Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > Interests > Tilted Technology


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-22-2005, 12:45 PM   #1 (permalink)
I flopped the nutz...
 
mikec's Avatar
 
Location: Stratford, CT
Macintosh Hacker Attacks Are on the Rise -Symantec

I remember many mac users on this board touting the fact that their mac's were untouchable. The times, they are a changin'...

story: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp.../tech_apple_dc

Quote:
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Hacker attacks on Apple Computer Inc.'s Macintosh OS X operating system, thought by many who use the Mac to be virtually immune to attack, are on the rise, according to a report from anti-virus software vendor Symantec Corp.

"Contrary to popular belief, the Macintosh operating system has not always been a safe haven from malicious code," said the report, which was issued on Monday.

"It is now clear that the Mac OS is increasingly becoming a target for the malicious activity that is more commonly associated with Microsoft and various Unix based operating systems."

Many in the Macintosh computer community have long claimed that the Mac platform has been virtually immune to attack -- unlike Microsoft Corp.'s Windows operating system, which runs on more than 90 percent of the world's personal computers.

The Macintosh operating system, the current version of which is based on the Unix operating system, has less than 5 percent of the global market for computer operating systems.

"All these platforms have vulnerabilities - it's a fact of life," said Gartner analyst Martin Reynolds. "The truth of the matter is that Mac is only a couple percentage points of (computer) shipments so it's not an interesting target."

Apple's recent introduction of the Mac mini, a $500 computer sold without a display, keyboard or mouse, could actually increase the likelihood of more malicious software computer code targeting the Mac platform, Symantec said.

"The market penetration of Macintosh platforms will be accelerated by the much lower priced Mac mini, which may be purchased by less security-savvy users," the report said. "As a result, the number of vulnerabilities can be expected to increase, as will malicious activity that targets them."

An Apple spokesman was not immediately available to comment.

Symantec said that over the past year, it had documented 37 high-vulnerabilities--weaknesses that leave the system open to malicious software attacks--in Mac OS X (news - web sites). They "have been confirmed by the vendor, which, in the Apple case, almost always means that the company has released a patch."

A patch is a small piece of software designed to shore up a vulnerability or to fix other software glitches.

At the same time, the report said that while those vulnerabilities in the Mac operating system will increase, "they will likely be outnumbered in other operating systems for some time to come."

Shares of Apple was down 53 cents to $43.17 on Nasdaq.
__________________
Until the 20th century, reality was everything humans could touch, smell, see, and hear. Since the initial publication of the charted electromagnetic spectrum, humans have learned that what they can touch, smell, see, and hear is less than one millionth of reality
mikec is offline  
Old 03-22-2005, 12:57 PM   #2 (permalink)
Tilted
 
Location: Omaha, NE
Every system has vulnerabilities... But you won't be affecting nearly as many people if you target Macintosh.
crafty is offline  
Old 03-22-2005, 01:28 PM   #3 (permalink)
I flopped the nutz...
 
mikec's Avatar
 
Location: Stratford, CT
good to see you concur w/Martin Reynolds, who basically said what you said, but better, in the article.
__________________
Until the 20th century, reality was everything humans could touch, smell, see, and hear. Since the initial publication of the charted electromagnetic spectrum, humans have learned that what they can touch, smell, see, and hear is less than one millionth of reality
mikec is offline  
Old 03-22-2005, 01:28 PM   #4 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
Anyone who thought Macs were immune shouldn't be trusted with their Mac information. Any system can be hacked. They are not an accurate representation of the "Macintosh computer community", becuase they probably don't know the first thing about computers. As, myself, an acurate representative of the "Macintosh computer community", I say it was bound to happen. Those iPod commercials piss a lot of people off. OSX may be more stable and less likely to be hacked, but it is far from immune. It's a shame that Macs will be less safe now. This is not a good day for Mac shareholders like myself.
Willravel is offline  
Old 03-22-2005, 01:40 PM   #5 (permalink)
Devoted
 
Redlemon's Avatar
 
Donor
Location: New England
I didn't see anything particularly newsworthy in that article. Mostly, it seemed to be Symantec trying to drum up sales for their software. No concrete examples, except that they said that Apple has patched any issues that came up:
Quote:
Symantec said that over the past year, it had documented 37 high-vulnerabilities--weaknesses that leave the system open to malicious software attacks--in Mac OS X (news - web sites). They "have been confirmed by the vendor, which, in the Apple case, almost always means that the company has released a patch."
They say that there are vulnerabilities, but not that any hackers have attempted to exploit them. They merely claim that future hacking is inevitable.

