Do I need an Anti-virus?

[bayareaking510]

I know that it's not as nessary as a Windows PC, but should I still have one? If so, what are some popular (maybe free) ones you guys use?

[magunwarrior]

There is a close to impossible chance you're going to get a virus, I feel it would be a waste of money and HD space.

[carbon-eclectic]

Not only do you have a next to nil chance of being infected with any kind of malware, but you might end up creating issues. Anti-virus software can actually interfere with the processes you're running which may cause problems with performance or software security.

[tssaloic]

Maybe if you are on a network with Windows boxes.

But it is still unnecessary.

[bayareaking510]

Wow, I'm really surprised to hear this. I mean, is it because of the lack of malware for macs, or is it more because of Apple's security?

BTW, thanks. Glad to hear that I won't be installing an anti-virus, cuz they do slow down your computer.

[logant]

I mean, is it because of the lack of malware for macs, or is it more because of Apple's security?

It's both.

[magunwarrior]

It's mainly because of the small user base.

[g_king]

Now that OSX is poised to take on a greater market share wouldn't it be advisable to get an anti virus program for the mac? After all apple jut recently patched 45 new security flaws in OSX. I have read a properly firewalled mac will greatly reduce the chances you will get infected by a virus or trojan. How many users use the osx software firewall when not behind a router?

[rabidbadger]

...After all apple jut recently patched 45 new security flaws in OSX...

Well That's one of the reasons not to bother, Apple finds and fixes any issues before they can be exploited. They have been doing this every month or two for the ten years osx has been out, Yet in all those ten years there has been no-one that beat them to the punch and exploited the flaws.

A small market share is irrelevant in this highly networked world, you would think that malicious folks would not want thier contagious code to be stopped cold from spreading or inflicting damage/zombiehood every time they hit a mac, when they could spend a day or two finding a way into the mac os... if it was so easy. Remember, these weasels make money with this stuff, and they would want to maximise that profit, not let it die every 20th computer it hits.

So the real reason Macs are 99.999% impervious is because OS X exists...

Apple threw away 20 years worth of intense coding in mac operating systems 1 thru 9. They began again by buying and building upon a tried and true, tested for decades, Unix based OS. Unix was designed from scratch decades ago to be a networked OS, long before Windows or Macs even imagined the internet... But Unix was originally an multiuser OS that was and is still created to seperate one user from another on the same machine, and one user from another user online...

So when Apple bought the Unix Based NextStep OS, and Steve Jobs with it, they bought a lot of security just to start with, and that was a shortcut to adding modern Mac based security. In other the words, the system started locked down, and Apple made it almost impenetrable, and when they find a flaw they fix it. And the cool thing is, it's not just them doing it, they get help from the opensource community because the core is based on the free BSD.

(Also, trivia: Tim Berners-Lee created the WWW on the NEXT Operating System)

[bayareaking510]

Well That's one of the reasons not to bother, Apple finds and fixes any issues before they can be exploited. They have been doing this every month or two for the ten years osx has been out, Yet in all those ten years there has been no-one that beat them to the punch and exploited the flaws.

A small market share is irrelevant in this highly networked world, you would think that malicious folks would not want thier contagious code to be stopped cold from spreading or inflicting damage/zombiehood every time they hit a mac, when they could spend a day or two finding a way into the mac os... if it was so easy. Remember, these weasels make money with this stuff, and they would want to maximise that profit, not let it die every 20th computer it hits.

So the real reason Macs are 99.999% impervious is because OS X exists...

Apple threw away 20 years worth of intense coding in mac operating systems 1 thru 9. They began again by buying and building upon a tried and true, tested for decades, Unix based OS. Unix was designed from scratch decades ago to be a networked OS, long before Windows or Macs even imagined the internet... But Unix was originally an multiuser OS that was and is still created to seperate one user from another on the same machine, and one user from another user online...

So when Apple bought the Unix Based NextStep OS, and Steve Jobs with it, they bought a lot of security just to start with, and that was a shortcut to adding modern Mac based security. In other the words, the system started locked down, and Apple made it almost impenetrable, and when they find a flaw they fix it. And the cool thing is, it's not just them doing it, they get help from the opensource community because the core is based on the free BSD.

(Also, trivia: Tim Berners-Lee created the WWW on the NEXT Operating System)
lol, that was a whole lot of info that I didn't really need, but I actually read all of it, and it is pretty interesting. Thanks.

