Print 78 comment(s) - last by wootwoot33.. on Dec 3 at 10:36 AM

Apple doesn't offer its customers free security protections like Microsoft, so Sophos is offering them instead.  (Source: YouTube/Apple)

Sophos' antivirus protects Mac users from many common threats.  (Source: Sophos/YouTube)
AV company steps up to the plate when Apple refuses to provide its users equivalent protections to Microsoft's

Sophos is offering Mac users a great deal.  As Apple has thus far refused to protect its users with free antivirus software, Sophos is stepping up to the plate, launching Sophos Anti-Virus Home Edition for Macs which will protect Mac users against "today’s and tomorrow’s Mac threats".

For all Apple's years of "Get a Mac" ads belittle the "virus"-plagued PC, it is Macs today that are relatively unguarded.  While their tiny market share has protected them in the past, a growing number of cross platform attacks are letting Mac users get infected, just like your average PC.

But the key difference is where Microsoft is very keen on protecting its users, offering free antivirus software (Microsoft Security Essentials) for Windows XP, Vista, and Windows 7; one of the internet's best online vulnerability databases (Knowledge Base); and a wealth of malware removal tools.

Apple, by contrast, doesn't seem very concerned at all about safeguarding its loyal customers.  It has a glacial patching time and has basically pretended that Mac viruses don't exist, which has led many of its loyal fans to do likewise. 

But Mac viruses do indeed exist in the wild as some users can attest, and they are growing in number.  After all coding for the Mac is not inherently different from coding Windows apps -- and many security researchers argue that Apple's OS-level security is actually weaker than Windows'.

Apple has quietly advised its users to get an antivirus program, but has declined to offer them one for free like Microsoft does.

Chris Kraft, product management vice president at Sophos, comments to EWeek, "While most businesses recognize the importance of protecting their Mac computers from malware threats, most home users do not."

Sophos security expert Richard Wang adds, "Mac users must remember that less targeted is not the same as invulnerable."

The new suite will protect against the new trojan-worm Mac-Koobface variant, among other malicious programs.

The company sells a number of packages for businesses with Macs.  The cheapest is a 3-user, one year license priced at $136.50 USD.  That product competes with similar offerings from Norton and AVG.  It also competes with smaller third party offerings like iAntiVirus.

Any Mac users who commonly use OS X are strongly advised to grab Sophos' new freeware, if you don't already have antivirus protection.  The install will take approximately 150 MB of disk space.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

not surprised by apple
By menting on 11/4/2010 12:39:47 PM , Rating: 5
For Apple to provide antivirus for their MacOS, it would be the same as them admitting that Macs can get viruses too, and we know that's not going to happen, because it's pretty much impossible to get Apple (or Steve Jobs) to admit they have a problem unless it's right in their face obvious.

RE: not surprised by apple
By borismkv on 11/4/2010 12:43:44 PM , Rating: 5
I'm waiting for the Steve Jobs, "If you have viruses, it's because you're using your computer wrong!" comment.

RE: not surprised by apple
By Luticus on 11/4/2010 12:48:58 PM , Rating: 4
if you have Windows and you have a virus you "ARE" using your computer wrong :)... anyone with half a brain, who doesn't go downloading porn/cracks/hacks/etc. will tell you that it's pretty uncommon to get a virus. Just practice safe browsing habits and actually use the security settings your computer provides you and you *should* be fine.

RE: not surprised by apple
By Spivonious on 11/4/2010 12:50:59 PM , Rating: 5
I totally agree. But it seems that Windows users are scared by viruses enough that when a popup shows that says "You're infected with 53 viruses! Click here to quarantine your computer", they click on it and install some of the nastiest malware out there.

RE: not surprised by apple
By Luticus on 11/4/2010 1:44:30 PM , Rating: 5
lol, unfortunately there's not much in the "cure department" for gullible... :)


RE: not surprised by apple
By borismkv on 11/5/2010 7:12:34 PM , Rating: 2
Social Engineering. Gotta love it.

RE: not surprised by apple
By Azure Sky on 11/6/2010 8:40:32 PM , Rating: 3
"you cant fix stupid"

ron white is correct there....

