Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 20th May 2011 20:37 UTC
Apple I have personally tried to pretty much let the whole MAC Defender trojan thing pass by, since we're not a security website. However, we have an interesting turn of events this week. An article over at Ars Technica quotes several anonymous Apple Store employees as saying that the infection rate of Macs brought into the Apple store has gone up considerably. More interestingly though, Apple's official policy states that Apple Store employees are not allowed to talk about infections to anyone - they're not even allowed to inform Mac owners if they find the infection without the customer's knowledge. Another interesting tidbit: Apple mandates the use of Norton Antivirus on company Macs, according to one Apple Store genius.
Thread beginning with comment 474072
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: ???
by JairJy on Sat 21st May 2011 02:56 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: ???"
JairJy
Member since:
2011-05-21

This is social resposability:
http://www.microsoft.com/security/pc-security/antivirus-rogue.aspx

Microsoft cares about user security more than any other company. Microsoft Security Center offers info about different kinds of malware and social enginering scams. Also, Microsoft gives an Antivirus for free.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: ???
by BluenoseJake on Sat 21st May 2011 07:21 in reply to "RE[4]: ???"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

They do care about security more than any other company, but they we're dragged there with a gun to their heads, it wasn't always (or mostly) like this.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[5]: ???
by Gone fishing on Sat 21st May 2011 11:31 in reply to "RE[4]: ???"
Gone fishing Member since:
2006-02-22

Microsoft cares about user security more than any other company.


Not more than any other company, maybe more than Apple. MS provides an AV because due to the legacy of its terrible security in the recent past, there are many orders of magnitude more Windows viruses, than viruses for any other OS.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: ???
by WereCatf on Sat 21st May 2011 11:54 in reply to "RE[5]: ???"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

"Microsoft cares about user security more than any other company.


Not more than any other company, maybe more than Apple. MS provides an AV because due to the legacy of its terrible security in the recent past, there are many orders of magnitude more Windows viruses, than viruses for any other OS.
"

To give Microsoft atleast some credit Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE) is an exceedingly good AV; it's a whole lot less resource-hungry than the others and is very good at doing its job without getting on the nerves of its users. Not to mention it's free.

So while Windows still has a security-hole here or there and Microsoft can't really stop people from being stupid and installing malicious things atleast they are trying to.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[6]: ???
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 21st May 2011 12:12 in reply to "RE[5]: ???"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

MS provides an AV because due to the legacy of its terrible security in the recent past


Define "recent".

There hasn't been an outbreak (i.e., like in the XP days) of anything since the release of Vista.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: ??? - ahahahaa.. hehe.. sorry, what?
by jabbotts on Sat 21st May 2011 14:15 in reply to "RE[4]: ???"
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06


Microsoft cares about user security more than any other company.


oh damn that's funny. Where you making a joke or did you actually type that with a strait face?

If Microsoft cared more than any other company we would have a modular Windows install. Everything including a web browser and basic image rendering libraries wouldn't be deeply embedded into the kernel. Privileged separation would be implemented in a strong manner instead of the wet cleanex separation between regular users and administrators. We'd never have had regular programs needing administrator rights to run. They would deliver anything but "good enough" quality product. We wouldn't have the immense "antivirus echosystem" that's remained so well supported by every Windows version so far. In all likelihood, Microsoft would be producing Windows under an open source license to take advantage of the expert peer review available; it seems to work for Cryptology and they tell me that relates closely to security.

I mean; keep some perspective. Microsoft cares more about user security than Apple. Sure. But "more than any other company"?

Reply Parent Score: 1

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Everything including a web browser and basic image rendering libraries wouldn't be deeply embedded into the kernel.


Lolwut? Where do you people come up with this stuff?

Privileged separation would be implemented in a strong manner instead of the wet cleanex separation between regular users and administrators.


You realise that when it comes to access control, Windows NT is miles ahead of vanilla UNIX and Linux, right? You need SELinux to come even somewhat close to the kind of fine-grained control NT allows, and then SELinux is a complicated mess.

Reply Parent Score: 5