[lindqvist]

rabidbadger, actually I think when it comes to the guys out there who are zombifying unsuspecting users' machines for money, they can't be bothered to put about as much work into being able to zombify machines with an OS that only constitutes around 5% of the desktop machines out there as they did for the first 90% or so. It's not like there's a lack of Windows machines for them to take from.

I think it's very much about market share, and MacOS will start to draw some more interest to it when market share increases.
Of course it's very important how security issues are handled by the manufacturer too, and that could make a difference.

[tokenuser]

Given the open source under pinnings of OSX, I am really surprised that there haven't been some very clever exploits performed on that platform. Ditto Linux. Get a malicious piece of code to hok the OS at a low level, and you would be set. What would be even more nefarious if a WINDOWS based exploit, that looked people running Parallels or bootcamp, and then copied an executable over to the OSX side of things. Windows being the gateway to OSX.

Most of the stuff out there these days aren't viruses anyway. Most infections are by Trojans and Malware - and they spread through unsafe net practices.

[rabidbadger]

...I think it's very much about market share, and MacOS will start to draw some more interest to it when market share increases.
Of course it's very important how security issues are handled by the manufacturer too, and that could make a difference.

Huh, what manufacturers? The only Mac manufacturer is Apple...(and the companies they hire to build them... Is that what you mean?)

Honestly, the Security vs. Obscurity myth has been kyboshed by folks smarter then either of us...

David Pogue apologizing for repeating the myth:

* Windows comes with five of its ports open; Mac OS X comes with all of them shut and locked. (Ports are back-door channels to the Internet: one for instant-messaging, one for Windows XP’s remote-control feature, and so on.) These ports are precisely what permitted viruses like Blaster to infiltrate millions of PC’s. Microsoft says that it won’t have an opportunity to close these ports until the next version of Windows, which is a couple of years away.

* When a program tries to install itself in Mac OS X or Linux, a dialog box interrupts your work and asks you permission for that installation -- in fact, requires your account password. Windows XP goes ahead and installs it, potentially without your awareness.

* Administrator accounts in Windows (and therefore viruses that exploit it) have access to all areas of the operating system. In Mac OS X, even an administrator can’t touch the files that drive the operating system itself. A Mac OS X virus (if there were such a thing) could theoretically wipe out all of your files, but wouldn’t be able to access anyone else’s stuff -- and couldn’t touch the operating system itself.

* No Macintosh e-mail program automatically runs scripts that come attached to incoming messages, as Microsoft Outlook does.

[lindqvist]

Huh, what manufacturers? The only Mac manufacturer is Apple...(and the companies they hire to build them... Is that what you mean?)

Honestly, the Security vs. Obscurity myth has been kyboshed by folks smarter then either of us...

David Pogue apologizing for repeating the myth:

* Windows comes with five of its ports open; Mac OS X comes with all of them shut and locked. (Ports are back-door channels to the Internet: one for instant-messaging, one for Windows XP’s remote-control feature, and so on.) These ports are precisely what permitted viruses like Blaster to infiltrate millions of PC’s. Microsoft says that it won’t have an opportunity to close these ports until the next version of Windows, which is a couple of years away.

* When a program tries to install itself in Mac OS X or Linux, a dialog box interrupts your work and asks you permission for that installation -- in fact, requires your account password. Windows XP goes ahead and installs it, potentially without your awareness.

* Administrator accounts in Windows (and therefore viruses that exploit it) have access to all areas of the operating system. In Mac OS X, even an administrator can’t touch the files that drive the operating system itself. A Mac OS X virus (if there were such a thing) could theoretically wipe out all of your files, but wouldn’t be able to access anyone else’s stuff -- and couldn’t touch the operating system itself.

* No Macintosh e-mail program automatically runs scripts that come attached to incoming messages, as Microsoft Outlook does.

Sorry, "manufacturer" was perhaps a poor choice of words. I meant on the software side and being a little more general than speaking about just MacOS and Apple, not anything else.

And I'm by no means saying that security through obscurity is the way to go, but I guess that part was for tokenuser?

[phillip-litt]

Just a "just in case":

If you are or are planning on running another operating system on your mac, you need to take the same precautions you would normally be taking on said platforms.

Sounds kind of elementary, but I didn't want anyone to have a false sense of security because their computer is white.

Carry on.