That's why I don't install AV software on my PC. I'm less likely to screw up than AV vendors are. Seriously. My own PCs have NEVER been infected by a virus. And yes I know how to check, and I know how to upload suspicious stuff to VirusTotal, and I know how to run browsers with different user accounts from my main account. Whereas the AV vendors make this sort of screw up every few years. So it's no point for me to slow down my computer with AV software. The sort of malware that would infect me would probably not be detected by their stuff anyway.
Do you use windows?
Is your computer connected to the internet?
If your answer to both these questions is "yes", congratulations! You just invalidated your whole argument. Your own PCs have never been infected by a virus that you could detect. Looking at all the the analogies that others have tried to come up with, I find it fitting to state that taking a windows PC on the internet without A/V, is akin to sharing a bath with all the patients in an infectious disease ward. You're not going to come out clean. Any claim to the contrary is the height of stupidity.
On the other hand, if you aren't using windows, or aren't using the internet, then your experience is a blip among the masses, and not a far-fetched one.
In no particular order. Vipre, Trend Micro WFB, and Symantec Endpoint are all good products. Everything else is a crapshoot. And stay the hell away from McAfee. That shit will eat your servers alive! (no really, blocks registry write backs from most legit software including Windows Updates)
Symantec Endpoint? Ugh. It just eats your servers in a different way, by voraciously devouring your ram. Our enterprise environment have had a much better experience with Sophos then we ever did with Symantec's Endpoint.
Is there a better company, though? Seems like all the major antivirus vendors have had embarassing false positives like this in the past.
Yes, but getting a false positive on your own software takes it to an entirely new level.
Meh, that's better then then McAffe's getting a false positive on core system files...link. At least the computer still runs afterwards. You can look up your fix on the affected computer, and implement it, even at the amateur level.
Why are some folks, particularly here on/., bent on construing this as some sort of Empire versus Rebel Alliance dichotomy?
Likely because the Bible condemns certain aspects of people's lifestyles. They don't like being condemned, so they intend to replace religion with science. Most religion contains a moral code, whereas science doesn't. If science replaces religion, they don't have to worry about conforming to any moral code, and they can flaunt their lifestyle in the open without fear of repercussion.
It's similar to the war the homosexuals continue to wage. It's not enough for many of them to be left alone, they want to rub it in everyone's face and replace everyone's morality with their own. If you merely disagree, you're instantly branded a bigot, "small-minded", or a homophobe. In both cases it's not about actual thinking anymore, it's about conformity and peer pressure. "You're either on our side, or you are an ". That's why you see more insults and sarcasm, and less actual reasoning, on both sides of the issue.
It's pretty hard to find an evolution skeptic outside of the hardboiled creationist crowd these days. I have not seen one in years. Unless you are totally impervious to reasoning, evidence, and logic or are hermetically sealed in a fact proof bubble it's hard to hold an anti-evolution stance these days. There are just too many exciting discoveries in genetics happening every day.
Perhaps it's because you automatically dismiss any evolution skeptic as a "hardboiled creationist", regardless of their abilities.
Microsoft can sell a five-year-old variant of OSX, Apple can sell Windows 2030.
Microsoft can sell 5 year old Apple software, and Apple can sell software that won't be available for 18 more years? The reality distortion field seems to be popping up in the strangest places lately...
This is an issue that all non-OS applications have: how to get and install updates in a timely manner? Firefox checks for updates upon launch; drawback: annoyance for user as this results in an apparent slow launch. Google installs an update service; drawback: many users will disable this service due to the perception that it could slow down the entire system. Adobe Flash Player is a "system plugin" with its own update tool that runs at boot time; drawback: it requires user interaction, thus it is annoying. RealPlayer creates update tasks in the TaskManager; drawback: some users will disable them as they could increase boot/login time and/or are perceived as intrusive/spyware. The only acceptable solution is a system-wide update system, the way it works on Linux but without any user interaction; or updates delivered for all installed applications via Windows Update on Windows (which Microsoft is unlikely to accept).
