Apple's always been more than happy to boast about the lower amount of malicious files aimed at its OS X operating system, when compared to its main rival, Windows; as everybody knows, nothing is 100% secure, and there will always be people out there with the intent of harming your computer, and with the upcoming release of Mac OS 10.6 (Snow Leopard), this is certainly not going to change. However, it seems Apple may be trying to keep one step ahead, according to a blog post from Intego, by building a form of system protection directly into the upcoming release.The common way of installing applications on OS X is to have an installer package, which, whilst handy for getting everything where it needs to be, can be rather dangerous as it doesn't usually show you exactly what is being installed. Although you can download free, third-party plug-ins to help quell the problem, it's more than easy enough to end up with harmful files on your computer even after following the usual routine, so this discovery is quite a good one. What Intego has found is that Apple has now included a form of malware-prevention in the package installer service; instead of simply asking if the user wants to install the package, Snow Leopard will scan it quickly, and then display a message if any harmful files are found.
According to ZDNet, it hasn't been stated as to how Apple is handling the file detection, but it appears that they may have partied up with a commercial anti-virus vendor to provide the solution. We've included a screenshot below from Intego's blog, to show what the user will see if anything crops up.
Funny, I always thought that Mac's were immune to malware. According to their commercials they are.
Funny, I always thought that Mac's were immune to malware. According to their commercials they are.
Maybe you could help by pointing us to an Apple commercial that makes such a claim, because no commercial from Apple has ever claimed that they are immune from malware. Viruses, yes, because Mac OS X has better security, they are immune from them, unlike Windows. Yes even Windows 7 has viruses for it.
Nobody is still programming "viruses" as of today. But when people say "a virus" they're generally referring to what the computer-literate call more generally "malware".
Modern malware doesn't infect files as a "virus" would, it can or can not be self-replicating, and it doesn't necessarily need things like high privileges to make your PC a zombie in a botnet (which is the common target).
Such threats can therefore live on any platform.
I haven't seen this pop-up, then again I don't download malware
Precisely
lol
lol
Probably conflict with another Virus you already have then.
lol
Probably conflict with another Virus you already have then.
Good one.
lol
Linux/BSD/Haiku/etc
How can they get infected? they are running a Mac.. Mac's can't get malware. They say it all the time [/sarcasm]
But now they have protection against the little there is for Macs. Now they can push that argument even further, because of course this function will always work perfectly.
If you ever actually listen to what Apple says about this, you would realize that they only claim that Macs are immune to the tens of thousands of viruses that affect Windows. Which is true, as stated.
I don't know if this part was sarcasm or not (I believe not, because you defended the Mac just the sentence before), but I'd have to agree. If there was 100 000 viruses, they would lose complete control in updating this little functionality in Snow Leopard. Now I think I can count the number of viruses for Macs on one hand, 2 at worse. It's gonna be really easy to maintain this perfectly.
Also, it's not going to slow down the system as much to scan files for like 10 possibilities of viruses or malware. But on Windows I don't know how antiviruses work, really, but if it compares each file to the 100 000 existing viruses.... whew, I can understand that when I had a PC 3 years ago, my antivirus slowed it down a lot.
As usual in matters referring to Apple, you are wrong. Go back and watch any of the Mac vs PC ads and show me ONE where Apple said that Macs are completely immune to all viruses.
Hehe, yea. And *Nix gets rootkits. Call the Whaaambulance.
Oh mate, when will you learn. Facts have no place here, this is Apple bashing. If neowin users could understand simple facts, they wouldn't still be harping on about how great Windows 7 5-year old technology was.
I was exactly thinking of the same thing!
Besides, there is that free MS security solution that is going to be released (can't remember its name).
Besides, there is that free MS security solution that is going to be released (can't remember its name).
Project Morro, now commonly called Microsoft Security Essentials. I'm using the beta right now for three reasons:
1. I heard it was nearly as good as NOD32 and Kaspersky (but that was back when it was released, not sure now
2. It integrates straight into Windows seamlessly
3. The obvious one, it's free!
But I think Apple's move is counter-intuitive to their marketing, as shown in above comments. By showing Macs are afflicted with some viruses only goes to show they cannot claim they are entirely virus-proof by nature.
Yes, and this is the equivalent feature now on Macs. I'm not sure what your point is.
Windows probably needed this feature much more than OS X since it's a far larger target, so there's little surprises here IMHO.
All of you that are saying this are really misunderstanding their ads.
Yes, they are saying that Windows get viruses to an extent that it is a problem. But this doesn't imply that Macs don't. They're just pushing it as more of a disadvantage on Windows.
When did you see a Mac ad where they claimed "Macs don't get viruses"?
You must have been the one that didn't watch those ads, because they say "without thousands of viruses and tons of headaches". Which is absolutely true. You can count the number of viruses that affect OS X on your hands.
Well now you're just splitting hairs.
No, I'm quoting the ad word for word. You were the one who claimed that the Mac ads said that "Macs don't get viruses", which they never have said. Every time they mention viruses, they simply claim that Macs are immune to the thousands (or whatever number they happen to mention) viruses that affect Windows.
Besides, there is that free MS security solution that is going to be released (can't remember its name).
It think it is called Project We-can't-make-your-OS-secure-so-we-added-this-program-to-help-make-it-secure-no-you-can-trust-this-one-for-sure!
If you're saying Apple copied Microsoft, then yes sure they did.
But it's something "inevitable" if you understand what I mean. An OS *needs* built-in malware protection a day or another. So yes it's copied from MS, but they really had to do this someday... it's just that MS did it first because their case was critical.
wow, that's actually what the apple ad said?
They should write ads for the pharmaceutical industry! They could sell a medicine that keeps humans from getting the thousands of viruses that other animals get! Just like Macs don't get the viruses that windows gets!
However, on Windows since Anti-Virus companies already came in, if microsoft included Anti-Virus software in their OS there would be anti-trust regulators tearing it apart. So Microsoft is doing the next best thing and making it a free download with MSE.
Before I can use SL I will have to buy a new Mac (thinging the 24" iMac. My six year old Power Mac isn't supported for SL. "Crying the Blues."
Before I can use SL I will have to buy a new Mac (thinging the 24" iMac. My six year old Power Mac isn't supported for SL. "Crying the Blues."
MSE will be offered seperately. If they actively promote it from within Windows, I can imagine Symantec and McAffee bawling to the EU
Using Windows Defender
It's important to run antispyware software whenever you're using your computer. Spyware and other potentially unwanted software can try to install itself on your computer any time you connect to the Internet. It can also infect your computer when you install some programs using a CD, DVD, or other removable media. Potentially unwanted or malicious software can also be programmed to run at unexpected times, not just when it is installed.
Windows Defender offers three ways to help keep spyware and other potentially unwanted software from infecting your computer:
Real-time protection.Windows Defender alerts you when spyware or potentially unwanted software attempts to install itself or to run on your computer. It also alerts you when programs attempt to change important Windows settings.
SpyNet community. The online Microsoft SpyNet community helps you see how other people respond to software that has not yet been classified for risks. Seeing if other members of the community allow software can help you choose whether to allow it on your computer. In turn, if you participate, your choices are added to the community ratings to help other people choose what to do.
Scanning options. You can use Windows Defender to scan for spyware and other potentially unwanted software that might be installed on your computer, to schedule scans on a regular basis, and to automatically remove any malicious software that is detected during a scan.
When you use Windows Defender, it's important to have up-to-date definitions. Definitions are files that act like an ever-growing encyclopedia of potential software threats. Windows Defender uses definitions to determine if software that it detects is spyware or other potentially unwanted software, and then to alert you to potential risks. To help keep your definitions up to date, Windows Defender works with Windows Update to automatically install new definitions as they are released. You can also set Windows Defender to check online for updated definitions before scanning.
As you can see there is no indication that Windows Defender is an AV. MSE is the AV, and at present is still in Beta. Microsoft does not include an AV in their OS's.
Do they? Has there ever been an issue with MS including antimalware and AV as part of the OS?
Windows Defender is not that much of a threat to all the free malware applications so no one really cares.
My god, yes.
Apple doesn't have a large enough marketshare for there to be antitrust violations.
You should read up on the Sherman Antitrust Act.
Market share is not the only thing that creates a monopoly.
Market share is not the only thing that creates a monopoly.
You're wasting your breath. No matter what anti-trust laws say, you'll never convince them to look at anything other than the RDF way they've seen it and will continue to see it.