RE: not surprised by apple
By MrBlastman on 11/4/2010 1:36:21 PM , Rating: 3 in your hosts file is your friend. Then you can browse to wherever you want and as long as MVPs is on your side, you'll constantly have an updated hosts file to block out most of those unwanted pests. :)

Oh, I almost forgot...

Apple computers don't get free virus protection because they don't get viruses!


RE: not surprised by apple
By PorreKaj on 11/4/2010 1:39:47 PM , Rating: 2
Someone care to explain this "trick" ?

RE: not surprised by apple
By klutzInMotion on 11/4/2010 2:35:14 PM , Rating: 3
Basically you put known bad sites in your hosts file and force them to to localhost, essentially disabling the url. Using black list has its own problems (where do u get latest update?) Beside, people can always use direct ip as url to bypass this.

RE: not surprised by apple
By Spivonious on 11/4/2010 2:29:22 PM , Rating: 2
Isn't that just the localhost IP? I don't see how that would make any difference.

RE: not surprised by apple
By MrBlastman on 11/4/2010 3:04:02 PM , Rating: 5
Exactly. If you put in the hosts table next to an entry say for bypasses DNS lookup as the hosts file gets first priority and when the computer tries and resolves the URL, it takes the hosts entry and tries to send you to thus blocking your computer from being able to access the site.

In practice, you would use this for malicious websites or advertisers so you don't see ads or say a script on a site tries to pop up a malware site, it instead pops up localhost (i.e. nothing), preventing you from being hurt.

Go to for more info.

RE: not surprised by apple
By AstroGuardian on 11/5/2010 4:31:24 AM , Rating: 3
This free software SpyBOT gets an update and the Immunization option sets malicious website's URL to localhost in hosts. Use this it's awesome.

RE: not surprised by apple
By putergeek00 on 11/4/2010 3:57:52 PM , Rating: 2
Why not just use IE7 or IE8 which already has a built in real-time blacklist of infected or malware installing websites?

RE: not surprised by apple
By inighthawki on 11/4/10, Rating: 0
RE: not surprised by apple
By piroroadkill on 11/5/2010 4:47:11 AM , Rating: 2
Because it will only block the sites within the browser. The hosts file trick will screw up any connection made on the system using DNS.

RE: not surprised by apple
By jonmcc33 on 11/4/10, Rating: -1
RE: not surprised by apple
By PrezWeezy on 11/4/2010 4:52:02 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, that's completely and totally wrong today. The "Fake A/V" has infected sites like MSN, CNN, Seattle PI, and many other sites which are completely reputable sites. They are buying ad space from Google with fake companies and infecting the ads. So all you have to do is open the page and it will try to install. If you have XP you don't even have to click yes. Vista and 7 are more protected, but they still can get infected. It's not as hard as it was 2 years ago to get a virus now.

RE: not surprised by apple
By Lerianis on 11/6/2010 4:16:31 PM , Rating: 2
I have to disagree. With UAC in Windows Vista and 7 (and those are the ONLY two operating systems for consumers that you should be running today), it's pretty near impossible to get infected unless you are a real idiot.

Protected mode in IE7/8/9 also prevents most attackers from being able to 'automatically' install stuff on your system as well.

With Windows XP, yes, drive by downloads ARE a real danger, but that is the reason why IT IS GODDAMNED WELL TIME TO STOP USING IT!
It's ten year old tech, unable to be fixed easily or at all without a total rewrite, which they have already done in Windows Vista and 7.

RE: not surprised by apple
By Lerianis on 11/6/2010 4:12:57 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, I download all those things and I have very rarely gotten hit by a virus. In fact, the ONLY virus alerts I have gotten on my system are for codec things (which I FINALLY 3 years ago realized were not necessary to download and were most likely viruses) and mistaken alerts for game trainers/cracks that are totally virus free.

RE: not surprised by apple
By Buz on 11/7/2010 6:05:02 PM , Rating: 2
I've only seen one virus in the last 3 years and it came from a friend's Ipod. Filthy things.

Of course he blamed me for giving him the virus because there's no way he could have ever got it.

