"Apple Says No"

apple can say NO as many times as they might please,but the threats are still there

First Apple IM virus? (Apple IM...AIM?)

"lOL! oMG iTs nOt a vIrus."

One bad apple doesn't make the entire tree bad. Get rid of it and move on.

No, but a tree of apples can be a tasty target for an infestation of worms... Look at the bigger picture... Establish a protection for the tree, not just eliminate one threat.

Poor worms, we saw in the movie Super Size Me what a diet of macs can do to you :-)

When a proper malicoius virus , trojan or whatever hits the mac world, and it will, there will be many casualties, and in the front line will be all those who are convinced that this is an impossibility, for it is always those who are convinced of their own invulnerability that make the easiest targets. There was a report in Australia a couple of weeks ago of the latest victims of the Nigerian bank account scam, amongst the victims were several lawyers and wait for it a financial adviser.

It is the way us Amerians thought before 911. It was our own arrogance, not Bush.

mac viruses been around for years.. there just not as severe....but who knows what will happen now ?

LIAR!!!!!! THERE ARE NO SUCH THING AS MAC VIRUSES!!!! HOW DARE YOU BLASPHEME AGAINST THE ALMIGHTY APPLE!

No seriously, what's up with the slander against Apple? What'd they ever do to you besides try to sell you a "computer" with a quality OS? *grin*

OSX 10.4 is immune so far, but other Mac OS's are far from it.

Are you suggesting that 10.3 and earlier are affected as well as 10.4.5, but not 10.4? Just curious so I know what users to capitalize on if and when problems occur.

Macs have odd versioning. 10.4 is a major update from 10.3, but how big is 10.4.5 from 10.4.4?

I suppose 10.4.4 would have vulnerabilities, and 10.4.5 would not have known ones, which would be classified similar to hotfixes in XP. Every once and a while a major update comes along like Sp2/3, or OSX 10.4/10.5

You're really picky about wording. Focus more on article related facts than comment wording.

I focus on everything... it's called, paying attention. :)

LOL @ reading between the lines :P Hope your weekend is going well Kramy.

I just love how the e-media has jumped all over this like it's an actual story. Have there been any actual e-casualties due to these two "viruses"? Not in an story I've seen. If there were a theoretical virus for Windows, which had not affected anyone and probably never would, do ya think it would receive this media blitz? No.
This is a classic case of pro-Microsoft monopoly-mongers using their power to spread their anti-Mac prejudice unchecked.

Umm, hey guys, help me out here... what was the name of that big scary hypothetical virus from earlier this month that did next to no damage but still managed to scare the bejeebers out of everyone in the tech industry? Wasn't it MyBall&Chain or something like that?

Let's see, what else was a much bigger deal according to the media than most viruses... oh yeah, the WMF exploit... yeah, that caused "some" damage, but was pretty limited scope and over-hyped.

Let's see... I'm sure if I start digging through news archives I could find more... and I can point out the paranoia surrounding 98% of the Windows "flaws", but you get my point by now, I hope. EVERY *POTENTIAL* security risk gets treated with concern on Windows and even the open-source platforms acknowledge security risks, solve them, and move on.

The ultimate point here is that only Apple can get away with downplaying every issue as if it's only possible to be a problem **IF** users are, in effect, stupid. That's right, you heard me... it's not an issue at all because according to them, it requires user interaction, and no Mac user would EVER be stupid and just accept files or click links from people they don't trust.

And input their admin password and then install the image file to a location on their harddrive.

Well if the user was "stupid enough" to click the link, do you reckon they're smart enough to not enter their password?

I mean, seriously... Maybe you haven't worked with non-technical end-users lately, or maybe you have and just ignore the reality of the experience, but most users tend to do what it takes to get the results they want. If they want to see pictures, then they are going to view pictures, and to hell with the consequences.

And before you comment on the intelligence of Mac users, remember that Apple is the one that called them stupid first... afterall, they're the ones saying this isn't a problem at all unless a user takes action... so anyone that ends up affected by the problem is obviously an not competent or responsible enough to protect themselves.

Apple claims there is little to no risk. From my experience with mac users, I would agree.

When you click a link to BlahBlah.jpg and it is instead an exe/equivalent, that's a clue that is quite easy to recognize.

One of the nice things about Macs is that they don't string you out to dry. Macs are designed to teach those that use them and be easy to learn for non-computer users.

Windows XP strings you out to dry unless you properly configure it, and things like defaulting to the admin account mean users think they are safe when anything and everything is running in the background.

Deny it all you want, but Macs are designed to make the fools safer. Out of the ones I've met none would input their password, though all would download the file. Remember, passwords are sensitive things, and everyone has heard "BANKING PASSWORD SCAM!!! WARNING!!!" headlines on the news.

What I find interesting though is that Macs seem to teach more relevent information. I've met oh so many PC users that don't know what a web browser is, and instead know about different file formats. I've also met oh so many Mac users that know what a web browser is(and what OSX's is called), but not what a file format is. Actually, that pissed many of them off when they tried to transfer stuff to their PC...but at least I can have a semi-intelligent conversation with them discussing different programs.

