Popped up on my Homeland Security Daily Report

scooter · Jan 30, 2006

I know we've beat this idea to death, but Homeland Security is now watching parts of it!

January 26, eWeek — Apple's switch to Intel could allow OS X exploits. The recent move by
Apple Computer to begin shipping Macintosh computers that use microprocessors from Intel
could open the door to more attacks against computers running the company's OS X operating
system, security experts warn. The change could put more pressure on Apple to build security
features into OS X. In an e−mail statement, the company said that the security technologies and
processes that have made Mac OS X secure for PowerPC remain the same for Intel−based
Macs. However, using the Intel x86 platform pulls Macintosh systems onto the same platform
used by Microsoft's Windows computers, a prime target of the hacking community for years.
"Attackers have been focused on the [Intel] x86 for over a decade. Macintosh will have a lot
more exposure than when it was on PowerPC," said Oliver Friedrichs, a senior manager at
16
Symantec Corp. Security Response. There are many more malicious hackers who understand
the x86 architecture in−depth than understand the PowerPC. And attackers have access to
hundreds of documents and examples of how to exploit common vulnerabilities on x86,
whereas exploits for PowerPC are far fewer, Friedrichs said.
Source: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1915923,00.asp

jram · Jan 30, 2006

Symantec Corp

Enough said.. With that said, I'm one of these users that think if Mac could be infected, it would have by now.. I think they try because there is a-lot of money involved in saying "I 'm the first to infect a Mac" Be it the talk show route or just because.. I'm not saying it couldn't happen, I run a AV on all my machines, Mac included.

lonerider · Jan 30, 2006

I agree with jram.

I've seen this topic brought up a lot, and all I have to say is that those who are thinking this way have at best a very superficial knowledge of operating systems and probably no knowledge of programming.

Let me put it this way. If I can get 1K of assembly code to execute on your computer, it does not matter what architecture you're running on (x86, PPC, Alpha, PA-RISC, whatever) except to the extent that my code would be written for a certain target. I own your computer at that point. I could very easily tell your computer to write all zeros to every sector on the hard disk with that 1k program.

The job of the OS is to prevent me from getting that kind of access. That's where the security is at. This is nothing but a red herring concocted by Pro-MS people and AV software makers who want to make some extra cash. There may be some security holes in the x86 version of OS X, but any breaches will be the fault of the OS not the hardware.

jimmyfitz · Jan 30, 2006

i dont know anything about security..i have know real idea about what im talking about but---- i was just thinking that perhaps there arent any security threats virus', spyware, etc is because the mac is so much less popular than windows based pc's...i mean anything is possible.. am i wrong? you use a spear they use a bow and arrow you use a semi auto gun they use a full auto... all the way up too nukes... the same nature is true for computer security am i wrong.. they find a way to hack.. you create a shield.. they find away around that shield.. you build a better one.. an endless cycle

sevenhelmet · Jan 30, 2006

Exactly.

mynameis · Jan 30, 2006

lonerider said:
There may be some security holes in the x86 version of OS X, but any breaches will be the fault of the OS not the hardware.

I concur

to_tough_to_die · Jan 31, 2006

Does everyone just have no clue that OS X is built on Unix?

To create a succesful Unix virus is the holy grail for hackers. The hardware don't mean jack.

No matter what processor, hardware, etc., there has been ONE succesful Unix virus.

It was created in 1988.

dan828 · Jan 31, 2006

So tell me, exactly how would you tell if your mac were now infected with a virus?

deus_ex_machina · Jan 31, 2006

to_tough_to_die said:
Does everyone just have no clue that OS X is built on Unix?

To create a succesful Unix virus is the holy grail for hackers. The hardware don't mean jack.

No matter what processor, hardware, etc., there has been ONE succesful Unix virus.

It was created in 1988.

I think the only reason why there's been a drought of Mac viruses is that there aren't enough out there to make a dent. You need a large target audience to have some mass outbreak. I don't think that situation will be anywhere near. For one its the prejudice PC users already have for the platform. Most people don't want to "think different", they are comfortable where they are. Most HATE change, especially in the way they do things. I haven't heard the general public raving about Mac and Intel - it's the techies that are gossiping. It would take years to swing the market enough to grab enough people to where someone could launch something massive on Apple. I think we're all right for a long while.

coach_z · Jan 31, 2006

correct me if i am wrong but even if someone were to sit and write a nice little virus for us folks using our p'books imacs etc. you would actually need to install and run it yourself which would most likely require you to enter your admin password for it to install.

deus_ex_machina · Jan 31, 2006

coach_z said:
correct me if i am wrong but even if someone were to sit and write a nice little virus for us folks using our p'books imacs etc. you would actually need to install and run it yourself which would most likely require you to enter your admin password for it to install.

