New Mac Virus Discovered, Making the Rounds
sl4shd0rk writes "A new Mac OS X exploit was discovered Friday morning by Kaspersky Labs which propogates through a zipfile attachment. The attachment tricks the Mac user into installing a variant of the MaControl backdoor via point-and-grunt. Embedded in the virus is an encrypted IP address belonging to a server in China which is believed to be a C+C server. Once installed, the virus opens a backdoor allowing the attacker on the C+C server to run commands on the compromised machine. Shortly after Kaspersky's announcement, AlienVault Labs claims to have found a similar version of the Mac malware which infects Windows machines. The Windows version appears to be a variant of the Gh0st RAT malware used last month in targeted attacks against Central Tibetan Administration. Both viruses are suspected of being tools in a campaign to attack Uyghur Activists."
I know its overly popular these days to call any malware, trojan or other malicious bit of software a virus, but they really dont meet the definition. Frankly, I cant think of a real virus being released in quite some time. Which just seems lazy to me.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Malware, not virus. Virii aren't installed by the users themselves...
Thank you very much.
Only reason it's a big deal is because Apple used to advertise OS X "doesn't get PC viruses." So when a Mac gets one, now everyone jumps on it with a /. article to show apple was wrong.
BTW Apple just removed their claim: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/25/mac-virus-apple_n_1625110.html
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
It's hard to blame Mac when you open an infected file. People have been unwittingly installing Malware and other infecting programs onto Macs for years. This is very different from one that propagates without the help of the user. It's a non story.
You mean like ms12-020? There are lots of others too. Just Google "windows remote exploits"
"Be grateful for what you have. You may never know when you may lose it."
I know Slashdot editors are famously lazy ('sup, guys!) but why does the summary they posted say "The attachment tricks the Mac user into installing..." when TFA* clearly says "the [attack] described here relies on social engineering to get the user to run the backdoor"? You know, just like every single other Trojan out there?!?** The attachment itself is totally benign until someone clicks on it several times. (Even if you view the message with webmail with Safari's "Open 'safe' files after downloading" in its (admittedly brain-dead) default "checked" position***, you still have to click on the attachment link in your webmail and then double-click the visible file to run it.) The only way this actually happens is if someone reads the email and takes a few steps on their own. As always, the attachment itself does nothing.****
Slashdot has been a techy news site for a decade and a half now. You'd think errors as blatant as this would get caught by the editors, even with their usual lack of checking.
You know what would be an awesome site? Exactly what Slashdot is, but with better editors. (And maybe lay off the JavaScript some.)
Anyway: sky is blue, water is wet, sun rises in the east, and all computers--by definition--are vulnerable to trojans. Film at 11.
And by the way, WTF is "point-and-grunt"? Does that imply that users are dumbly clicking on things? If so, doesn't that also imply that the users just might be the problem? Trojans are trivially easy to write. Here's one in one line:
Voila. Type that into Terminal, email it to all of Slashdot, and wait for a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of home directories suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
* I know no one here reads them, but I think the submitter should, right? Even if they don't, they should just submit the URL and not make up shit for the summary.
** Which is to say, like every single Mac "virus" of the last decade as well.
*** Apple even puts "Safe" in quotes, so they obviously know that's not an ideal term. They should set it to "off" by default--and then remove the option.
**** Unlike the bad old days with Outlook Express' infinitely more brain-dead "Hey, let me run that executable attachment for you!" setting.
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
Apple also used to boast that users could "Safeguard your data. By doing nothing." And I noticed this: "When the latest version of Mac OS X, codenamed Mountain Lion, becomes available to users in July, the software will include a new "Gatekeeper" feature that restricts which applications users can download onto their phones or computers. Only apps "downloaded from the Mac App Store or those digitally signed by a registered developer" will be accessible with the Gatekeeper upgrade, per Computerworld"
Wow. That means a lot of my programs, which are not "registered" developers, will not be installable on a Mac 10.8. I guess?
- Stella (Atari emulator)
- NES emulator
- N64 emulator
- VLC Player
- uTorrent
- azureus
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"