RE: not surprised by apple
By DCstewieG on 11/4/2010 4:18:25 PM , Rating: 2
I have seen sooooo many Windows users say exactly that while complaining about the Get A Mac commercials and boasting that they don't use AV.

RE: not surprised by apple
By borismkv on 11/5/2010 7:14:05 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly. To hear Jobs say it will be poetic justice without scale.

RE: not surprised by apple
By Iaiken on 11/4/2010 4:56:29 PM , Rating: 5
I'm waiting for the Steve Jobs, "If you have viruses, it's because you're a disgusting porn monger and I hate you." comment.


RE: not surprised by apple
By kattanna on 11/4/2010 12:48:14 PM , Rating: 4
For Apple to provide antivirus for their MacOS, it would be the same as them admitting that Macs can get viruses too


the decision to not include AV software on a mac is ALL about image, which is the driving force behind a mac to begin with.

RE: not surprised by apple
By Tony Swash on 11/4/10, Rating: 0
RE: not surprised by apple
By xpax on 11/4/2010 2:11:10 PM , Rating: 5
I'm sure this comes as no big shock to anyone, but you're wrong, again.

Macs do get malware, and as more people use them, it'll only get worse. It is well known (amongst people who aren't stupid) that OS X is the least secure OS available today. Once the bad guys start taking advantage of this, it'll be the beginning of the end for this current phase of Macsurdity. Back down to 3% market share you go.

RE: not surprised by apple
By Tony Swash on 11/4/10, Rating: 0
RE: not surprised by apple
By Gio6518 on 11/4/2010 2:40:19 PM , Rating: 5
(although Macs are already over that if you factor out corporate Window sales).

Factor MAC's out of our school systems and Mac would be down to 1 maybe 2%

RE: not surprised by apple
By Tony Swash on 11/4/10, Rating: 0
RE: not surprised by apple
By JakLee on 11/4/2010 6:46:34 PM , Rating: 3
In the real world it is extremely unlikely that there is going to be a magic moment, magic event or turning point which will somehow demolish the brand reputation Apple has.

Actually that is an easy one to change. 1 nasty virus that is Apple only & is very hard to update/find-remove and also does something very bad (like bot-net your computer & steal your personal info with a keylogger) that hits quickly but takes quite awhile to find out would do it.

RE: not surprised by apple
By satory on 11/4/2010 8:39:05 PM , Rating: 2
In the real world Mac's have a firmly entrenched reputation for security, mostly because actual existing malicious security problems occur on another platform.

existing? well thats nearly obvious isn't it?

Now I'm not an expert, but most of the EXISTING malicious security problems would of been made to target the more wide spread platform, and more than likely due to the differences in the OS's they would affect Macs in the way that they affected Windows machines. But MS are learning, little by little and have made some progress in their AV software, but now its Apples turn. They shouldn't be blind to the fact that the need to be more responsive to possible threats the more market share they get.

In the real world it is extremely unlikely that there is going to be a magic moment, magic event or turning point which will somehow demolish the brand reputation Apple has.

Yeah I cant imagine there would be a turning point that would damage Apple, but that really because there are a lot of Apple users that are in denial of any negative things that Apple do, (and yes there's a few blind MS people around as well)

RE: not surprised by apple
By Tony Swash on 11/5/10, Rating: 0
RE: not surprised by apple
By Luticus on 11/5/2010 8:30:40 AM , Rating: 2

you whine about lack of knowledge... allow me to point out why this article is the stupidest thing i've ever read... i feel as though it's planted a virus in my brain!

No one can have missed the commotion caused by Microsoft Windows of late. It began with the announcement by Google that they'd been hacked by China. Then the revelation that way too many Google computers were running Windows and way too many of them were running the intergalactically shunned IE6 web browser, bane of web designers and security consultants everywhere.
this fist paragraph shows a COMPLETE bias and basically screams "this is not an article but a windows bash fest.

