason for anti-virus software in general.
Most security vulnerabilities are publicly disclosed before the vendor is notified. Virus writers can exploit a hole much quicker than a vendor can create, test and distribute a reliable fix. Once you have a virus, getting the patch for the vunerability doesn't magically disable it.
Next time you think operating system XYZ is so secure that nothing unwanted can get in, go to defcon, turn on your laptop and it's wifi and connect to the local access point. I give you 10 minutes before someone is downloading all your porn.
People who think anything is immune on a network are laughable.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
I don't need AV either...I got me this new Vista box...Microsoft says it's the most secure yet!
You can make it even shorter than that:
"Can you show me an infected OS X machine?"
The answer of course is always "no".
hmmm anyone else remember that it was the out of the box mac book air that was hacked within 10mins at cansec??? lol@ apple...
Let's see - web browser set to open 'safe' things by default, firewall turned off. Two nice attack vectors open right there. What else? Oh yeah, a lot of users just run the one account, which by default is an admin account (not root granted, but one password away from full access anyway - installer asking for password?).
The funny thing is, proof of concept code for attack does exist (especially for browse-by Safari holes), but no one has yet built and distributed the end-to-end product, ready for mass market. That is the next step.
Well put sir.
It seems that many people STILL do not understand that a computer "virus" (or trojan or worm) is NOT the same as a biological virus.
It is a computer program SPECIFICALLY designed to exploit a weakness in another computer program.
Simply by NOT running certain computer programs (example, anything related to ActiveX) you "immunize" yourself from any and ALL "viruses" that are designed to exploit that.
So, going forward, it doesn't matter how many people are using your system. Without those specific programs, the viruses cannot infect your system.
They do not "mutate" or "evolve" to attack other programs. The person writing the "virus" has to find a weakness in a different program and re-write the "virus" to attack that weakness.
Let me get this straight... I'm supposed to believe OS X is invulnerable to viruses.. because apple says so... while at the same time understanding that even though the iPhone 3G was advertised being twice as fast, that I'm a fool to believe that statement to be true?
Im pretty certain there are going to people a lot of people saying "its go time!" and start to coding after this statement from apple. at least i would hope so. I can not stand people that boast how invincible their macs are. I like the OS, hate most of the users.
It may or may not be true that the various network daemons installed on most Mac OS X installs are 'secure' (I'll go with the premise for the time, but, really, who knows what currently undiscovered vulnerabilities therein lie? Yes, that applies for the same daemons installed on any Unix), but really, what protects Macs from the same kind of user 'tricking' that are commonly used against windows users.
Things like:
* A website of, err, questionable repute, which tells you that you need to download and run an installer for a new 'video player' to see videos on the website, but which is really the installer for a rootkit or botnet zombie.
* An email claiming to have an attachment or a link to a file which purports to be some business related file, or a video or photo the receiver might find funny, or a holiday greeting card, etc, but is really the installer for a rootkit or botnet zombie.
Don't say that Mac users are just too smart to fall for that kind of thing - I'm sure some of them are, but I'm equally sure some of them aren't.
I think the main thing which protects Mac and Linux users from such things is mainly that, right now, the installed base for both O/Ses is just too small for anyone to care about attacking. But, the Mac community is rather larger, and growing somewhat quickly, so they could be soon a large enough user base to be 'worth' trying to exploit.
Way to throw down the gauntlet Apple. All you geek squad guys polish up on your Mac knowledge. You'll be repairing a lot more Macs in the near future.
For some reason I refuse to use either spell check or the spacebar properly.
Well, they did under the old cooperative multitasking "old world" Macintosh System Software.
I'm suprised that no one mentioned that we Mac users had a virus known as Oompa-Loompa starting on Valentine's Day, 2006.
I found this stuff on About.com! C'mon, people! Firefox even has a Google Quicksearch built right in! Ctrl-L "google mac viruses" enter. No mouse even required.
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
Assuming the summary is accurate and Apple really is taking a high-and-mighty attitude like this, someone REALLY needs to get a Mac virus out there just to prove to Apple how wrong they are about how safe Macs are.
After reading some of the comments, I realize that this assumption is flawed, but I would love to see a news story one day on how a malicious program destroyed a significant portion of an OS's userbase.
That advantage is very simple. People with pirated copies of Windows cannot get security updates, due to DRM. People with pirated copies of OS X get all the updates, no questions asked. Viruses do not discriminate and are more likely to fluorish (and therefore threaten *your* machine) in an environment with a certain number of unprotected machines. All of the pirate copies of Windows out there become that vector, by Microsoft's design. Therefore, the installed Mac OS X userbase is at a massive architectural advantage for security compared to the Windows userbase, simply because Microsoft places the almighty dollar above all other considerations.
Actually, people have been saying "One day, OS-X will have enough users that malware authors will target it the way they target Windows". That hasn't happened yet
are you sure?
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
ifconfig: 127.0.0.1 lo
Just not that well. Or fast. Not that Apple would ever lie or mislead the user about their products, oh no...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaN1Nz1Dyls
This might be what started all of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWi9xAAxOWE
:D
When you're dead, you don't know you're dead. It only affects the people around you. Same thing when you're stupid.