I've heard that too... the unix worms/trojans that have been in the past were on some little network of machines - some proof of concept that it could be done. I don't think Apple faces the security risk like Windows viruses. They'd have to devise something different.

johninc · Jan 31, 2006

to_tough_to_die said:
Does everyone just have no clue that OS X is built on Unix?

To create a succesful Unix virus is the holy grail for hackers. The hardware don't mean jack.

No matter what processor, hardware, etc., there has been ONE succesful Unix virus.

It was created in 1988.

I was gunna say when will people learn, I know several people who are convinced there mac needs Symentec's anti-virus software.

deus_ex_machina · Jan 31, 2006

johninc said:
I was gunna say when will people learn, I know several people who are convinced there mac needs Symentec's anti-virus software.

I think it's funny that the people discussing the potential risks are experts from Symantec

macanal · Feb 1, 2006

Mac OSX has more then serveral times the vulnerabilities of windows.
The thing is windows get attacked all the time so Microsoft spend more on R&D for security then everyone else put together.
The result is Windows is becoming quite a robuts OS.

If Mac OSX ever becomes popular and becomes a target of attackers, i think Apple will be in trouble.

But i dont think in the near future Apple (Mac OSX) will ever be big enough for script kiddies and attackers to switch from trying to attack M$ to Apple.

Well lets hope not.

Here

to_tough_to_die · Feb 1, 2006

macanal said:
Mac OSX has more then serveral times the vulnerabilities of windows.
The thing is windows get attacked all the time so Microsoft spend more on R&D for security then everyone else put together.
The result is Windows is becoming quite a robuts OS.

If Mac OSX ever becomes popular and becomes a target of attackers, i think Apple will be in trouble.

But i dont think in the near future Apple (Mac OSX) will ever be big enough for script kiddies and attackers to switch from trying to attack M$ to Apple.

Well lets hope not.

Here

Again, guys, UNIX. Guh... OS X is based on Unix. Unix has been largely unhacked, with exception of small networks, where viruses and the like have been tested, there has only been one succesful Unix virus.

Also, don't think that Apple doesn't concentrate on security, why the **** do you think every rendition of OSX gets at least 5 updates?

johninc · Feb 1, 2006

deus_ex_machina said:
I think it's funny that the people discussing the potential risks are experts from Symantec

I think its funny they make 150k a year.

macanal · Feb 2, 2006

to_tough_to_die said:
Again, guys, UNIX. Guh... OS X is based on Unix. Unix has been largely unhacked, with exception of small networks, where viruses and the like have been tested, there has only been one succesful Unix virus.

Also, don't think that Apple doesn't concentrate on security, why the **** do you think every rendition of OSX gets at least 5 updates?

think about it 5 security updates and no one is really trying to attack mac OSX imagine if people were attacking it as much as windows then all then all the vulnerabilities would be found out and Apple will have to spend alot more on security!!

FACT is Mac OSX has more vulnerabilities then windows just because no one cares to exploit them is a mute point!! Only one virus on Unix, well thats not the point the FACT!!! is Mac OSX and Unix have more vulnerabilities then Windows!! thats the point!!

As i said if Mac OSX ever becomes popular and starts to be attacked, Apple wont know what hit them!
But thats not going to happen

to_tough_to_die · Feb 2, 2006

macanal said:
think about it 5 security updates and no one is really trying to attack mac OSX imagine if people were attacking it as much as windows then all then all the vulnerabilities would be found out and Apple will have to spend alot more on security!!

FACT is Mac OSX has more vulnerabilities then windows just because no one cares to exploit them is a mute point!! Only one virus on Unix, well thats not the point the FACT!!! is Mac OSX and Unix have more vulnerabilities then Windows!! thats the point!!

As i said if Mac OSX ever becomes popular and starts to be attacked, Apple wont know what hit them!
But thats not going to happen

It's not because OS X has a lower market share, it's because Unix is a ******* secure technology for basing an OS off of. To create a Unix virus is like winning the Stanley Cup or the Super Bowl for a hacker.

coach_z · Feb 2, 2006

macanal said:
think about it 5 security updates and no one is really trying to attack mac OSX imagine if people were attacking it as much as windows then all then all the vulnerabilities would be found out and Apple will have to spend alot more on security!!

FACT is Mac OSX has more vulnerabilities then windows just because no one cares to exploit them is a mute point!! Only one virus on Unix, well thats not the point the FACT!!! is Mac OSX and Unix have more vulnerabilities then Windows!! thats the point!!

As i said if Mac OSX ever becomes popular and starts to be attacked, Apple wont know what hit them!
But thats not going to happen

can you back this up with some hard information?? there has been a bit of speculation going on in this thread

rman · Feb 2, 2006

You can go to this site (CIAC), to see the type of exploits for each of the operating systems.

You will see that windows and linux takes more hits.