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 474114
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: ???
by Gone fishing on Sat 21st May 2011 11:31 UTC 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[7]: ???
by Gone fishing on Sat 21st May 2011 15:23 in reply to "RE[6]: ???"
Gone fishing Member since:
2006-02-22

Security Essentials (MSE) is an exceedingly good AV; it's a whole lot less resource-hungry than the others


MSE is certainly OK, on Virus Bulletin its been tested 4 times and missed a in the wild virus once http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/vendor?id=70 I use ESET NOD (tested 67 times tailed 3.) So I think time will tell if MSE is good.

As for resource efficient where would you get a reasonable impartial review of AVs? The popular press would have us using McAfee (failed the 4 of the last 5 tests) or Norton. - Well Mac Defender or Norton that would be a tough call

Reply Parent Score: 2

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[7]: ???
by Gone fishing on Sat 21st May 2011 13:51 in reply to "RE[6]: ???"
Gone fishing Member since:
2006-02-22

Vista comes out in 2006 - much improved in security appalling in most other respects, XP service pack 3 in 2008.

Mid last decade, probably the worst years for out of control virus problems, most viruses in the wild date from 2007.

So lets say recent past is about then.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: ???
by smashIt on Sat 21st May 2011 20:00 in reply to "RE[6]: ???"
smashIt Member since:
2005-07-06

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


and even then the 2 major outbreaks came from people not updating their systems

how long was iloveyou patched before the actual virus came around? 3 month?

Reply Parent Score: 2