Apple Didn't Issue a New Anti-Virus Advisory
News Commentary. Will bloggers and journalists please stop writing that Apple has suddenly advised its users to use anti-virus software? That's simply not true. |
Gizmodo got it right and got around to writing it before me. Gizmodo's headline says it all: "False Alarm: Apple Mac OS X Anti-Virus Recommendation Is Old."
But I've been reading pretty much everywhere else that Apple has changed its security policy and now is advising users to get anti-virus software. This change, the mass of misguided bloggers and journalists assume, means that Macs are more susceptible to malware as marketshare increases. It's a big, hairy non sequitur, baby. One doesn't follow the other, and the first is simply wrong.
There haven't been any major new malware attacks to suggest increasing Mac marketshare has generated more malware. Just two weeks ago, I blogged that in fact Apple's increasing marketshare hadn't led to more attacks—that Microsoft's marketshare mythology is wrong.
That's problem one, people jumping to some strange conclusion that Apple's advisory was because the Mac was now more vulnerable. Problem two: There was no new advisory. Gizmodo blogger Jesus Diaz rightly observes that the so-called warning "is just an update to this support article from 2007. The new tech support note, which even shows the reference from the old article, only lists new anti-virus software versions. This is normal in tech notes."
Jesus also reminds that Apple used to distribute anti-virus software with .Mac. How true. I've had an Apple online services account since 2000 (When it was iTools, later .Mac and now MobileMe). Apple started offering anti-virus for free to .Mac subscribers in July 2002. I lamented when Apple later took away the McAfee anti-virus. McAfee had pretty much stopped regularly updating the software, which broke after several Mac OS X updates.
I get really peeved about feeding frenzies that follow some stories, which propagate misinformation. The reporting here wasn't rocket science, just a careful reading of the support document and some knowledge of Apple history.
I'm amazed at how this thing has spun outward. No offense intended to my peers, but I simply can't resist:
- Silicon Alley Insider buys into the marketshare malware myth and says the advisory is warranted.
- Washington Post: "This is news to me," writes Brian Krebs. That's the problem, Brian.
- Macworld should know better. But doesn't.
- InternetNews writes (wrongly) that "Apple is now admitting that its users could benefit from protection from security threats."
- BBC asks, "Can the Mac catch a cold...I've just watched the 'I'm a Mac, I'm a PC' advert which shows the PC guy coughing, spluttering and falling over, while the cool Mac guy remains immune to his virus. I wonder whether Apple's marketing department will decide that's a line which doesn't play so well any more?"
- PC World: "Say it ain't so: Apple encourages antivirus software...after years of belittling-and rightfully so-Windows' lame security."
- DailyTech writes that "Macs are not the virus-free playground they once were, says Apple."
I could go on, but I'll stop with these. If rightly Techmeme, Brian started this whole mess. But I won't attest to that. I don't want to start another falsehood.
There's a strange footnote to all of this. While writing this blog post, I viewed Apple Support document "HT2550." Later on, when I checked back the cut and paste from document, I got Apple page error: "We're sorry. We can't find the article you're looking for." If I search Apple's support site, I can bring up a link to the technical note, which is titled "Mac OS: Antivirus Utilities." But the link goes to the same error page. Just to make sure there was no browser glitch, I tried to load the link in Firefox and Safari; no luck.
I can only assume that Apple removed the support document. Brian's post cites a publish date of Nov. 21, but the version I saw was updated today, which is when most of the blogs and news stories posted, too. Could it be somebody at Apple got tired of all the unwanted attention caused by support document?
Now, it's gone, or at least as I post this blog—and so is the older "4454" document HT2550 replaced. Now what does that say about Apple's so-called new recommendation that Mac users use anti-virus? My bigger concern: That a new feeding frenzy of misinformation will start; somebody will write that by removing the support document, Apple changed its position on the necessity for installing Mac anti-virus. Oh, please! Somebody slap me.
Update: An Apple spokesperson had this to say about the technical note's removal: "We have removed the KnowledgeBase article because it was old and inaccurate. The Mac is designed with built-in technologies that provide protection against malicious software and security threats right out of the box. However, since no system can be 100 percent immune from every threat, running anti-virus software may offer additional protection."
So much for the change in policy everybody wrote about, huh?
[Please send your tips or rumors to watchtips at live.com].
Comments (28)
But this still proves how false their commercial claims are.
Posted by Anon | December 2, 2008 11:13 PM
What claims are false? It is a good idea to run anti virus software on your mac. Not because your mac is likely to get infected with a virus. It is a good idea so that when you come into contact with files that you make sure they are clean so as to not be a carrier of a virus that you can spread to PC users.