Oh well, what's it matter? OSX was made to keep less technologically inclined people safe, and it does what it does well by making sure they learn the basics.

Kramy,

Just stop dude... you've taken a series of joking comments and turned it into a crusade, lol. Moreover, you're acting like a child who just found out Santa doesn't really exist... "OMG! NO! Apple would never lie to me!"

But since you bring it up, you seem to forget that Apple doesn't have filename "extensions" the way Windows does. Therefore, it is theoretically easier to do the whole "claim it's one format, but it's really another".

That's why it's easier for Mac customers to focus on programs, not formats. It's reasonably a good thing, yes, but on the PC it's the reverse focus-- it's the files and functions that matter... not the programs.

It's a false sense of security that Apple offers, and they've been fortunate in the past because no one gives a crap about them. You overlook the fact that it takes Apple a long time to admit there's a problem though, and just as long to fix problems... but fix they do, which is evident by the number of security updates they released last year.

You can make all the claims you want about which OS is better, but the simple truth is that it boils down to user preference and comfort. If you like it great, but don't be a dimwit and think you've got something better than everyone else just because you and 5% of the computer market say so.

I never said I liked it. Buying a Mac would be the last thing I do. All the "features" they have really interfere with productivity imo, but if you can't use a PC very efficiently in the first place then perhaps a Mac would be better.

""Apple always advises Macintosh users to only accept files from vendors and Web sites that they know and trust. We have a guide to safely handling files received from the Internet," the company said."

I think that this quote from the article is particularly interesting in that they have to have guides for their users. "Our users are safe because..."

It just made me laugh. Well, on to my work.

? so only inefficient users should buy a Mac?

Nobody considers themselves inefficient. Only people that are actually bugged by having to keep lots of programs up to date would switch to a Mac from fear of viruses or spyware.

If you're truely an efficient computer user, then you'll be able to try a Mac and get extremely annoyed by all the features that slow things down, yet still impress anyone watching with your amazing speed.

If you aren't annoyed, then great! If you are annoyed, you won't buy a Mac.

"Once Leap.A is activated, when any iChat user changes his or her status, the worm initiates a file transfer for the latestpics.tgz archive. The file transfer takes place in the background and is hidden from the user.

In addition, the malware replaces all applications that have been used in the last month with itself, saving the original executable as a resource fork with the same filename. According to F-Secure, "When the application is opened the worm activates first, then it runs the original application from the resource fork.""

>>> No, it can't possibly be a virus! It's malware... either way, it's a vulnerability... a flaw, if you will... in Mac OS X. So while it's true that I wouldn't encourage Mac users to run out and buy the latest copy of Norton or McAfee... I would recommend that they go and download Ad-Aware or dare I say it, Windows Defender. :)

Once [insert virus name here] is activated your Antivirus is fubar'd on windows and you need to reformat.

The betanews article isn't telling all the facts...

I think Nate did an excellent job on this article, actually... the relevant information is present, and he did a good job of leaving it open to the reader to decide if it's really a virus or "system damaging, but user-incompetence-required malware". He uses respectable sources, too.

As for the Windows virus comment, that's not at all accurate for a [insert virus name here] comment. If you wanted to be specific, SOME viruses do circumvent SOME SCANNING ENGINES, and some of them prevent quick easy detection or removal... but I've yet to see one require a full Windows format. That's why you keep Windows AND your Antivirus software up to date at all times, and that means running updates manually from time to time, not just the auto-install features. It's also why it's a good idea to update to the latest version rather than just renew the 2002, 2003, 2004 versions that you bought years ago. (Had a girl come into the office today with Norton 2003 complaining that we removed it in favor of our managed corporate edition-- said she paid for 2003, and we pointed out "yeah, 3 years ago... viruses know how to ignore that version now.")

Many viruses can get by Norton(non-corporate) anyway. Recently someone tried to download nLite(a Windows ISO cleaner) and Norton thought it was bad and deleted their My Documents folder. :P

Not too sharp a person...I mean using Norton, and somehow losing all their stuff in the process.

And yes, I know I was very vague.

You know I'm just using Norton as one example... you can use AVG or Kaspersky or whatever. Good grief, don't be so limited.

Nod32?

Yeah, sure, you betcha! :)

If you download something, and have no idea what it is, you are a dumba**. It is only a matter of time before these so called "hackers" find a way to make a virus for every OS that exists. It is improbable to say that a virus will never exist for Mac. This is the beginning of a problem for Mac users. Malicious software or not.

PS: I'm sure it's only a matter of time before someone finds a way to write a OS X virus though. Those dang widgets in Tiger seem like a great place to start.

This vulnerability exists on EVERY OS that allows you to install and run software. It is simply a bad application. You have to physically unzip it and execute it in order for it to work.

This is very different than a virus that attacks your system without you taking any physical action. In truth, many Windows viruses are similar to this. All of the e-mails you get that have an attachment of type NAKEDGIRL.JPG.EXE are very close to this.

Still, it is not exploiting a vulnerability in the OS, just a vulnerability in the person who can't resist opening up attachments.

It's technically a Trojan, but for non-technical people any malicious software is a "virus." Also, it does have the ability to replicate itself and "infect" other files, so it could be clasified as a virus, it is just not a "worm."