The difficulty with some of these (granted, never had this issue with flash) is legacy support. Some businesses run specialized software that is occasionally broken by software updates. My personal experience with this has been JRE updates that break an app, until a couple release down the line fixes the issue, but others have seen this with Firefox as well. When this happens, users begin to equate "updates" with "broken apps" and then puts them off, it not avoiding them forever. While this isn't an excuse, it does expose some of the causes of outdated software...
The only reason you think it's funny is because you are stupid and thus easily
amused, even by old jokes.
Hostility is not the way of Jobsian monks, quickly now, return to the path. Buy an app and repent.
Seriously though, your willingness to call someone stupid because their taste in humor differs from yours shows how intolerant and close-minded you are. Your opinion is invalid.
I know you hear "You're holding it wrong" from your boyfriend all the time, but the joke, and any sort of brand bashing is tired.
It's only tired if you belong to the order of the Jobsian monks. Patiently waiting, cash and credit, upon the drops of technological dew that drops from Apple. To the rest of us, including non-devotees who have an apple product, it's still pretty funny. =D
It would appear that the MIT system was stealth installed, and arrangements were made afterwards to keep the system there. From the readings on the Blinkenlights site and the wikipedia entry, Blinkenlights had prior arrangements with the building management, although both teams are admittedly short on details in this respect. If I'm reading things right, that's a major difference and an interesting one at that.
Frankly, I am surprised that musical instrument manufacturers haven't attached EULAs and charges for every time you play a song with one of their instruments. If the RIAA likes playing their game with copyrights and screwing people, then Fender can play a game with them.
I'm a little surprised you would address this argument to me!
Who cares? The important part is: Let Macs onto your mostly Windows network and you might get a not so fun surprise...
No, the important part is Sophos is using this information to attempt to sell anti-virus products. But they can't be too direct about it because there's a clear contradiction here. If Sophos products could stop the malware, then the Windows PCs are already safe. The infected files stored in a Macs web cache aren't going to magically leap across the network, but even if they did, the anti virus software on the Windows machine should catch it first. If the AV can't stop the infection, then why buy any additional copies?
Of course Sophos is using this information in an attempt to sell anti-virus products. That is their business. Sophos products DO stop the vast majority of malware, but only inept systems and/or security administrators would leave an attack vector open for later abuse. Sophos (like any other AV vendor) reacts to new threats as they are found in the wild. By closing any security holes you may have (including your OS X clients) you are much more likely to evade infection until your AV vendor updates their signatures.
But don't worry, the black hats love people like you. Save your money, don't buy security software, that way there's more to fleece from your bank account.
I don't care about any social media. I refuse to use any of it. I consider myself a technological hermit, and proud to be one.
Slashdot is the first and leading social media destination for
technology professionals and IT decision makers. Slashdot’s highly
engaged community of IT influencers share and socialize hundreds of
pieces of content every day, including news, analysis, peer questions,
and professional insight. Slashdot is a website of Geeknet Media, a
wholly owned subsidiary of Geeknet Inc. (Nasdaq:GKNT).
But while it is extremely helpful in a court case, I also believe that science has killed such things as common sense, which in some instances has been know to ruin a case. Some examples where I think science destroyed a case: OJ Simpson trial, Casey Anthony trial, all the cases trying to chip away at Roe Vs. Wade, just to name a few.
While I believe good science was used in OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony cases, I believe that too much emphasis was put on scientific evidence, thus causing doubt where there should not have been any doubt.
In the matter of case chipping away at Roe Vs. Wade, the problem is how science is destroying the underlining message of Roe Vs. Wade, the science about a fetus is outweighing the basic human rights of the mother.
Just my initial thoughts.
If it is a scientific theory, following the scientific method, then it's unpossible to be wrong. or is it? Following the logic of many on Slashdot, anyone debating science with anything short of a tested theory is a bible-thumping retard living in Tennessee having children with their sibling. They would have science out-weigh anything, be it religion, politics, judiciaries, or common sense. To those who thump a news story with no real understanding of the science involved science IS the new religion, right or wrong, applicable or not, it's science and therefore infallible.