Here's what's important to understand: if a Windows system bottoms out in a BSOD, then there's something very wrong at kernel level.
WRONG: a windows system can bsod's because of driver issues, major system crashes, bad hardware and many other reasons and usually doesn't involve the kernel (as the source of the problem). A windows bsod is a catch mechanism which renders the computer locked down (hence your only recourse is to reboot) due to the crash to prevent things like hardware/software system damage. If i remember correctly it's the mac systems that have "kernel panics".

Windows programmers like to talk about processor ring levels. Intel processors have different so-called rings. The Intel processors run code at different levels and keep track of where they are at all times. Apple computers of today use Intel processors too, so the concept is applicable on Mac OS X as well.
Only if the software takes advantage of it. Doesn't mean crap if it isn't used. Even if this is available on mac's, what does it matter? It's not a minus on the windows side of things...

Mac OS X is a variation on a vanilla Unix theme. All the important system files are locked away and out of bounds to ordinary users. Take a look yourself.

How old is this article? I'll spell it out for you... U A C !
UAC completely invalidates this argument because it does EXACTLY THE SAME THING!

So take the time now to pay a visit to the other side of town. See how the poor unfortunate live. The recent issues with Windows BSODs have to do with a rootkit that seems to have spread to a lot of computers. What's a rootkit?
This is an issue where these were installed on Sony machines from the factory. Talk to Sony... and by the way, they aren't doing this anymore (as far as i know).

The most powerful file attribute in MS-DOS is the 'read-only' attribute. With this attribute set, applications can't write to files. But because MS-DOS is a single user system, anyone - any process - can remove this attribute on a whim.
Again, how unbelievably old is this garbage, ms-dos died with windows 9x/ME. The windows command prompt is NOT ms-dos. The command prompt (especially that of vista/7 and their server equivalents respect permission settings). By the way, if you think "read only" is the most powerful permission setting in windows you're a crack head...

Unix systems have several ways to achieve this, such as su ('substitute user') and the even more effective sudo ('substitute user and do'). Users need not log in to Unix systems with the root account but can temporarily escalate to root status provided they are able to supply the proper credentials.
windows uses "run as user/administrator".

Windows doesn't have a good way to do this. Windows doesn't have a secure way to do this. Windows doesn't have a viable counterpart at all.
AGAIN: windows uses "run as user/administrator". This emulates to "sudo" functionality perfectly.

Watching those Windows fools panic everytime there's a catastrophe can be infuriating or frustrating or enervating. But sitting on a secure system where none of this ever applies has to elicit a smile. Slashdot had a huge thread on the topic the other day. Some of the quotes there are precious. Precious few contain any helpful insights. But they're all extraordinarily amusing.
Utter, total Bull shit... This article is garbage and is not only comparing the newest mac technology to windows tech that's 10+ years old, but it's even wrong about the old stuff......

No wonder you're crazy Tony, if this is the garbage you've been reading into... WOW, just... WOW...

It is my true and honest hope that you are an exception and that not all mac users are this stupid... I have more faith in my techy counterparts than this and hopefully someone from the mac "side" will back up my statment here when i say that this article and the fact you you DARE to reference it here shows your garbage, biased point of view in its true color and only serves to make you look like i total fool. I am now dumber having read that!


RE: not surprised by apple
By Luticus on 11/5/2010 8:57:51 AM , Rating: 2
Didn't see this at the very bottom (past what looked to be comments but were in-fact only "quotes":


In past jobs I left my workstation on 24/7 and would always find it at the login screen after a set of updates along with the stupid balloon about how Windows happily restarted itself for me once I was logged in. My user account was centrally managed with limited privileges of course. And since the company had no IT person pushing out updates, MS was doing all of the work.

So yes EVEN IF you're only logged in as a LUA, Windows will still perform the updates and reboot itself. If you decide to shut down, Windows will apply the updates without any privilege escalation, even as a limited user (and you'll get the 'do not turn off or unplug your computer' warnings).

windows xp: control panel -> automatic updates. Here you can turn off automatic updates.

windows vista/7: control panel (icon view) -> windows update -> change settings. Here you can turn off automatic updates.

Whoever wrote this article is a complete tool, has no idea how to operate windows, is NOT a computer tech (obviously) and probably works at a mac "genius bar". And i say "genius" with utter sarcasm because this guy is an idiot.