As almost every antivirus company on earth i've read that has this "malware" listed lists it as a WORM.

Still, who cares??? The whole virus vs. bad program thing is stupid. If it does damage to files, masks itself as something it is not, changes any security settings (firewall, etc.), OR installs without your knowledge it should be considered malware. I hate that term but it is the only one that includes every bad thing out there.

"I hate that term but it is the only one that includes every bad thing out there."

Except mooses. It doesn't include mooses.

...and they can be reali nasti.

I saw a moose mess up a truck real bad once!

A moose once bit my sister....

That's terrible, can I suggest a piece of cheese and a moose trap

I would like to apologize for the sillyness of the writers... they have been sacked.

Ouch! I hope your sister was bigger than the truck!

Finally....someone gets it.

Thank you.

I had one step on my toe once, and then he ate my little brother. He tasted so bad, the the moose threw him up immediately and ran away!

If it needs your permission to be installed and the user needs to click on it. It is not a virus, a Trojan or other malicious software yes. Still far fewer problems than windows, where you can get infected just by being connected to the internet.

No argument there.

Are you saying that we don't have Instant Messenger Viruses, but we instead have Instant Messenger Malware?

Because I'm pretty sure that most of the time they have to click the links or accept and run a file to get infected, and take some action... but they're still classified as viruses.

All this political correctness and specialized definitions of crapware is pathetic bull sh*t... If it compromises the security of a computer, it's a security flaw... if it replicates itself, it's a virus. Period.

No interaction required according to the story.

"Once Leap.A is activated, when any iChat user changes his or her status, the worm initiates a file transfer for the latestpics.tgz archive. The file transfer takes place in the background and is hidden from the user."

"It's not a virus"

[/arnold]

Does it spread without explicit user intervention?

"requires a user to download the application and execute the resulting file." No.

Does it replicate without explicit user intervention?

"Once Leap.A is activated, when any iChat user changes his or her status, the worm initiates a file transfer for the latestpics.tgz archive. The file transfer takes place in the background and is hidden from the user." Yes.

Does it harm the computer?

"In addition, the malware replaces all applications that have been used in the last month with itself, saving the original executable as a resource fork with the same filename." Yes.

2 out of 3 ain't bad.

I'd call it a virus.

If the user has to download it themselves, it is not a virus; it is (at best) a trojan horse. Further, the user is prompted for their administrator's password before the code can do its damage, so there is a specific warning that the picture they thought they were viewing is actually a program. Both of these are why "Leap.A" has been given a lowly "1" on the severity scale--it's not running wild and it warns the user before it does anything.

"If the user has to download it themselves, it is not a virus; "

I generally have to download a virus myself in windows...so 80% of windows viruses aren't really viruses after all??

"Further, the user is prompted for their administrator's password before the code can do its damage"

I don't see the mention of that anywhere...nowhere does it say that it asks for the admin password...soooo, where did you pull that out of??

"it's not running wild and it warns the user before it does anything."

Most viruses are spread through user stupidity...not much difference here. And this is just a "proof of concept" type of virus anyway....

From The Mac Observer:

Quote:

Leap-A is merely an attempt to disguise an executable program as an image in effort to trick the recipient into launching the program. Launching a program in Mac OS X requires the user to enter their password, an indicator that should clue most users into the fact that it is not what it appears to be. If launched, the application requires administrator access before it can install files that attempt to send copies of itself to people that are in your iChat Buddy list.

UnQuote.

Actually it generally doesn't prompt for an administrator password. It changes files int he "Applications" directory which is writable for people with "Admin" privileges. In fact, in most stand-alone Mac OS X installation (i.e. home users), people are running as Admin's - so no password prompt.

Thats the problem with most desktop OSes is that they run as admins, giving Virus' more power.

Sue me for using the BetaNews report for my information.

Does the article above mention passwords? No?

well then....

Hey, at least I read the damn thing. :P

BTW: Most viruses are "downloaded" by stupid users. That file called "SW Galaxies Account Generator.exe"... Yeah, that'd be a virus.

Besides, you'll noticed I voted that part a "no"...hence the 2 out of 3 rating. :)

RE: "I don't see mention of that [requires an administrative password] to launch"

It's not mentioned because it's a given with OS X. All application installs, including Apple's own software, require an admin password. That's why security is tighter in OS X. There WERE viruses (virii?) for Mac's Classic OS for the same reason there ARE viruses on Windows now: namely, pretty much anything you want to launch will launch with a click and do whatever it was written for (for good or evil).

The difference between a virus and malware is slim, but seems to boil down to---

a virus is like poison that someone slips into your soda and you drink it without knowing.

This Mac "virus" is a loaded gun you have to put to your own head with full awareness when it asks for your password to install itself that you are NOT holding a picture of a gun (or .jpg of one) but an actual gun and that you are the one pulling the trigger.

In other words it only effects less then intelligent people who would not question a photo file needing an administrative password, not just unfortunate people (as with a Windows virus) who turned on their PC and opened Outlook Express.

I would agree. Possibly, not a severe threat, but still none the less - a virus.