Slashdot Mirror
Maker of Sneaky Mac Adware Sends Security Researcher Cease-and-Desist Letters (zdnet.com)
Zack Whittaker, writing for ZDNet: The maker of a sneaky adware that hijacks a user's browser to serve ads is back with a new, more advanced version -- one that can gain root privileges and spy on the user's activities. News of the updated adware dropped Tuesday in a lengthy write-up by Amit Serper, principal security researcher at Cybereason. The adware, dubbed OSX.Pirrit, is still highly active, infecting tens of thousands of Macs, according to Serper, who has tracked the malware and its different versions for over a year. Serper's detailed write-up is well worth the read. [...] TargetingEdge sent cease-and-desist letters to try to prevent Serper from publishing his research. "We've received several letters over the past two weeks," Serper told ZDNet. "We decided to publish anyway because we're sick of shady 'adware' companies and their threats."
It would be nice to know how this crap gets on a system. Since we're talking about macOS, I'm going to guess this is a trojan and simply carry on...
#DeleteFacebook
Maybe we should send the malware maker some cease-and-desist letters.
Cease-and-Desist talking about the malware? Yeah, I am sure filing a lawsuit will to a great job of that, Barbara.
Also, why isn't what the malware maker doing illegal?
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
I think he is just fictional. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
Mac security improved greatly when OS X took the field. Before that, especially with system 6/7, you could actually have a code segment sitting on a SCSI drive that would load and execute with all permissions. This was used for security software (FileGuard, A. M. E., Empower) to have a driver for on the fly encryption, and thankfully it was never used for ill (AFAIK), but the early Mac operating systems had a lot of infection vectors (WDEF... insert a floppy, bam infected, for example.)
OS X (i.e. NeXTStep with a Mac UI) was pretty good in the security department, and got a lot better, especially with the MAC/DAC stuff added in. However, nothing is 100% secure, and no desktop OS can protect against a Dancing Bunnies attack.
What does help would be more macOS developers using Apple's store instead of offering downloads on their websites. This way, users are trained that if they are asked to go outside the established mechanism, they should be extremely wary... or just say "no". The exception are programs that Apple doesn't allow, such as low level utilities (Little Snitch, VMWare Fusion, etc.)
In any case, Apple should be proactive and revoke the signing key of any proven adware maker.
... Maker of Sneaky Adware to his maker.
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
I don't know why you think that VM host software cannot be hosted on the App Store.
If VMWare doesn't distribute it that way, it's probably because most of their revenue/license is corporate rather than individual and app stores tend to be a poor fir for those arrangements.
They know the identity. It's a listed company based in Tel Aviv.
No idea why they can't use a legal solution, but it's not because they don't have a company to sue.
An earlier poster said the company was headquartered in Israel. So they *could* file suit in the US court system. I consider it unlikely, and I consider it unlikely that a jury would find in their favor. But a judge might...or might not.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
You mean Apple Inc., the corporation that spend over $1 billion a year on advertising?
Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
why is that half assed? yes they are clearly scumbags, but you are under no obligation to tell journalists anything and they can happily lie their asses off to them.
That is a good thing, and I am glad I am wrong here. Previously, I remember Apple disallowing programs that affected kernel level functionality. If Parallels can put their virtualization setup on the App Store, then I don't see why all Mac developers should not use the store. I would assert that stores or repositories are very beneficial in combatting Trojans, assuming they are well curated and bad software is removed quickly with the developer getting tossed.
In the Linux world, I've found it very rare that I download a program outside a repository. The only exception are some very specific utilities that address a narrow market, and Borg Backup, which the latest version doesn't seem to wind up in EPEL or the latest Ubuntu updates.
As for Windows, Microsoft needs to consider a push to have their store be similar. The days of downloading some program from Cnet or a BBS are long gone when it comes to security, for the most part.
Of course, there is a downside... I fear that doing this might get OS makers to block sideloading of programs. Ideally, sideloading should be allowed, but in very rare circumstances.
Fuck face, it's "loser". "Looser" is when I'm done with your mom. Why can't people get this right when insulting people?
They should send the report and the lawyer's address straight to the FBI. If it's accurate, the software is violating the Compture Fraud and Abuse Act. And Israel will honor the extradition...
An engineer who ran for Congress. http://herbrobinson.us