RE: not surprised by apple
By Tony Swash on 11/5/10, Rating: 0
RE: not surprised by apple
By Luticus on 11/5/2010 12:29:27 PM , Rating: 2
Mac osx 10.6:
system preferences -> software update, check "check for updates" and set a schedule, check download updates automatically. It might not "install" them with out your authorization but it will download them and put them on your machine meaning the same exploit is technically "possible".

I've never heard of any virus/hacker exploiting the windows update system. in a corporate environment (and at home) i use wsus which is used to update all my windows machines (they sync with that server which in turn syncs with windows update and then my server filters things i don't want, and from there my machines grab their windows updates). In a standard user environment your given the CHOICE to enable automatic updates. You don't have to. Your also given the CHOICE to automatically install downloaded updates, but you do not HAVE to.

All the world has gone Unix except the boys in Seattle and there is a reason for that.

that's funny, because windows is still the operating system with the largest install base, and windows 7 is the fastest selling operating system of all time seconded by... wait for it... windows xp! unix/linux based environments aren't bad, i actually am a huge fan and really like them. What you're doing here though is promoting complete lies and BS. if you're going to knock windows at least come up with REAL flaws. What you've done here is show a complete lack of knowledge of the operating system and nothing more.

RE: not surprised by apple
By Tony Swash on 11/6/2010 3:25:14 PM , Rating: 1
system preferences -> software update, check "check for updates" and set a schedule, check download updates automatically. It might not "install" them with out your authorization ".

Exactly. In MacOSX nothing can get installed with out explicit use authorisation, in Windows it can. The difference is an indicator of fundamentally different security architecture. If it's possible to install software and make changes to the system without used permission then it is inherently less secure.

I've never heard of any virus/hacker exploiting the windows update system.

You know as well as I do that that that is not was is being argued. If it is structurally possible in an OS to escalate permissions to the level where software can be actively installed and run on your system without your permission then that OS is inherently less secure than one where such a thing is impossible.

In the end you don't have to do this sort of analysis to discover that Windows is the world's most insecure OS. Just use empirical evidence. Just count the number of real world exploits per OS. That's one area where Windows really does excel :)

RE: not surprised by apple
By Luticus on 11/8/2010 4:32:09 PM , Rating: 2
If it is structurally possible in an OS to escalate permissions to the level where software can be actively installed and run on your system without your permission

First of all you're talking about system UPDATES, second these updates do not have to be installed automatically. The user can choose to install them manually if he/she wants... You're splitting hairs.

By the way, convenient dodge to the REST of my post prior. Your article is still garbage even if this one simple fact is or is not true. All this arguing is irrelevant because of the fact that the article spends about 90% of it's duration comparing leopard/snow leopard to the days of MS-DOS/pre windows 2000, 10+ years in the past. That article is ridiculous and so are you for referencing it or even suggesting it as a viable argument. This is a pathetic attempt and I will go out of my way to call you on any further like it. I feel sorry for people who buy into garbage like this. You have to be the most biased individual I've ever met. I've met some crazy "mac fans" before but this garbage tips the scale. A computer is a computer, get over yourself. The product you happen to like is NOT the end-all, be-all, best thing ever! Every product has it's pluses and minuses and for someone so bent on pointing out all of Windows minuses you have managed to show none. I use Mac, Windows, and Linux (among others) every single day, and am very skilled and well versed in all of them. You CAN'T sell me a BS argument! If you're going to argue with me about the quality of a computer product you'd better know your stuff and you'd better be 100% right. No half baked crack head article will convince me otherwise. Unless you really know your stuff and are also 100% correct, I will call you on it... You can't win. This whole trick you do where you skim a post for it's "weak point", the spot you think you can exploit to make your next wild, insane claim... will not work, I will also call you on that! Very convenient, read a whole post and ignore all the good comments that shut down every thing you've said, then find the one thing you can build a case against and push that and only that... yea that's not going to work on me... If you're going to reply, reply in-full!

RE: not surprised by apple
By dark matter on 11/6/2010 8:24:42 PM , Rating: 1
You really a funny guy dude, you remind me of one of those guys of God TV, you know, the crazy ones that believe their own bullshit.