If Apple integrated it with a commercial anti-virus developer (whom they are paying royalties for and whom there was a competitive tender process to decide) then there is no antitrust concerns here.
Where? Please point to one conversation, one blog, even a twit where someone has made this complaint??
Everytime Apple does something, someone comes up with this excuse. Every single time, like cockwork, someone will trot out this old horse.
The message says "you should move it to the trash" The correct main response from a user to this would be "do it for me". But instead you are given "open", the thing you're trying to discourage.
"Cancel" should be the primary response, but then "cancel" what? You can't assume the user would have the context for the popup.
Finally, the detailed info should be in bullet points, or hidden. You want people to focus on the issue, not the random names and numbers.
(Basically, they should've copied Windows.)
Sounds like a cleaner approach to me. Also makes it easier to organize.
UAC isn't designed to detect malware or virii. It's to let you know that an application is trying to do something that requires administrative privileges and give you the opportunity to approve or deny it. It's more like the OS X administrative prompt.
+1
UAC has nothing to do with viruses. It also warns you for admin access, so it's useless to catch viruses with. It could just as well warn you for a legit application. There would be no way for you to tell the difference. Please don't confuse this feature with UAC.
The message says "you should move it to the trash" The correct main response from a user to this would be "do it for me". But instead you are given "open", the thing you're trying to discourage.
"Cancel" should be the primary response, but then "cancel" what? You can't assume the user would have the context for the popup.
Finally, the detailed info should be in bullet points, or hidden. You want people to focus on the issue, not the random names and numbers.
(Basically, they should've copied Windows.)
I was just thinking that myself too
/sarcasm
Seems they got fleeced given that it can only detect two signatures...
Windows fanboys have been predicting the flood of OS X viruses for nearly a decade now. And yet, you can still count the number of them on your hands.
i guess we thought you would have a marketshare of at lest 10% by now...our mistake.
Even so, if numbers of viruses was proportional to market share, then OS X should still have at least a couple hundred if not a thousand viruses out there.
Right. Except it's not going to be linearly proportional, it would be exponential.
... but let's not count malware, trojans or spyware, right?
-"Hey, did you know you have a virus on your Mac?"
-"IT'S NOT A VIRUS!! It's a keylogger!!!"
Even so, there logically should be many more than there are, if that line of reasoning was at all accurate. Come on, OS X has been available for nearly a decade, and there are less than a dozen, if even that, that is including lab created proof-of-concepts that never show up in the wild.
I'm counting all types of malware. Even proof-of-concept stuff that no user will EVER encounter.
How many examples can you provide links to information about? I really doubt you can come up with even 10.
Change the rich guy variable to Windows, poor guy to MAC, thief to malware.
Here's a 33 page thread of photos of various celebrities using Macs (although admittedly some of the pictures are from movies or TV shows): http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=396597
Here's a 33 page thread of photos of various celebrities using Macs (although admittedly some of the pictures are from movies or TV shows): http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=396597
I'm sure, if asked, you'd find that Apple gives those celebrities those computers. Want to see a celebrity using a Mac? Look up 'Ice-T macbook repair' on Youtube. Here's a hint; it involves a hammer.
Here's a 33 page thread of photos of various celebrities using Macs (although admittedly some of the pictures are from movies or TV shows): http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=396597
I'm sure, if asked, you'd find that Apple gives those celebrities those computers. Want to see a celebrity using a Mac? Look up 'Ice-T macbook repair' on Youtube. Here's a hint; it involves a hammer.
You really want to believe, yeah celebrities love Windows. I am sure they all hang out here, and are following the latest news of W7. Now I don't believe celebs to be a good measure of anything, but you people really want to believe that they love windows.
As for ice-t, he got a new mac, which is why he destroyed the old one.
And Yes im a windows user and No I hold no malice or dislike for Apple or their products (or their loyal customer base), not my personal choice in systems but thats exactly it, my personal choice, doesnt make me superior or better than someone else due to the personal choice they take in a PC (Personal Computer)
Ha ha ha ha, priceless. Any competent IT person knows this. But the drones who echo Apple's marketing (and even some PC users who hear Apple's messages) truly think that Apple is 100% totally bullet-proof.
Now MAC users will have the same great experience of having software blocked by false mal-ware warnings.
You clearly have no understanding of even basic statistics, the number of examples has nothing at all to do with the number of false positives.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.