Come on people I don't know why anyone buys into this notion that there is little threat from a virus because of market share. What script kiddie would turn down the chance to be the first to infect a mac if they had the skill.
I dare the virus community to come up with a virus. They can't and won't!
Nuff said
Posted by John | December 3, 2008 1:26 AM
Their commercial claims are not that implausible. Most malware is written for Windows, on the Mac the level of threat is not that high.
Posted by Anon too | December 3, 2008 1:32 AM
I'm really surprised that the vast majority of people have never run anti-virus software. I always assume people have the software and just run it every once in a while. I use ClamXAV when I want to scan a file I've downloaded or received via email, but I don't have it set up to continually scan. I read a post today at Mac Guru Lounge on the Top 5 Mac Security Tips for the Holidays, which also talked about running AV software.
Posted by Mike | December 3, 2008 6:20 AM
Spot on Joe!
J.
Posted by J | December 3, 2008 8:34 AM
Apple has it coming.
They blast TV with smug advertising filled with half-truths (like implying digital cameras always working with a Mac before a PC...yeah, that's exactly what a camera manufacturer is going to do...), so naturally people want to take them down.
Posted by Centerfield13 | December 3, 2008 9:20 AM
@Centerfield13
Give me a break. They are 30 second commercials, not documentaries, and they strike a chord with lots of Windows users. You obviously want to be offended, so sputter away.
Posted by ja | December 3, 2008 10:35 AM
When we bought our iMacs back in July 2007, we decided to include Intego VirusBarrier V4. Partly it was because, as Windows veterans, we couldn't fathom not having some kind of protection. But also, as the Apple Store employee pointed out, it is possible for viruses downloaded by a Mac to endanger Windows running under Parallels, even if OS X itself is immune.
When my subscription runs out this June, most likely I'll be upgrading to the latest VirusBarrier. It's worth it, for a little peace of mind.
Posted by Bob | December 3, 2008 11:06 AM
People have a false sense of security. Macs have an underlying Unix system with a terminal. I could write a really really mean script and call it something seemingly harmless. Then a totally oblivious Mac user executes the script and something fun happens, like deleting their files or doing a number of other malicious things. This is how viruses are born!
Posted by James | December 3, 2008 12:42 PM
My 20 years of virus free computing for both personal computing and for running my business substantiates Apple's claim of built in security.
I have never bought anti-virus software and I have never had a virus. Owning a Mac is in itself protection enough for me. I do use a back-up system but that is just common sense. In fact OSX is 8 years old and has 0 viruses to date. I am neither lucky nor ignorant, it's just that Apple products are better built. Nobody is claiming 100% security here but the fact is that Mac users have no real need for AV software the way other's do.
I think Apple would have a very long line up of people willing to tell their virus-free story in a commercial.
Posted by Robert | December 3, 2008 1:51 PM
@James
You really have no idea what a virus is do you.
Posted by Bill Smith | December 3, 2008 2:54 PM
@James:
The idea that anything that runs a shell like Bourne shell or C shell is the same as any other is simplistic to the extreme. Security is not a matter of Windows vs. Unix, it is one of systematic creation of holes vs. systematic security.
Even though every system is vulnerable, Windows was created insecure and has never quite changed in its old ways (lots of new insecure features in every release followed by years of patches), while the real multiuser systems had builtin security from the start and have improved with time.
Posted by Andres Villarreal | December 3, 2008 3:56 PM
@John
First, viruses for Mac's exist, they have existed, I've already written a background false that embeds in Safari and Firefox. And it updates with firefox, it keeps self injecting it's code with every update. Mac's aren't, and never will be safe. It's just not benefical to publish a code for such a small group of people. Most *nix O/S are vunerable in ways you can't imagine, but also the easiest to publish your own viruses for.
Another topic, the Mac commericals? Full of shit. I use Gentoo, not windows or Mac. But I know, they are, full of shit. However, they are very clever at advertising, I'll give them that.
As for proof of the virus, I put it on a few mac's in the mac store out in the California Bay Area, then told the reps they had to find a way to get rid of it. Probably destroyed the programs and remade them. Which is how you kill a virus.
Posted by CD | December 3, 2008 4:42 PM
Here's a thought: Could all this publicity actually make script kiddies and professional malware writers sit and take notice? Could it be in effect, a self-fulfilling prophesy?
What do you guys think?
Posted by Dej | December 4, 2008 9:03 AM
Mac's are my preferred choice of machine but:
just because the OS isn't attacked like Windows doesn't mean it's immune. In the 14 + years of using Mac's I've only encountered one virus (in year one). The anti virus program I was using caught it.
Just because something hasn't happened before doesn't mean it won't occur.