RE: not surprised by apple
By INeedCache on 11/8/2010 9:30:17 AM , Rating: 1
You need to lay off the crack pipe. Is Apple giving them away with Macs instead of AV software?

RE: not surprised by apple
By themaster08 on 11/5/2010 3:18:55 AM , Rating: 1
In the real world Macs are more popular than they have ever been in the last 25 years.
Probably because there are more people in the world than there were 25 years ago.

Guess what? PC's are also more popular than they have ever been in the past 25 years.

Yet OS X's market share still hangs around the 5% mark. OS X saw a decline in market share over the past 12 months.

To put that into proportion, that means that Macs are still selling at the same rate as they've always been if you factor in population and PC sales.

RE: not surprised by apple
By Helbore on 11/5/2010 10:40:56 AM , Rating: 1
What the heck are you doing on a tech site?

RE: not surprised by apple
By Gio6518 on 11/4/2010 2:54:49 PM , Rating: 4
Much of Apple's focus has been on the new mobile market where they appear to be doing rather well.

Apple has no idea about its probabally better that they dont offer a security suite, even in their mobile area, an app must pass Apple so called rigorous inspection, and they let something likee this get through...

RE: not surprised by apple
By Luticus on 11/4/2010 3:12:36 PM , Rating: 5
On a side note... (regarding the "get a mac" picture above) i'd like to see an altered version of that commercial:

mac: boy it's nice to be out here alone...
UAC guy: Mac attempting communication on port 1121, confirm or deny?
PC: Deny...

UAC turns to mac, kicks him in the balls and says to the pc "Port closed... threat neutralized"

Mac falls over vomiting all over himself.

words flash on screen: The best defense is a good offense... UAC kicks balls!

:) much better :P

RE: not surprised by apple
By Luticus on 11/4/2010 3:28:57 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think the image of the Mac as being safer will change and I don't think the sales of Macs will decrease, Mac sales have outgrown the market for 18 quarters in a row so there is a bit of a trend there :)

Windows has had 90+% of the pc market for years and years.... so there's a bit of a trend there...

All in all these "oh my god Macs get viruses" stories make some folks get very over excited but in the real world the impact is zero.
The worst part is that you're probably right here... That's the bad thing. Idiots will continue believing they are invulnerable and apple will continue doing very little because they want to maintain their "image" and so much of their user-base will be highly screwed when $hit does inevitably hit the fan.

Much of Apple's focus has been on the new mobile market where they appear to be doing rather well.
true, they have done rather well here, even in the face of large competition. while i think this is great i do hope someone steps up and offers some "more capable" devices because i hate how locked down apples are and i'm not touching android ever.

RE: not surprised by apple
By morphologia on 11/4/2010 2:46:54 PM , Rating: 2
All someone needs to do to compromise an Apple machine is want to. Whereas Microsoft builds dynamic security features into its software and updates it frequently, Apple is counting on there being little interest in Mac malware (counting on it, and telling their worshippers to count on it too). After all, how much mayhem can a cyber-vandal cause by attacking a minuscule portion of the overall market?

Cyberbaddies like to see evidence of their work, and writing a Mac virus would result in very little devastation, like duct-taping a cherry bomb to the side of a battleship. They want headlines, news broadcast stories and visible mayhem...and compromising Apple systems won't cause that (even assuming Jobs doesn't pay everyone to bury the story).

The cyber-infrastructure of the world at large is built on something other than Apple products. Probably because doing otherwise would result in huge security gaps, compromised systems worldwide, and a Sad Mac face that you could see from Mars.

RE: not surprised by apple
By Luticus on 11/4/2010 3:00:10 PM , Rating: 2
The only real security in mac is inherited by the fact that it's based on BSD. This, while good, can be overcome.

And nothing is going to change that.


Time + infections + microsoft improving it's security models will change it plenty. micorsoft is already leaps and bounds better off in public opinion and true security than it was a few years ago. If osx is ever targeted on the grand scale windows is, well, only time will tell. Fact still remains though that it's the best policy is cover your @$$. There is nothing to be gained by being blissfully unaware.

