Symantec: Mac users deluding themselves on security

Is this more FUD or are they onto something?

[timster]

Symantec says hackers are turning their attention to Mac OS X. Are they just trying to scare up sales?

[computerworld.com ]

Yes, we've been down this road before, but I've got a bit more respect for Symantec than those other security firms I've read warnings from.

[dcrombie]

They've been doing this every few months for the last year. Lies damn lies and statistics!

If there ever was a virus or worm for OSX (and there hasn't been a single occurence that I'm aware of) then Apple will patch it within days and most computers will update automatically. So where's the fun for virus writers?

Even if one does get through it's unlikely it can do a fraction of the damage that's possible on Windoze.

[sonjay]

And in other news today.... Chicken Little reports that the sky is falling.

In that article I found a single reference to the existence of a single rootkit that the good folks at Symantec interpreted to mean ""While there have been no reports of widespread infection to date, this Trojan serves to demonstrate that as Mac OS X increases in popularity so, too, will the scrutiny it receives from potential attackers" and that ""It is now clear that the Mac OS is increasingly becoming a target for the malicious activity"

Lots of FUD, but no actual evidence for the above assertions.

I'll happily continue using my Mac without benefit of any of the excellent products offered by Symantec. ;)

[microcars]

Are they just trying to scare up sales?

yes

[werd]

When OSX first came out, I read an article in a newspaper where it was stated that the design of the new OS had a whopping great flaw which couldn't be patched, and left it vulnerable to attack. It sounded like an "oops" moment for Apple. If I find the article I will forward a link, in the meantime security threats can be found at [securemac.com...]

[timster]

a whopping great flaw which couldn't be patched

That's probably referring to the classic permissions issue (classic runs as superuser, so a virus that infects an OS 9 app could conceivably take control of the Mac).

That was never exploited in the wild (basically because folks use classic only to run a few old legacy apps, not web browsers or new downloads) and is not much of an issue these days where many newer Macs don't have the classic environment installed at all.

[dragonthoughts]

True that very few viruses are written for macs, but don't be too complacent either. Some Macro virus written for Microsoft Word on Windows still work on Word for Mac (although why anyone would run Word on a Mac is beyond my comprehension)

There are also some threats out there, for example, see:
[vil.nai.com...]

[whoisgregg]

True that very few viruses are written for macs

By "very few" you mean zero? Or did I miss the headlines about the first Mac OS X virus?