And Macs are still below 20% in market share... what's the point you're trying to make?
Browsing through his comment history, he appears to be more of a disgruntled MS admin, and less of an Apple fanboy. He likely works among an inept group of individuals with no political support from his office, and therefore no ability to implement functional resolutions, because they either cost money or make it difficult for the sales staff to play farmville, angry birds, or whatever the flavor of the month is. MS is the outlet upon which he unleashes his wrath. =D
He actually has some good and insightful comments, but whenever Microsoft is brought up, his comments take on a more hostile tone.
The whole point of this article is that there are now a couple of ways for a Mac to be infected. You might ask yourself, "Why is that news?", and by doing so, you would have your answer on which OS seems to be more secure.
Why is this news? Likely because Apple loudly boasted via commercials about how their OS does not get viruses. Not to mention all the raging Apple disciples who claimed on/. that Apple would never get a virus, for whatever reason.
The fact that OS X has now two (or is it three?) known vulnerabilities -- real vulnerabilities not trojans -- which have been subsequently patched, and which did not affect out-of-the-box Macs (because they don't ship with Java installed / enabled), is an absolutely huge difference from the Windows platform along with Microsoft's feeble attempts to distribute a monthly "Malicious software removal tool" to counteract the severe problems there.
Mac's have shipped with java installed and enabled for many years. I believe it was your intention to state that "NEW out-of-the-box Macs" are unaffected, as 10.7 (released less then a year ago) was the beginning of Apple not including a Java runtime in the OS. Every Mac shipped before that (which would make up the vast majority of them) has an Apple managed Java installation on it.
And yes, it is an absolutely huge difference from the Windows platform, which has been a target for many many years, as opposed to the Mac platform, which is just starting to draw attention. That's just common sense. Next you'll tell me that the guy who started eating first was full when the other guys were just starting to eat.
Sure, at some point, Macs may have real virus problems, but for now it's not widespread and it's not severe and there isn't the level of imminent danger that there is with Windows. Much like the state of Linux virus protection, I might add.
Can't blame the blackhats for going after the low-hanging fruit at first can you? And comparing the many flavors and varieties of Linux to the uniformity of Windows and OS X, is like comparing apples to oranges. Nice try though.
The exploit was because of Java and you blame Apple? That's rich. OS X was not at fault. If Oracle got it's act together this would not have been a problem.
And the fanboi shows his colors. Apple was at fault. That java patch was fixed and a patch deployed for every other system well in advance of that news report. Oracle did have it's act together, and resolved the issue. Want to guess why OS X was the only system exploited? Here, I'll give you the answer. Apple maintains (controls) it's own implementation of Java, and is consistently behind the times. That lackadaisical approach (by Apple, not Oracle) is why this outbreak occurred. Apple's fault, NOT Oracle's.
Show me real exploits within OS X. Show me the same type of exploits that exist in Windows in OS X. Show me OS X can reach the level of exploits that Windows has.
You want for free what costs money. Zero days exploits are found and sold on the black markets. Talk to them if you want to see the exploits, and be sure to bring large amounts of untraceable bills. Otherwise, wait with the rest of us and find out on the news aggregates.
That's not do to market share, that's do to the technology. OS X is safer than Windows because it has less exploits, because it is a more secure OS.
*rollseyes* I guess the reality distortion field is still in effect in some areas...
Slashdot Mirror
That's why I don't install AV software on my PC. I'm less likely to screw up than AV vendors are. Seriously. My own PCs have NEVER been infected by a virus. And yes I know how to check, and I know how to upload suspicious stuff to VirusTotal, and I know how to run browsers with different user accounts from my main account. Whereas the AV vendors make this sort of screw up every few years. So it's no point for me to slow down my computer with AV software. The sort of malware that would infect me would probably not be detected by their stuff anyway.
Do you use windows?
Is your computer connected to the internet?
If your answer to both these questions is "yes", congratulations! You just invalidated your whole argument. Your own PCs have never been infected by a virus that you could detect. Looking at all the the analogies that others have tried to come up with, I find it fitting to state that taking a windows PC on the internet without A/V, is akin to sharing a bath with all the patients in an infectious disease ward. You're not going to come out clean. Any claim to the contrary is the height of stupidity.
On the other hand, if you aren't using windows, or aren't using the internet, then your experience is a blip among the masses, and not a far-fetched one.
I figured as much. I got definition errors in every compiler I could think to try =D.
In no particular order. Vipre, Trend Micro WFB, and Symantec Endpoint are all good products. Everything else is a crapshoot. And stay the hell away from McAfee. That shit will eat your servers alive! (no really, blocks registry write backs from most legit software including Windows Updates)
Symantec Endpoint? Ugh. It just eats your servers in a different way, by voraciously devouring your ram. Our enterprise environment have had a much better experience with Sophos then we ever did with Symantec's Endpoint.
Yes, but getting a false positive on your own software takes it to an entirely new level.
Meh, that's better then then McAffe's getting a false positive on core system files...link.
At least the computer still runs afterwards. You can look up your fix on the affected computer, and implement it, even at the amateur level.
Why are some folks, particularly here on /., bent on construing this as some sort of Empire versus Rebel Alliance dichotomy?
Likely because the Bible condemns certain aspects of people's lifestyles. They don't like being condemned, so they intend to replace religion with science. Most religion contains a moral code, whereas science doesn't. If science replaces religion, they don't have to worry about conforming to any moral code, and they can flaunt their lifestyle in the open without fear of repercussion.
It's similar to the war the homosexuals continue to wage. It's not enough for many of them to be left alone, they want to rub it in everyone's face and replace everyone's morality with their own. If you merely disagree, you're instantly branded a bigot, "small-minded", or a homophobe. In both cases it's not about actual thinking anymore, it's about conformity and peer pressure. "You're either on our side, or you are an ". That's why you see more insults and sarcasm, and less actual reasoning, on both sides of the issue.
It's pretty hard to find an evolution skeptic outside of the hardboiled creationist crowd these days. I have not seen one in years. Unless you are totally impervious to reasoning, evidence, and logic or are hermetically sealed in a fact proof bubble it's hard to hold an anti-evolution stance these days. There are just too many exciting discoveries in genetics happening every day.
Perhaps it's because you automatically dismiss any evolution skeptic as a "hardboiled creationist", regardless of their abilities.
Microsoft can sell a five-year-old variant of OSX, Apple can sell Windows 2030.
Microsoft can sell 5 year old Apple software, and Apple can sell software that won't be available for 18 more years? The reality distortion field seems to be popping up in the strangest places lately...
This is an issue that all non-OS applications have: how to get and install updates in a timely manner? Firefox checks for updates upon launch; drawback: annoyance for user as this results in an apparent slow launch. Google installs an update service; drawback: many users will disable this service due to the perception that it could slow down the entire system. Adobe Flash Player is a "system plugin" with its own update tool that runs at boot time; drawback: it requires user interaction, thus it is annoying. RealPlayer creates update tasks in the TaskManager; drawback: some users will disable them as they could increase boot/login time and/or are perceived as intrusive/spyware. The only acceptable solution is a system-wide update system, the way it works on Linux but without any user interaction; or updates delivered for all installed applications via Windows Update on Windows (which Microsoft is unlikely to accept).
The difficulty with some of these (granted, never had this issue with flash) is legacy support. Some businesses run specialized software that is occasionally broken by software updates. My personal experience with this has been JRE updates that break an app, until a couple release down the line fixes the issue, but others have seen this with Firefox as well. When this happens, users begin to equate "updates" with "broken apps" and then puts them off, it not avoiding them forever. While this isn't an excuse, it does expose some of the causes of outdated software...
Glad to see that Apple is taking all the necessary steps to return to "no viruses on Apple".
FTFY
The only reason you think it's funny is because you are stupid and thus easily amused, even by old jokes.
Hostility is not the way of Jobsian monks, quickly now, return to the path. Buy an app and repent.
Seriously though, your willingness to call someone stupid because their taste in humor differs from yours shows how intolerant and close-minded you are. Your opinion is invalid.
I would would recommend looking carefully, based on the smell, and the orifice it exudes from, I don't think that is dew that's dripping.
I was of course speaking from the perspective of the aforementioned monks. =D
I know you hear "You're holding it wrong" from your boyfriend all the time, but the joke, and any sort of brand bashing is tired.
It's only tired if you belong to the order of the Jobsian monks. Patiently waiting, cash and credit, upon the drops of technological dew that drops from Apple. To the rest of us, including non-devotees who have an apple product, it's still pretty funny. =D
Microsoft is a bigger, more evil giant than even Oracle.
I'm not entirely sure you've ever dealt with Oracle...
Oracle vs Google is like "do no good" vs "do no evil".
It would appear that the MIT system was stealth installed, and arrangements were made afterwards to keep the system there. From the readings on the Blinkenlights site and the wikipedia entry, Blinkenlights had prior arrangements with the building management, although both teams are admittedly short on details in this respect. If I'm reading things right, that's a major difference and an interesting one at that.
Frankly, I am surprised that musical instrument manufacturers haven't attached EULAs and charges for every time you play a song with one of their instruments. If the RIAA likes playing their game with copyrights and screwing people, then Fender can play a game with them.
I'm a little surprised you would address this argument to me!
Who cares? The important part is: Let Macs onto your mostly Windows network and you might get a not so fun surprise...
No, the important part is Sophos is using this information to attempt to sell anti-virus products. But they can't be too direct about it because there's a clear contradiction here. If Sophos products could stop the malware, then the Windows PCs are already safe. The infected files stored in a Macs web cache aren't going to magically leap across the network, but even if they did, the anti virus software on the Windows machine should catch it first. If the AV can't stop the infection, then why buy any additional copies?
Of course Sophos is using this information in an attempt to sell anti-virus products. That is their business. Sophos products DO stop the vast majority of malware, but only inept systems and/or security administrators would leave an attack vector open for later abuse. Sophos (like any other AV vendor) reacts to new threats as they are found in the wild. By closing any security holes you may have (including your OS X clients) you are much more likely to evade infection until your AV vendor updates their signatures.
But don't worry, the black hats love people like you. Save your money, don't buy security software, that way there's more to fleece from your bank account.
I'd mod this funny, but I'm out of mod points...
I don't care about any social media. I refuse to use any of it. I consider myself a technological hermit, and proud to be one.
Slashdot is the first and leading social media destination for technology professionals and IT decision makers. Slashdot’s highly engaged community of IT influencers share and socialize hundreds of pieces of content every day, including news, analysis, peer questions, and professional insight. Slashdot is a website of Geeknet Media, a wholly owned subsidiary of Geeknet Inc. (Nasdaq:GKNT).
link
Will the patent-go-round continue, or has Facebook loaded up for a good old-fashion Mexican standoff?"
In Soviet Mexico, we just call them "standoffs".
But while it is extremely helpful in a court case, I also believe that science has killed such things as common sense, which in some instances has been know to ruin a case. Some examples where I think science destroyed a case: OJ Simpson trial, Casey Anthony trial, all the cases trying to chip away at Roe Vs. Wade, just to name a few.
While I believe good science was used in OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony cases, I believe that too much emphasis was put on scientific evidence, thus causing doubt where there should not have been any doubt.
In the matter of case chipping away at Roe Vs. Wade, the problem is how science is destroying the underlining message of Roe Vs. Wade, the science about a fetus is outweighing the basic human rights of the mother.
Just my initial thoughts.