RE: not surprised by apple
By ClownPuncher on 11/4/2010 3:19:31 PM , Rating: 3
I hope, for your sake, this is all some elaborate ruse and you are actually just some Microsoft fanboy going "deep cover" into the realms of the Apple Distortion Field with some serious layer cake style satire.

RE: not surprised by apple
By Reclaimer77 on 11/4/2010 5:06:03 PM , Rating: 3
Even for you Tony, that was pretty weak. I knew you would comment on this article, I just thought you would come out with something a lot better.

You're worse than a fanboi. You've become an Apple apologist.

RE: not surprised by apple
By bigboxes on 11/4/2010 5:42:39 PM , Rating: 2
It's just reader1 and his new username.

RE: not surprised by apple
By Tony Swash on 11/4/10, Rating: 0
what did you expect?
By Setsunayaki on 11/5/2010 4:58:42 AM , Rating: 2
The problem to macs are far more severe...As a hacker who has spent my time turning platforms to mud, heavily into system defense and security..

Thanks to APPLE's Advertisements, they have caught TONS of people who are trusting macs for their most sensitive information. This means the likelyhood of a hack causing something vital to corporate or national security to be breached and copied by hackers is a lot higher...

So high that the iPhone security breach was considered to be one of the worse network security breaches in the history of the nation.

No one cares to hack PCs anymore except to affect the individual and deal with things like identity theft, etc....Every major hacking group cares about stealing company information and government secrets + military contracts that can be sold to rival powers for millions upon billions.

The problem to Anti-Viruses is that they slow PCs down considerably, they make them SLOWER than ever before...

I've been using Linux for years as my main OS and I've never looked back. ^_^

RE: what did you expect?
By jabber on 11/5/2010 7:51:56 AM , Rating: 2
"The problem to Anti-Viruses is that they slow PCs down considerably, they make them SLOWER than ever before..."

Maybe if you are using a PC from 1999 or a Norton Total Controlfreak Lockdown Suite.

Otherwise the hit of using a decent standard AV suite is next to nothing these days.

Things have moved on old chum since you stopped using Windows all those years ago.

RE: what did you expect?
By DJ Brandon on 11/6/2010 12:50:26 AM , Rating: 2
Disagree there bud. Antivirus let alone Internet Securities eat up a boatload of ram. Not everyone is on windows 7 with 8 gbs of ram, or better yet XP with 8GB ;).

RE: what did you expect?
By jabber on 11/8/2010 7:00:26 AM , Rating: 2
60 to 85MB system resource a problem for your PCs?

Time to upgrade to 2001 spec or 1GB of ram maybe?

Either that or you are just doing it wrong.

A decent standard AV product (and I do not mean those god awful security suites) ahould not be an issue for ANY pc built in the past 8 years or so.

If it is then something is fundamentally wrong with the setup full stop.

RE: what did you expect?
By DJ Brandon on 11/6/2010 12:42:34 AM , Rating: 2
Dude. You rock. Well said. You get these snobby Apple fans who think they are great and above people since they have

I use PC and always have. I have always used Windows! It's not Linux but it works for me and I to this day have never had a virus!

Why is this important?
By maaax on 11/4/2010 12:35:39 PM , Rating: 5
There are already free AV applications for Mac like ClamXAV. Why does this one deserve its own article?

RE: Why is this important?
By UNHchabo on 11/4/2010 1:34:28 PM , Rating: 2
Well, I'm not familiar with ClamXAV, but I do know that most frontends for ClamAV only provide on-demand scanning, not on-access. If Sophos provides on-demand scanning, then it might be preferable to the other solutions available.

By Spivonious on 11/4/2010 12:33:04 PM , Rating: 2
We used to use them at work until corporate mandated that everyone use McAfee. Sophos makes a great product. Switching to McAfee meant that we had to add more RAM to all of our desktops.

RE: Sophos
By Luticus on 11/4/2010 12:50:37 PM , Rating: 2
never tried sophos, might have to check them out on my virtual pc and see how i like em. for now i use ms sec essentials, and norton corp at work (i have to).

