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?
I browse the web using telnet. Sometimes I do have to break out my calculator to handle https sites.
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/
...You actually get used to reconstructing the web page in your head, much like web developers can see their sites when writing code.
I don't even see the code anymore. I just see blond, brunette, redhead...
No sig for the moment.
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)...