Apple Mac users

jayme1

23n1th wrote: »

As far as I'm aware oracle update/patch their software and if it's critical, (ie able to comprise windows) Microsoft will push the update through windows update which can be done quickly. I don't read in the article that Microsoft update java itself, just that they patch windows.

I don't think that's how it works, Java isn't installed or shipped with Windows the user has to install it themselves, therefore updates work in exactly the same manner as other programs (Flash ect.), the user is prompted to install the update by the Java program, not through Windows Update.

in fact because Java doesn't come with Windows is a very good thing, very little actually uses Java anymore (outside programming) so most people won't miss anything by not having it installed (websites for one don't use it anymore)

some of the advice from this malware news is that users should disable Java if they don't use it (which will be the vast majority of users) cause if you don't have it enabled you are immune from malware using exploits like this.

tombruton87

people dont realise how much is made using java especially on mac as it doesnt have c#, I think some core apps are written in java aswell im not sure

Dave101t

doesnt the update, which automatically installs, fix any potential attacks, even the botnets? we have no antivirus on this mac and id say its still true, the standard mac security, when set to autoupdate and install, requires NO extra security.
plus, 600,000 macs, mostly in the USA, doesnt the slightest windows trojan usually affect 100million pc's? and require this update, that update, restart, bios adjustment, call to customer services, system restore, and finally buying a new pc?!

Mr_Toad

It was only a matter of time, which is why both my Macs had AV installed from day 1.

smos585

I don't believe that Macs are any more secure than PCs (this might cause Mac aficionados to suffer from apoplexy). It’s simply a question of where the virus writers etc feel they will have the biggest impact. If there are 95 PCs to every 5 Macs (and I don’t know the actual numbers), then I sure as hell would find my time better spent on the PCs. IF Macs become much more popular etc, then we may well find more MAC attacks.

Incidentally the last-but-one poster exaggerates somewhat, it is rare indeed to have to reinstall the OS on PCs because of malware, and I’ve never heard of a PC being ditched because of malware (apart from some cases where the owner didn’t know better).

m5rcc

almillar wrote: »

m5rcc - Microsoft will make similarly bland claims about protecting you too.
Stick with the facts- there are more viruses/malware etc around for Windows. More Windows PCs have them installed too.

I've never said they were not.

[Deleted User]

Dave101t wrote: »

doesnt the update, which automatically installs, fix any potential attacks, even the botnets? we have no antivirus on this mac and id say its still true, the standard mac security, when set to autoupdate and install, requires NO extra security.
plus, 600,000 macs, mostly in the USA, doesnt the slightest windows trojan usually affect 100million pc's? and require this update, that update, restart, bios adjustment, call to customer services, system restore, and finally buying a new pc?!

600,000 is a huge number of computers in a botnet.

For comparison, the Kelihos (aka Hlux) botnet was around 150 - 160,000 in size when both parts of it were taken down.

23n1th

I think what people are missing here is that this botnet is a direct result of apple.

Had apple acted promptly this wouldn't have happened and the apple using masses could go on pretending they were immune to viruses.

Its quite ironic really. Their low market share made them safe from being targeted as it wasn't worth it, which they then used to market their products as safe - not needing AV, thus increasing their market share making them now worth targeting.

mrochester

23n1th wrote: »

I think what people are missing here is that this botnet is a direct result of apple.

Had apple acted promptly this wouldn't have happened and the apple using masses could go on pretending they were immune to viruses.

Its quite ironic really. Their low market share made them safe from being targeted as it wasn't worth it, which they then used to market their products as safe - not needing AV, thus increasing their market share making them now worth targeting.

Naughty Apple. I'm sure they'll learn their lesson and do better next time. Luckily my MBP escaped unharmed

Gratis

23n1th wrote: »

Its quite ironic really. Their low market share made them safe from being targeted as it wasn't worth it, which they then used to market their products as safe - not needing AV, thus increasing their market share making them now worth targeting.

The greater irony is that if you have both Mac OS and Windows installed on a Mac and you go surfing and emailing with Mac OS because it’s safer, it can pick up a virus to which Mac OS (sensibly used) is itself immune but which will hop over to the Windows partition and infect that.