I'm not saying that the Mac is invulnerable, but I don't thing Symantec has made a good case to the contrary.
__________________
I can't read your signature. Sorry.
Redlemon is offline  
Old 03-22-2005, 01:42 PM   #6 (permalink)
I flopped the nutz...
 
mikec's Avatar
 
Location: Stratford, CT
will, I remember reading some of your posts, and I don't believe you're an accurate representation of the Mac community, or the PC community in general.

why? because you seem to know what you're talking about. the PC community, as a whole, is pretty fuckin' clueless IMO hehehe.
__________________
Until the 20th century, reality was everything humans could touch, smell, see, and hear. Since the initial publication of the charted electromagnetic spectrum, humans have learned that what they can touch, smell, see, and hear is less than one millionth of reality
mikec is offline  
Old 03-22-2005, 02:10 PM   #7 (permalink)
zen_tom
Guest
 
Shock Headline!

"Macintosh Hacker Attacks Are on the Rise - Says Security Sofware Firm"

I'm still laughing now!!!
 
Old 03-22-2005, 02:33 PM   #8 (permalink)
Tilted Cat Head
 
Cynthetiq's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redlemon
I didn't see anything particularly newsworthy in that article. Mostly, it seemed to be Symantec trying to drum up sales for their software. No concrete examples, except that they said that Apple has patched any issues that came up:

They say that there are vulnerabilities, but not that any hackers have attempted to exploit them. They merely claim that future hacking is inevitable.

I'm not saying that the Mac is invulnerable, but I don't thing Symantec has made a good case to the contrary.
McAfee said the same thing about the Palm platform in the late 90s. Marketing Marketing Marketing.
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.
Cynthetiq is offline  
Old 03-22-2005, 05:32 PM   #9 (permalink)
Mjollnir Incarnate
 
Location: Lost in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynthetiq
McAfee said the same thing about the Palm platform in the late 90s. Marketing Marketing Marketing.
Hey, my dream is to become teh 1337est PDA h4x0r eva!!!1!
Slavakion is offline  
Old 03-22-2005, 09:04 PM   #10 (permalink)
Upright
 
Just remember that security is a process. Microsoft's security process is getting better. Now Apple's security process is being tested. We'll soon see just how good their process is.

"Security is a process, not a product"
jamesconrad is offline  
Old 03-23-2005, 12:53 AM   #11 (permalink)
Psycho
 
Location: OMFG BRB
Quote:
Originally Posted by zen_tom
Shock Headline!

"Macintosh Hacker Attacks Are on the Rise - Says Security Sofware Firm"

I'm still laughing now!!!
Me too!! People - check your sources!
OS X is certainly not invulnerable, but it's not nearly as easy a target as a windows box regardless of marketshare.

For those not familiar, os x asks for your administrative password any time a major system change is about to occur. So even if a hacker was to exploit, say, a safari bug and execute code they can only do as much damage as you have priveleges for (which can be pretty bad, but not erase-your-whole-computer or infect-the-boot-blocks bad).
doubleaught is offline  
Old 03-23-2005, 01:02 PM   #12 (permalink)
Professional Loafer
 
bendsley's Avatar
 
Location: texas
Opinion: Despite Symantec's security warnings for Mac OS X, Macintosh users pay too much for protection they don't really need.

In a perfect world, people might pay for security software based on the number of attacks prevented and the severity of those threats. The bigger the threat, the harder the software works and the more it protects, the more you pay. Seems fair enough.

In the case of Mac OS X, if you paid for what you got, the price for security software would be zero. The price would thus equal the number of virus and malware threats that target Apple's Unix-based operating system.

So why do Mac users pay so much—often as much at $70 for anti-virus alone and as much as $150 for a security "suite." Using the same math, Windows anti-virus software would probably cost $1,000 a desktop, yet it's easy to find software for as little as $20 in the stores.

Mac OS X users pay significantly more for protection than Windows users, protection so far they have needed only in theory or "just in case" a big new threat appears. People are getting wise to this. So is it any wonder that Symantec, in the eternal search for the next dollar, is out with a report that seems to predict dire consequences for future Mac users? It's like a teacher once told me, "Sell the sizzle, not the steak. Especially when you don't have any steak."

I suppose it's to the anti-virus industry's credit that some bored anti-virus developer hasn't launched an OS X threat merely to justify his or her continued employment. Still, with no threats, it's not like the software really requires much dev time.

Indeed, a Morgan Stanley report out this week predicts Apple could nearly double its share of the worldwide PC sales this year, thanks to iPod users buying a Mac as well. Going from 3 percent to 5 percent will be dramatic for Apple, but hardly noticeable in the broad marketplace. Given OS X's small global installed base, even this projected doubling of sales may not be enough to attract too much unwanted attention.

