Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Flashback trojan reportedly controls half a million Macs and counting

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 125 posts

Re: Flashback trojan reportedly controls half a million Macs and counting

#81

Post by echo-unity »

vectorpush wrote: post #70
superuser2 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are constraining your discussing to Windows 7. I am not. XP may have disappeared from the life of a non-corporate programmer, it's still everywhere for me. Hence the impedance mismatch. Most of our shop's customers did not see a business need to upgrade, and acquaintances that can afford to buy new computers while their old ones are still running (however poorly) tend to be Mac users anyway. >every terrible ailme…

You are constraining your discussing to Windows 7. I am not. XP may have disappeared from the life of a non-corporate programmer Well what version of OSX are you using to make your comparison? SP3 to 10.8? Either way, there isn't some nebulous security gap between OSX and Windows, vulnerabilities exist in all systems and a responsible vendor patches them when they're discovered. Please show me how to remotely comprom…

|vulnerabilities exist in all systems

Couldn't disagree with you more.

Re: Flashback trojan reportedly controls half a million Macs and counting

#82

Post by gnaffle »

vectorpush wrote: post #32
superuser2 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it is correct that Macs can get viruses. Where people get upset is when you generalize this to say that because >1 virus exists, OSX presents no significant advantage over Windows. Viruses are not a fact of life for Mac users. Talk to anyone who uses or services Macs; you'll be hard-pressed to find anyone who's even seen an OSX virus. Whereas for Windows power-users, cleaning viruses for friends/parents is pract…

Viruses are not a fact of life for Mac users. Neither are trojans, and that is exactly why this trojan has manifested so successfully. Windows users are mostly hardened to the basic threats of the internet (don't open a random exe etc), and are cognizant of the reality that malicious software does target them. Non-technical Mac users have been lulled into a false sense of security that will eventually make them a mor…

If most trojans and viruses are still made for Windows, how can this statement not be true? If you took a random sampling of infected websites or virus emails, the large majority would probably be targeted at Windows.

Actual risk of a _targeted_ attack is a different matter.

Re: Flashback trojan reportedly controls half a million Macs and counting

#83

Post by rbarooah »

vacri wrote: post #68
ealloc wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe "PC" has historically meant (or often been used to imply) "IBM PC compatible" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PC_compatible ) which Apple/Mac was not, until they switched to x86.

The problem is that viruses don't relate to the architecture - otherwise linux and *bsd (on the x86 platform) would have also been windows-like with their malware. I know I'm playing semantic games here, but so is Apple with this slogan :)

In the context of Apple's "Mac vs PC" campaign, does anyone seriously have doubt about what they mean by a PC?

Re: Flashback trojan reportedly controls half a million Macs and counting

#84

Post by rbarooah »

beedogs wrote: post #18
aboodman wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To Linux! Quickly now!

In 10 years, I bet most of us will be running Linux on the desktop, actually.

Serious question - how do you see us getting to there from where we are now?

Re: Flashback trojan reportedly controls half a million Macs and counting

#85

Post by rmc »

vacri wrote: post #42
phillco wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't Apple used to claim that Macs didn't get viruses? I can't remember. (This would be at least several years ago, when Mac malware was still fully theoretical.) It's possible they never stated it directly, and the phrase was spread by fans. To be fair, their slogan is currently "Macs don't get PC viruses" [1]. Which is true. Although, devilishly close enough to blur the two in somebody's mind. [1] http://www.appl…

Given that macs are PCs, being personal computers, it's not true that macs don't get PC viruses.

In the general public's eyes Macs are computers, so yes they are PCs. In the Appleland, "PC" is synonomous with "Microsoft Windows", and hence Apple Macs aren't PCs.

I had a long time Apple user ask me if I had a Mac or PC. I was using Ubuntu Linux at the time, so I said PC :P

Re: Flashback trojan reportedly controls half a million Macs and counting

#86

Post by rmc »

Xuzz wrote: post #5
philaquilina wrote: post #4

As someone who used to sell Mac computers, I used to get asked the question "Is it true macs never get viruses?", to which I replied "No that's not true." (It was just an apple reseller store afterall so I was never compelled to bend the facts.) I'd try to explain the caveats a bit: a smaller market share and the unix based operating system requiring more permissions, yada yada, being "prohibitive" to an attack but s…

The interesting part is that I still haven't seen one traditional "virus" — even is thing appears to still be just social engineering users to install it, by pretending to be Flash Player. I can't imagine it's that much more difficult to actually find an OS X vulnerability to propagate with, but I still haven't seen any. Edit: It appears this uses a Java vulnerability, rather than the fake-Flash Player-installer that…

The interesting part is that I still haven't seen one traditional "virus"

Originally, when it was just us geeks using computers, 'virus', 'malware', 'trojan', etc. where different terms for different things.

Now a days, 'virus' is used by the general public & media to refer to any sort of bad programme that should be removed.

Re: Flashback trojan reportedly controls half a million Macs and counting

#87

Post by rmc »

pagekalisedown wrote: post #69
deet wrote: post #64

Apple includes a lot of third-party software in OS X, and if they don't start patching those packages as promptly as the software maintainers do, exploiting these non-Apple or open source packages could become a common strategy. Attackers can watch other platforms roll out updates before Apple and then target the same software in OS X. Not that the same vulnerabilites will always work, but it's certainly a worry. Thi…

That's a good observation. Avoiding GPL3 software, like newer versions of bash and gcc, might have the unintended consequence of putting their users at risk.

I highly highly doubt we'll see a day when there are significant exploits for Joe Soap Mac User from a bug in bash or gcc. Those are not software that Joe Soap is likely to have install (e.g. gcc), or will be hard for a website to run.

Re: Flashback trojan reportedly controls half a million Macs and counting

#88

Post by ralfd »

pooriaazimi wrote: post #29

I seriously doubt that 600,000 macs were infected... How do we know this number is correct? Because a completely unknown security firm that sells Mac antivirus software ("Dr. Web", a russian antivirus company) tweeted about it!

I also am extremely skeptical.

Re: Flashback trojan reportedly controls half a million Macs and counting

#89

Post by DanBC »

eli wrote: post #30
FireBeyond wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And almost no Windows "malware" in the last decade has been a traditional "virus" either. Trojans, social engineering, all so much easier.

I disagree. Visiting a malicious website or opening an email that exploits a vulnerability in your os or software is very common.

And those are not viruses unless they self-replicate.

Re: Flashback trojan reportedly controls half a million Macs and counting

#90

Post by el_presidente »

rbarooah wrote: post #80
nextparadigms wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not clear. It implies that the Mac can't get any viruses.

No. If they didn't qualify it with "PC" it would have that implication. By qualifying it, they make it unambiguous.

They're implying that only PCs have viruses.
Post reply on HN