Hackers pick Google's pocket with Mac virus

reply to post by Aim64C


You're glossing over the reasons for why "macs are immune to viruses" started in the first place, which leads me to believe you don't know either and at the same time are calling these "otherwise intelligent people", idiots. Just find it amusing.

All the trendy followers ruined it for everyone else. I remember the days of very few mac users and those that had a mac actually knew why it was that they were using a mac. Now every "cool" kid at school has one. Someone should invent a virus that attacks followers. Nvm, that's like 95% of humanity gone. Bad idea.

reply to post by Aim64C


So, for an infected jpg you also need to have a compromised exe that can extract the code hidden in the jpg, am I understanding that correctly?
If so I wonder why the jpg is even bothered with as the compromised exe could contain anything.

If I understand correctly an infected jpg on its own is harmless?

I do a little programing, vb6 and play with php, hence my earlier comments that a virus is just another program. Its what its instructed to do that is the difference, at least thats how i see it.

Originally posted by conspiracy88
All the trendy followers ruined it for everyone else. I remember the days of very few mac users and those that had a mac actually knew why it was that they were using a mac. Now every "cool" kid at school has one.

Someone should invent a virus that attacks followers. Nvm, that's like 95% of humanity gone. Bad idea.

I KNOW RIGHT!?!? I have been using apple since birth and my 3g iMac is still a viable web browser, word/data processor and jukebox! Not to mention a treasure trove of old school video games the point is that machine has been in operation, sometimes excessively, for about thirteen years and has shown no signs of any breakdown or failures! (granted it crashes when i push its limits but hey, i'm still running os9 on that sucker and with less than 1gb of ram you should really know your limit...

And that is just one of the many reasons I continue to use and purchase apple computers!

reply to post by Turq1

You're glossing over the reasons for why "macs are immune to viruses" started in the first place

No, I'm not.

Macs have always had computer viruses that affected them. The thing is that Mac computers have never been a large part of the market. Even today - Apple struggles to make inroads into the home computer market. They've made some inroads in the notebook arena... but they really don't have much sway on matters bigger than your pocket (the ipad is an iphone with a larger screen - so I don't exactly count it as being anything other than a cell phone).

securitywatch.pcmag.com...

Yaneza's advice to Mac users? The conventional wisdom still holds: stick to Apple's own app stores, and don't download anything from an unknown source. Following those two rules alone will block most Mac malware.

I will say one thing about the hive-mind Mac users tend to operate on... they are so effectively brainwashed into believing Apple is the best thing since sliced bread that there is, quite literally, almost zero risk they will buy something not made by Apple for their computer. ... An interesting proactive tech support strategy....

nakedsecurity.sophos.com...

This is a very concerning point within the article:

In November, Sophos warned of the Jahlav Trojan. Similar to other malware campaigns, cybercriminals created a bogus webpage claiming to contain a video.

Visiting the site produces a message saying that you don't have the correct codec installed to watch the video - whereupon the site offers you an EXE if you run Windows, and a DMG (Disk Image) file if you are using an Apple Mac.

Controversially, Apple issued a support advisory urging customers to run anti-virus software - but after media interest, rapidly deleted the page from their website.

Emphasis, my own.

Do I understand why they took the support advisory down? Yes - and that is why I will -never- buy a mac product. They pulled it because it would damage their "I'm better than you" marketing strategy that had caught on like wildfire.

which leads me to believe you don't know either and at the same time are calling these "otherwise intelligent people", idiots. Just find it amusing.

Sometimes, it would behoove you to pay attention to how one posts in a thread. If I am answering questions about how viruses work and provide links to them.... why would it be wise to taunt me about subjects related to computers?

Just find it amusing.

reply to post by VoidHawk

So, for an infected jpg you also need to have a compromised exe that can extract the code hidden in the jpg, am I understanding that correctly?

This really depends.

The key thing to remember is that the virus embedded into -any- file must be processed by an executable before it becomes active. Files processed by the system are far more popular to infect, as various system processes have far more access and control over the entire system.

It's not unlike how various games could be used to "root" your Xbox, back in the day (MechAssault and one other game were used for this). By processing a modified save-game file, the game's executables were coaxed into enabling unsigned code to be run on the xbox that allowed you to install non-MS operating systems (such as EVOX).

Similarly - almost any program you use to open up an image can be used. Since most viewers don't have write functions/privileges, it would be rather difficult to use them to infect a machine. However - since browsers -do- process images, there has been considerable interest in the possibility of exploiting the scripting of a browser or browser add-on to allow for pictures and other media to be utilized as a means of infection.