If it is a scientific theory, following the scientific method, then it's unpossible to be wrong. or is it? Following the logic of many on Slashdot, anyone debating science with anything short of a tested theory is a bible-thumping retard living in Tennessee having children with their sibling. They would have science out-weigh anything, be it religion, politics, judiciaries, or common sense. To those who thump a news story with no real understanding of the science involved science IS the new religion, right or wrong, applicable or not, it's science and therefore infallible.
Your choice mods, flamebait or troll?
And Macs are still below 20% in market share... what's the point you're trying to make?
Browsing through his comment history, he appears to be more of a disgruntled MS admin, and less of an Apple fanboy. He likely works among an inept group of individuals with no political support from his office, and therefore no ability to implement functional resolutions, because they either cost money or make it difficult for the sales staff to play farmville, angry birds, or whatever the flavor of the month is. MS is the outlet upon which he unleashes his wrath. =D
He actually has some good and insightful comments, but whenever Microsoft is brought up, his comments take on a more hostile tone.
The whole point of this article is that there are now a couple of ways for a Mac to be infected. You might ask yourself, "Why is that news?", and by doing so, you would have your answer on which OS seems to be more secure.
Why is this news? Likely because Apple loudly boasted via commercials about how their OS does not get viruses. Not to mention all the raging Apple disciples who claimed on /. that Apple would never get a virus, for whatever reason.
The fact that OS X has now two (or is it three?) known vulnerabilities -- real vulnerabilities not trojans -- which have been subsequently patched, and which did not affect out-of-the-box Macs (because they don't ship with Java installed / enabled), is an absolutely huge difference from the Windows platform along with Microsoft's feeble attempts to distribute a monthly "Malicious software removal tool" to counteract the severe problems there.
Mac's have shipped with java installed and enabled for many years. I believe it was your intention to state that "NEW out-of-the-box Macs" are unaffected, as 10.7 (released less then a year ago) was the beginning of Apple not including a Java runtime in the OS. Every Mac shipped before that (which would make up the vast majority of them) has an Apple managed Java installation on it.
And yes, it is an absolutely huge difference from the Windows platform, which has been a target for many many years, as opposed to the Mac platform, which is just starting to draw attention. That's just common sense. Next you'll tell me that the guy who started eating first was full when the other guys were just starting to eat.
Sure, at some point, Macs may have real virus problems, but for now it's not widespread and it's not severe and there isn't the level of imminent danger that there is with Windows. Much like the state of Linux virus protection, I might add.
Can't blame the blackhats for going after the low-hanging fruit at first can you? And comparing the many flavors and varieties of Linux to the uniformity of Windows and OS X, is like comparing apples to oranges. Nice try though.
The exploit was because of Java and you blame Apple? That's rich. OS X was not at fault. If Oracle got it's act together this would not have been a problem.
And the fanboi shows his colors. Apple was at fault. That java patch was fixed and a patch deployed for every other system well in advance of that news report. Oracle did have it's act together, and resolved the issue. Want to guess why OS X was the only system exploited? Here, I'll give you the answer. Apple maintains (controls) it's own implementation of Java, and is consistently behind the times. That lackadaisical approach (by Apple, not Oracle) is why this outbreak occurred. Apple's fault, NOT Oracle's.
Show me real exploits within OS X. Show me the same type of exploits that exist in Windows in OS X. Show me OS X can reach the level of exploits that Windows has.
You want for free what costs money. Zero days exploits are found and sold on the black markets. Talk to them if you want to see the exploits, and be sure to bring large amounts of untraceable bills. Otherwise, wait with the rest of us and find out on the news aggregates.
That's not do to market share, that's do to the technology. OS X is safer than Windows because it has less exploits, because it is a more secure OS.
*rollseyes* I guess the reality distortion field is still in effect in some areas...
Reportedly, the fragrance smells like old burnt coffee. As though it had been fresh once, but neglected by it's barista. Java anyone?
Hey, I agree, I would never worship a non-living multinational-corporation.
Apple has been going downhill ever since Jobs died. While He was around, the reality distortion field would have never allowed all this bad press.
FTFY