I'm afraid that when one does occur, many will get burned from over-confidence.
If you exchange files with other users, it's wise to keep your system up to date with current virus defs. Don't pass on 'bad' stuff to your PC buddies).
We currently run 1470 systems. 80% Macs. Trust me - I worry much more about the PC's.
Posted by Mike | December 4, 2008 9:28 AM
@CD
Very easy to say you did it without proof. I say BS.
Posted by rs | December 4, 2008 9:37 AM
So how can OSX protect against a malicious trojan that does a "rm -fr $HOME"?
Posted by Ted | December 4, 2008 9:57 AM
I agree it can happen, but love that it hasn't on a major scale (I hear there are a few "theory" tests, but nothing more... so to all us mac users....keep your mouth shut, your head down, and we'll hopefully continue to click happily.
Otherwise we'll end up being the boy who cried about crying about a wolf... er something like that ;)
Posted by merrmerr | December 4, 2008 10:10 AM
Don't be silly. Of course market share matters. Apple doesn't care about market share? Market share means money and money attracts thieves. Besides I started trying windows with 2.1 and have used it on a daily basis starting with 3.1, NT, 2000 and XP. I've never had a virus.
Posted by Keith | December 4, 2008 10:20 AM
Oh the humanity!!!
Safe computing practices dictate that no matter which platform, YOU INSTALL AN ANTI-VIRUS PROGRAM.
I've been a Mac user and Mac/Windows support specialist for over 15 years and each computer I've configured has had some version of an anti-virus program installed on it.
The Mac platform is simply more resistant to malware, not invulnerable. Remember at the Black Hat conference, they were able to hack one, but only after they were given physical access to the system.
Posted by Rich | December 4, 2008 10:59 AM
To Apple fans: Before 9/11 or the bombing of twin towers, there were no terrorist attacks to the USA. There were people warning: it will happen, it is a matter of time. I think the same can happen with viruses and Macs, so you have to take precautions.
Posted by Roque Mocan | December 4, 2008 1:05 PM
@rs
I prefer not being arrested to providing you with proof. It's a nice thing not to be someones butt buddy. And my program isn't a very easy to install one unless your just downloading firefox for the first time really.
And yes, thank god people are admitting it's not invulnerable, and market share does have some play, it may not be the biggest seeing how windows is still a whooping majority of computer O/S. It's all very dependent. Basically, as long as you play it smart, you won't get a virus is how I see it. I've personally never run anti virus on my XP and Vista computers, Linux, or the 2 mac's that still run. With the exception being my servers. Which are all Linux.
Posted by CD | December 4, 2008 1:10 PM
@CD
Speaking of not being arrested, I'm sure the Apple Store guys were thrilled when you put the POC virus on their machines. I'm surprised you were not arrested on the spot.
Posted by Stratocaster | December 4, 2008 1:43 PM
@ CD
You’re a Wanker. All Mac's at the Apple store get re-imaged nightly.
If what you say was true did that make you feel superior? What point were you making, why screw up someone else’s day because of your twisted sense of making a point that no one but you could give a shit about.
People like you are full of it.
Posted by spagbol | December 4, 2008 6:38 PM
"All Mac's at the Apple store get re-imaged nightly."
Must be because they are so insecure and easy to screw up, huh?
Posted by bsnguy | December 5, 2008 11:16 AM
Roque: there certainly were terrorist attacks in the US prior to 9/11, including a terrorist bomb explosion in the parking garage of one of the World Trade Center towers in 1992. Several people were killed & others injured. And that's just from Al-Queda. If one broadens the field beyond foreign nationals, there's Oklahoma City & the Unibomber.
Not necessarily disputing your main point, Roque. Just pointing out that misstating facts calls your entire argument into question.
Posted by Charlie | December 5, 2008 11:52 AM
I see statements like "Mac's a built better than PC's" which is not true. The hardware itself is no better than any other name brand PC makers, being a support specialist, I see just as many hw failure on Mac as I do for PC's.
But if you compare the OS's and the underlying infrastructure, in short core of the OS, Mac OS/X is better that Windows.
Windows has been using the the same basic core since Windows Advance Server 3.1 (aka Win NT 3.1) which dates back to ~1994, and Microsoft has made it free available for the development community, where as Apple say you need to pay to become a developer.
So who's the easier target???
Well duh!!! Microsoft
BTW, I'm running MacOSX 10.5 on a Dell XPS in native mode and had no problems.
Posted by Apple_n00b | December 5, 2008 1:16 PM
Anyone who thinks that Mac's are immune to Malware is an idiot.
Posted by E-Dub | December 8, 2008 11:12 AM