But, really, if someone wanted to invest the time and effort - it may be possible to infect images with a virus that would propagate via popular image processing suites.

So - no, you don't necessarily need a compromised EXE to use a .jpg as a means of infection. However, it was one example of how someone accomplished the task at hand.

Its what its instructed to do that is the difference, at least thats how i see it.

Basically. Computer code is computer code (well - unless you want to start breaking down into individual languages and hardware instruction sets...). The CPU doesn't treat the virus code any different than a game or video stream.

But, at the same time - a virus is unique in that it is not often initiated like a standard program would be.

Mac users simply don't have a respect for the stupidity and vulnerability of a machine.

This is not entirely true. While some mac users are naive enough to believe it, others of us are not. Some of us have made the switch from a Windows based PC to a mac based on our positive experience with some of the other apple products you call i#. It has been my experience that apple products are popular, quite simply, because they work, and my experience with their customer service has been nothing but positive. One does not get that with Dell or HP. Also, a Mac does not come loaded with all of the useles, resource hogging, load at start up bull # that comes on a pre-built Windows PC. My wife bought an HP laptop last summer. It took me an hour or more to figure out what needs to load at start up and what does not so I could get it to boot up at what I consider proper for a new computer. It is an added bonus that there are less viruses out there, currently, in the big bad mean old world of the interwebs with which to become infected. I say currently because I also understand and appreciate the main reason why there has historically been less infection for them. I am however, not naive enough to think that my computer is immune. Lots of users are however......either naive or snobbish about it. One pf the things I like about the mac is that it asks for your system password before any changes are allowed to be made to the registry. I am sure there is a way for a virus writer to work around that, but it is an added layer of security. I am not a software expert by any stretch, but there are advantages to owning and using a mac. As these products proliferate, however, those advantages will diminish, as you so eloquently stated.

reply to post by Hugues de Payens

Also, a Mac does not come loaded with all of the useles, resource hogging, load at start up bull # that comes on a pre-built Windows PC.

The programs aren't useless. Just the person who can't recognize that a program they don't require or desire can be uninstalled.

My wife bought an HP laptop last summer. It took me an hour or more to figure out what needs to load at start up and what does not so I could get it to boot up at what I consider proper for a new computer.

Give me any windows based laptop computer and an hour. You won't believe it's a windows platform by time I get through using the settings built into the operating system that most people never bother to discover or set.

This is why I say macs are surface-deep. "What do I get out of the box?" You'll pay an extra $1000 for a laptop with less storage space, weaker performance, shorter battery life, and a whole host of compatibility issues - because it comes with almost nothing straight out of the box.

That's great - if you expect your computer to -always- have nothing on it. But let's be real, here. You're going to be installing and removing programs, files, etc. These will need to be managed by you, in the end. And that is where Macs really fail - try to manage files or program settings the way you want to (not the way apple tells you) ... and you'll find a completely broken, frustrating experience.

One pf the things I like about the mac is that it asks for your system password before any changes are allowed to be made to the registry. I am sure there is a way for a virus writer to work around that, but it is an added layer of security.

Windows Seven has vastly superior innate system security. The problem is that most people run as an administrator (because they don't want to be prompted with passwords when they install another tool-bar) - which throws many of the security features out the window.

Other problems come from the fact that Windows Seven is designed to operate on multiple partitions (if not separate disk drives). Why OEM manufacturers insist on setting Windows up to install everything to the C:\ drive is beyond me. Vista and Seven were both designed to be very finicky about the C:\ drive, and does not like letting programs originating from outside the C:\ drive to # with files on it. ... So it defeats the point if everything installs there.

Like I said - I can set up a windows machine so that it is very close to bulletproof without doing anything other than making a few simple changes in the control panel. Give me an extra hour and allow me to install a free Microsoft program - and I can kid-proof a computer (well - not from physical damage).

Yes. Kid proof.

Sit down with me and work out a schedule, and I can make it so your kids will only be able to log on the computer for certain lengths of time, during certain times of the day, etc (that's a standard setting in all windows computers - though it used to require a networking class of OS - it has since been adopted in the standard line).

It's pretty strange... some of the best parental control software to ever be developed has come from products designed for business networks.

What it all boils down to is that most mac users don't know any better. They never bothered to manage files or programs on a windows platform, and will never do it on their mac. They've no concept of how easy it should be to navigate the directory system, how easy it should be to change default settings, or even the sense of power or control over their machine.

It's a magic box.

Plain and simple - if you like macs - you've never experienced a proper windows setup. Once you have - the only thing to prefer is the tiny little specifics about the graphic icons or various noises made by the system.