PR Nonsense
By Ard on 11/4/2010 12:52:51 PM , Rating: 3
This is what happens when you let marketing dictate security policy decisions. If Apple starting bundling antivirus software, it would be admitting that all the crap they spewed about Macs being immune to viruses and PCs being virus prone wrecks was patently false. Apple can't let the distortion field fall so easily.

Steven P Jobs
By Cheesew1z69 on 11/4/2010 12:51:26 PM , Rating: 2
And company, are lame. End of story.

Wait a minute....
By captainBOB on 11/4/10, Rating: 0
RE: Wait a minute....
By Luticus on 11/4/2010 3:07:58 PM , Rating: 2
The point isn't that they don't make an av, it's that they don't seem to take security very seriously...

By wootwoot33 on 12/3/2010 10:36:05 AM , Rating: 2
douche u suck Travis hunter

Market Share?
By ResStellarum on 11/4/2010 8:27:08 PM , Rating: 1
Windows and microsoft products have 100% virus marketshare. Nuff said ;)

So why do I need Mac antivirus again?
By sapiens74 on 11/4/10, Rating: -1
RE: So why do I need Mac antivirus again?
By Marlonsm on 11/4/2010 1:36:51 PM , Rating: 2
It only takes one virus to get you infected...

By spamreader1 on 11/4/2010 3:08:38 PM , Rating: 2
kinda like hookers eh?

By fsardis on 11/4/2010 1:47:36 PM , Rating: 3
By klutzInMotion on 11/4/2010 2:45:10 PM , Rating: 3
So why do I need Mac antivirus again?
To protect your Mac OS from the virus that sits between the keyboard and your chair.

By Helbore on 11/5/2010 10:37:02 AM , Rating: 1
I will never understand Mac fanboys. If you walk around with yuor hands over your eyes, going "lalalalala," eventually you're going to wlak over a cliff. The only person that hurts is you.

You're not benefitting yourself by pretending Macs have no viruses. It might massage your ego by making you believe you were smarter than everyone else for buying a Msc, but beyond that it doesn't help you at all.

Why do you need antivirus? Well because Apple recommends you do (even if they only whisper it like they're mentioning some taboo subject).

By amanojaku on 11/4/2010 12:42:55 PM , Rating: 2
No one would complain if Apple wrote an anti-virus program. We certainly would shout from the rooftops that Apple has finally admitted to being vulnerable. Actually, Apple already has:
Security Advice
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, antivirus software may offer additional protection.

And MSE is just fine. I've replaced all my Norton/Symmantec and McAfee installations with it. It seems to be faster and offers just as much protection. And MS did not bundle it; you download it and install it if you want to. I may not use it five years from now, same as Norton and McAfee, but I like it today.

By Luticus on 11/4/2010 12:44:50 PM , Rating: 2
People only said something about safari's bundle after the eu/opera and others gave ms crap for ie...

Microsoft's antivirus isn't necessarily the best solution.
Yea, if you're corporate and even then only because it doesn't have a server/client deployment. (that's what MS Forefront is for). Otherwise yes, yes it is! You show me any free or paid for antivirus solution that's better than Microsoft's for the common folk... go right ahead. Granted this is all opinionated and you can't show me one because i've used all the common/mainstream virus scanners (avg, kapersky, norton, mccafee, etc...) none of those or any others i've tried can touch ms security essentials.

Although with $50 billion in cash, Apple could probably buy any antivirus company they want.
that'll be the day... and even if they did they'd only do it if it were profitable to them, when has apple ever given anything away?

By Anoxanmore on 11/4/2010 1:36:46 PM , Rating: 2
Eset does better than security essentials. :)

That is the only one I'd reccomend if someone wanted to pay for an A/V.

They always have, and always will(probably).

By Luticus on 11/4/2010 2:53:47 PM , Rating: 2
I'll have to read up on that one and try it out, haven't really played with that. nothing a virtual machine, some free time, and the trial version can't solve.

"A lot of people pay zero for the cellphone ... That's what it's worth." -- Apple Chief Operating Officer Timothy Cook

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki