Opinions on Norton AntiVirus 10?

On 2008-02-12 15:33:59 -0800, "CZ" <CZ.DeleteThis@no99spam.com> said:

> What technology does OS X have that obviates antivirus s/w?
>
> Or is it simply the lack of Mac viruses that makes the Mac "safe"?

The bottom line is that Mac OS X seems more secure. There are no
viruses right now. Will there be one day? It's probably possible.

HOWEVER, if there are viruses one day, there's certainly no guarantee
that the tools available today will be updated quickly and competently.
You're much better off simply waiting; if a serious happens, it will be
news.
 >> Stay informed about: Opinions on Norton AntiVirus 10? 

>> What technology does OS X have that obviates antivirus s/w? Or is it
>> simply the lack of Mac viruses that makes the Mac "safe"?

>The bottom line is that Mac OS X seems more secure. There are no
viruses right now. Will there be one day? It's probably possible.
>HOWEVER, if there are viruses one day, there's certainly no guarantee
that the tools available today will be updated quickly and competently.
You're much better off simply waiting; if a serious happens, it will be
news.

Steven:

So, there is no technology in OS X that obviates antivirus s/w?
 >> Stay informed about: Opinions on Norton AntiVirus 10? 

AV3:

>> To operate at root level you must know the password

In OS X 10.5 root user does not have a password by default, though it is
disabled.

>> It's not so much technology as an organizing principle, and to be fair
it is a characteristic of Unix and applies to the many flavors of Unix,
Linux, etc., of which the Mac OSX is but one

How about vulnerabilities?
From http://www.macworld.com/article/131317/2007/12/iwtop10.html
First some numbers: In 2006, the National Institute of Standards and Testing
(NIST) tabulated 106 “vulnerabilities� in Apple’s Mac OS X. (It defines
vulnerabilities as a weakness in the code that could be exploited to perform
unauthorized, and generally harmful, functions by the application.) In the
first six months of 2007 there were 78 vulnerabilities found in Mac OS X.
Windows XP (all flavors), meanwhile, had 55 vulnerabilities in 2006 and 19
in the first six months of 2007. Vista, which wasn’t available in 2006,
chalked up 19 vulnerabilities in 2007.

“Apple has better commercials, but the Mac is no harder to break into than a
Windows PC,� says Gartner security analyst John Pescatore. What’s more, most
IT shops can automatically patch large numbers of PCs at the same time,
while Macs generally have to be patched one at a time, he said.

>> I read a few months back about made-for-Mac malware to be installed by a
>> purveyor of porn

From http://www.securethoughts.net/2007/10/osxrspluga-trojan-horse.html
Security researchers at Intego, creators of NetBarrier, have discovered a
new Mac OS X trojan horse named OSX.RSPlug.A, out in the wild. They found
this trojan hiding on porn sites, disguising itself as a Quicktime codec
that visitors running OSX must download and install before being able to
watch videos.
 >> Stay informed about: Opinions on Norton AntiVirus 10? 

In article <fotnph$7nm$1@aioe.org>, AV3 <arvimide DeleteThis @earthlink.net> wrote:

> And no
> outsider, who doesn't know it, can operate at root level in your
> computer. Actually, malware can do superficial harm without root access,
> but malware mavens want root access to capture computers and propagate
> their malware from captives or to destroy the captive completely from
> the root.

There are well-known ways for malware to gain escalated privileges
*without* having to know a password.

--
Note: Please send all responses to the relevant news group. If you
must contact me through e-mail, let me know when you send email to
this address so that your email doesn't get eaten by my SPAM filter.

JR
 >> Stay informed about: Opinions on Norton AntiVirus 10? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Opinions on Norton AntiVirus 10? 

In article <ITtsj.57475$Pv2.666@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net>,
"CZ" <CZ RemoveThis @no99spam.com> wrote:

> >> I read a few months back about made-for-Mac malware to be installed by a
> >> purveyor of porn
>
> From http://www.securethoughts.net/2007/10/osxrspluga-trojan-horse.html
> Security researchers at Intego, creators of NetBarrier, have discovered a
> new Mac OS X trojan horse named OSX.RSPlug.A, out in the wild. They found
> this trojan hiding on porn sites, disguising itself as a Quicktime codec
> that visitors running OSX must download and install before being able to
> watch videos.

Yep. That's what he said. Were you just helping clarify or did you
have a point?

--
Note: Please send all responses to the relevant news group. If you
must contact me through e-mail, let me know when you send email to
this address so that your email doesn't get eaten by my SPAM filter.

JR
 >> Stay informed about: Opinions on Norton AntiVirus 10? 

In article <ITtsj.57475$Pv2.666@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net>, CZ
<CZ RemoveThis @no99spam.com> wrote:

> ³Apple has better commercials, but the Mac is no harder to break into than a
> Windows PC,² says Gartner security analyst John Pescatore.

so if macs are just as easy to break into as windows, why is there
still no mac malware in the wild? maybe it's not as easy as he claims
it is.

> What¹s more, most
> IT shops can automatically patch large numbers of PCs at the same time,
> while Macs generally have to be patched one at a time, he said.

that's totally false.

> From http://www.securethoughts.net/2007/10/osxrspluga-trojan-horse.html
> Security researchers at Intego, creators of NetBarrier, have discovered a
> new Mac OS X trojan horse named OSX.RSPlug.A, out in the wild. They found
> this trojan hiding on porn sites, disguising itself as a Quicktime codec
> that visitors running OSX must download and install before being able to
> watch videos.

it is not 'in the wild' if you have to download and install something.
 >> Stay informed about: Opinions on Norton AntiVirus 10? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Opinions on Norton AntiVirus 10? 

On 2008-02-12 16:15:49 -0800, "CZ" <CZ.TakeThisOut@no99spam.com> said:

> So, there is no technology in OS X that obviates antivirus s/w?

Specifically, no. People will tell you that Mac OS X is more secure,
and it probably is, but whether or not it's really secure enough to
never have any viruses at all is not really known.

In order to be a credible threat, the virus:
1. Must be able to execute. Every release of Mac OS X fixes at least
some arbitrary code execution bugs, so there's a chance this could
happen.
2. Must be able to replicate itself on your computer. Most users run an
account with administrator privledges, which has write access to
Applications. So there's a chance this could happen.
 >> Stay informed about: Opinions on Norton AntiVirus 10? 

In article <2008021216273077923-sdfisher@spamcopnet>,
Steven Fisher <sdfisher.RemoveThis@spamcop.net> wrote:

> On 2008-02-12 16:15:49 -0800, "CZ" <CZ.RemoveThis@no99spam.com> said:
>
> > So, there is no technology in OS X that obviates antivirus s/w?
>
> Specifically, no. People will tell you that Mac OS X is more secure,
> and it probably is, but whether or not it's really secure enough to
> never have any viruses at all is not really known.
>
> In order to be a credible threat, the virus:
> 1. Must be able to execute. Every release of Mac OS X fixes at least
> some arbitrary code execution bugs, so there's a chance this could
> happen.
> 2. Must be able to replicate itself on your computer. Most users run an
> account with administrator privledges, which has write access to
> Applications. So there's a chance this could happen.

Yep. Yet for the past SEVEN years, it has not happened. While there are
plenty proof-of-concept viruses, trojans, and malware for Mac OS X (most
of which are created by the same security companies wishing to sell you
their antivirus software, BTW), so far there hasn't been one single
successful wild virus attack against Mac OS X.

There are multiple reasons for that, having to do with the design of the
underlying Unix-based system and of Apple's proprietary user interface
being more secure than WIndows, the lower market share of Macs in
comparison with PCs, the different mind set of Mac users in general, the
Mac user community atmosphere, and so on. All of those are contributing
factors to a platform that is relatively hard to penetrate in a
meaningful way.

That isn't to say Mac OS X is without vulnerabilities. Far from it.
Apple, Mac developers, security consultants, and many others find
vulnerabilities in Mac OS X all the time, and Apple has been pretty good
about patching the OS as these appear. It's important to note, though,
that vulnerabilities doesn't automatically equate for a need for
antivirus software.

There's no guarantee that antivirus software makers will update
definition files in time to catch the first Mac OS X virus, should it /
when it ever hits. And due to the fact that no piece of software is
without bugs, compounded by the fact that antivirus software does things
to your system that can interrupt normal operation, it's really more
trouble than it's worth. So in my opinion, antivirus software is simply
not needed at this point in time.

--
Note: Please send all responses to the relevant news group. If you
must contact me through e-mail, let me know when you send email to
this address so that your email doesn't get eaten by my SPAM filter.

JR
 >> Stay informed about: Opinions on Norton AntiVirus 10? 

In article
<jollyroger-B9234D.20450812022008.RemoveThis@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
Jolly Roger <jollyroger.RemoveThis@pobox.com> wrote:

> There are multiple reasons for that, having to do with the design of the
> underlying Unix-based system and of Apple's proprietary user interface
> being more secure than WIndows, the lower market share of Macs in
> comparison with PCs, the different mind set of Mac users in general, the
> Mac user community atmosphere, and so on. All of those are contributing
> factors to a platform that is relatively hard to penetrate in a
> meaningful way.

It has nothing to do with market share...it's all about the design of
the OS.
 >> Stay informed about: Opinions on Norton AntiVirus 10? 

In article <120220082055501362%rag@nospam.techline.com>,
"Mr. Strat" <rag RemoveThis @nospam.techline.com> wrote:

> In article
> <jollyroger-B9234D.20450812022008 RemoveThis @earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger RemoveThis @pobox.com> wrote:
>
> > There are multiple reasons for that, having to do with the design of the
> > underlying Unix-based system and of Apple's proprietary user interface
> > being more secure than WIndows, the lower market share of Macs in
> > comparison with PCs, the different mind set of Mac users in general, the
> > Mac user community atmosphere, and so on. All of those are contributing
> > factors to a platform that is relatively hard to penetrate in a
> > meaningful way.
>
> It has nothing to do with market share...it's all about the design of
> the OS.

Wrong. Market share plays a part, just as design does, just as every
other factors I mentioned (and some I didn't mention).

--
Note: Please send all responses to the relevant news group. If you
must contact me through e-mail, let me know when you send email to
this address so that your email doesn't get eaten by my SPAM filter.

JR
 >> Stay informed about: Opinions on Norton AntiVirus 10? 

In article
<jollyroger-58CF89.01414313022008.TakeThisOut@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns.net>,
Jolly Roger <jollyroger.TakeThisOut@pobox.com> wrote:

> > It has nothing to do with market share...it's all about the design of
> > the OS.
>
> Wrong. Market share plays a part, just as design does, just as every
> other factors I mentioned (and some I didn't mention).

No, the reason there are no OS X viruses or spyware has nothing to do
with how many Mac are out there in the hands of the people. The reason
that OS X has not yet had any viruses or spyware in the wild is because
the default user is not logged in as an admin with root access. DUH!
 >> Stay informed about: Opinions on Norton AntiVirus 10?