I guess you have a valid point there. I wouldn't call it an 'architectural' advantage, but that's just semantics.
I have a hard time sympathizing with anyone pirating windows and then getting pwned by a virus of course, but it doesn't negate your point.
You know this to be true.
Viruses generally exploit users at some point, right? They may be wicked sick once there in there - but some numb-nuts had to open the "I Love You" attachment to get started.
This is why both Linux and OSX viruses are lower than both what their market share AND security models alone can explain.
OSX users are generally either newbies (Grandma) who don't know *how* to do anything that would compromise their systems, or techies who know better. When a newbie sees a prompt to enter the admin password, they ignore it, call someone for help, or turn off the computer and hope it doesn't happen again (I'm not making this up). A techie realizes that shouldn't happen when they visit a webpage, and leave.
So... yes, when OSX market share increases to the point where there are enough "a little knowledge is dangerous" people on them, it'll finally break it's virus cherry. Until then, it'll have to get by with the
"To complete the installation of this software, your computer must be restarted, and then submerged in orange juice" approach.
...the worst most destructive virus to ever be created, and 1st to hit Mac's all on the internet...in 3, 2....1
Use a Mac or Linux on a PC and you are safe 99.9999 % of the time. I have been using a distro of Linux for 4 years now, and have never gotten a virus while using Linux.
Windows Users Insert FANBOY comments and insults here______________________________________________.
My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my Father! Prepare to die!
. . .a challenge!
"If your parents never had children, chances are you wonât either." -Dick Cavett
mac? gotta love BSD...
PWN2OWN! Mac OS X 'lost', get over it. It has already been compromised. Install software that 97-98% of REAL PEOPLE use and there's a vunerability somewhere. Stop blaming the OS(it's only doing what it was made to do). If you have a firewall and 'magically' get infected... well it was really YOUR OWN DAMN FAULT! If you don't have a firewall... STFU, you're stupid... oh yea -get one. Then re-evaluate your software. You're welcome.
Enlightenment is the elimination of that which is unnecessary.
Macs have no viruses because the authors of said viruses don't want to infect their own systems.
The same applies for Linux.
We are trying to get switchers here, lets not scare them away before we get their money!
Ever notice how around the time some bad press comes out the TV ads ramp up to say how much better their products are? I fell off my chair when I saw their current "green" commercial running for the first time spewing their usual FUD of how they are the bestests ever green company. Yeah you really engineered that cpu in your laptop didn't ya apple?
There were a lot of Mac viruses back before the OS X days. nVir was one, but none of them will run on OS X.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA, , HA HA HA HA HA HA APPLE POLITICIANS, all .... sound ..... alike .....
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA, , HA HA HA HA HA HA
,
the recommendation was an old one. not a recent one. and, anyways, what is it with people trying to prove that macs can be hacked or infected? Any operating system has some kind of vulnerability or another. The real issue is whether the operating system in question was designed with security in mind, or did the company that produce it barely care until very recently and are trying their best to patch things over? I can't trust Microsoft to prioritize security over their other agendas. Macs are pretty much as safe as it gets for a casual user.
Saying macs are secure is ignorant and the sign they are clueless.
I guess no one loads any 3rd party software on a mac. No one uses bittorrent, or firefox, or ANYTHING right? Fact is, you get a trojan on a mac, and you'll have your idenity stolen non-stop for years until you buy a new computer. And you'll never realize why it's happening.
Amazing.
It may be totally safe out of the box, for various reasons.
But even THEN it is still best to have additional security measures in place to detect any known attacks / known spyware / malware, which script kiddies are sure to eventually develop if OS X ever gets above 10% market share.
By detecting attempts to exercise known attacks, you alert the user that something is amiss, and then they can initiate standard security response procedures (format that system and perform a clean install, if root compromised -- or delete the user, reboot, and re-create the user with an empty home directory if user account compromised)
Apple abuses their discussion forums, frequently deleting ("moderating") posts and content that doesn't suit a high, untarnished corporate image; especially anything overly critical of their internal processes.
I'd take what content is there with a few grains of salt. It's clearly not democratic.
Apple is acting just like the Microsoft of 10 years ago. Arrogant as fuck, and refuses to publicly acknowledge security problems until they have a patch out. It took Microsoft 3-4 years to finally begin changing that, lets see how long it takes Apple.
Having read an article about this issue, while at the Apple store I saw a copy of Symantec Anti-Virus for the Mac on the shelf with all the other software Apple sells. While it would be strange for Apple to try to dis-allow the existence of Symantec for Mac, actually having it in their store means they accept its value enough to want to make money off it. If it wasn't really needed, would they carry it on their shelf? Also Symantec may have to hope the Apple Mac platform needs antivirus as Microsoft has recently announced that they intend to give away antivirus software for free which could hurt Symantec's profits on the PC platform. Given that, I am watching carefully this issue about whether Mac users need to invest in yearly subscriptions to software that slow down their computers. Over the years I have been astounded at how badly Windows machines run when Symantec is installed, and how many error messages come up about Symantec software failing to terminate on time.
Comment removed based on user account deletion