"Contrary to popular belief," the Symantec Threat Report continues, "the Macintosh operating system has not always been a safe haven from malicious code. Out of the public eye for some time, it is now clear that the Mac OS is increasingly becoming a target for the malicious activity that is more commonly associated with Microsoft and various Unix-based operating systems."

Is it any surprise that Symantec would beat the drums of fear as loudly as possible? This is, after all, a company that has for years persuaded Mac users to pay $70 for software "necessary" to protect their computers against nonexistent threats.

This makes me wonder whether the real threat that concerns Symantec isn't from Mac OS X viruses and malware. Rather, it's customers noticing that they've paid a lot of money for Norton anti-virus software that they didn't really need.

How can Symantec keep those customers in line and writing checks? By scaring the living daylights out of them, that's how. They even invoke the "M" word as a warning of what could be in store!

It's prudent to protect yourself. But what you pay for the protection ought to have some relationship to the threat.

While the "value pricing" concept will never fly, there really should be some relationship between what we pay and the protection we get. Compared with what Windows users pay, $70 is more protection than any Mac requires. Yet that's what Symantec and some competitors charge.

Mac users deserve a break.
__________________
"You hear the one about the fella who died, went to the pearly gates? St. Peter let him in. Sees a guy in a suit making a closing argument. Says, "Who's that?" St. Peter says, "Oh, that's God. Thinks he's Denny Crane."

Last edited by bendsley; 03-23-2005 at 07:32 PM..
bendsley is offline  
Old 03-23-2005, 01:32 PM   #13 (permalink)
zen_tom
Guest
 
It's just not time-effective for a hacker to write code for Macs. A virus wants to be able to spread through as many machines as quickly as possible before it is discovered and patched against - to achieve this spread, all those machines need to be connected to the internet at the same time and running the same application (SQL Server, IIS, Outlook or whatever) - if anything having Macs in the loop should slow the propagation of many of these things down (the way a control rod slows down a nuclear reaction by absorbing the particles flying about)

Yes, a determined hacker could write a virus that targets Macs, but why bother? It wouldn't get the population necessary (due to the low numbers) to make it worth-while. As the number grows, expect more threats.

As for selling sizzle, it's what software vendors are renowned for. Wouldn't expect anything different. However, it's such well documented behaviour, I'm still amazed anyone really takes it seriously.
 
Old 03-23-2005, 02:23 PM   #14 (permalink)
Mjollnir Incarnate
 
Location: Lost in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by zen_tom
Yes, a determined hacker could write a virus that targets Macs, but why bother? It wouldn't get the population necessary (due to the low numbers) to make it worth-while. As the number grows, expect more threats.
Good hackers do something to prove it can be done. They like the challenge. This proves that virus writers must not be made up of very many 1337 hackers if there are still <10 linux viruses and whatever small number for macs.

What would be really awesome (well, awesome isn't really the word...) is if somebody managed to come up with a cross-platform virus. It'd have to have some way to perform OS fingerprinting, and then choose what to do from there. Probably make for a bulky virus, but even a 2 meg proof-of-concept would be cool.

Last edited by Slavakion; 03-23-2005 at 02:25 PM..
Slavakion is offline  
Old 03-23-2005, 04:20 PM   #15 (permalink)
whosoever
 
martinguerre's Avatar
 
Location: New England
*nods...

I know my OSX machines are not invunerable. But they are, for day to day operations, not subject to the same threat level that wintel machines are. i've been quite happy with apple's response time with patches, and my security experience...and i've been a mac user since about 1987.
__________________
For God so loved creation, that God sent God's only Son that whosoever believed should not perish, but have everlasting life.

-John 3:16
martinguerre is offline  
Old 03-24-2005, 12:20 AM   #16 (permalink)
Tilted
 
Most importantly, OS X is far easier to secure from an engineering standpoint. For starters, a large portion of the OS is open-source, and the parts that are are typically the ones that are important as related to security. And it's not nearly as easy to run malicious code as it is on Windows, where things like ridiculous DLL conflicts, ActiveX and MS Office Macros run rampant. And of course there's no registry.

So yes, hackers will devote more attention to it if its market share increases, but I still think that it will prove more secure, proportionally speaking, for the amount of hacking attention devoted to it.
__________________
Jesus saves ... and Gretzky gets the rebound!
FlunkedFlank is offline  
Old 03-24-2005, 03:20 PM   #17 (permalink)
Crazy
 
:: points to OpenBSD ::

Problem solved.
__________________
This space not for rent.
archpaladin is offline  
 

Tags
attacks, hacker, macintosh, rise, symantec

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:23 PM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360