Symantec warns of Mac OS X trojan

[Kougar]

No OS is truly safe... ;)

Symantec has issued a warning to Mac owners about a new malware software that exploits a vulnerability in the "launchD" service. The software could let an attacker get administrator or root access on any Macintosh system running OS X version 10.4.6 or earlier. Apple released a patch in version 10.4.7 this Wednesday.

Symantec has initially called the program a trojan horse, but the code hasn't yet been seen spreading in the wild. Kevin Finisterre, a security researcher at Digital Munition, created and released the code. Earlier this year, he also released the Inqtana worm which also targets Mac OS X.

http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/06/30/symantec_macosx_trojanhorse/ (http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/06/30/symantec_macosx_trojanhorse/)

[Coolest-Tech]

And my mac lover said macs were immune to viruses. :haha:

And, sice linux uses the same unix core, Linux might have the same problems. :fear:

[werty316]

This is probably the first virus ever for a mac. I guess someone got really bored.

[Kougar]

And my mac lover said macs were immune to viruses. :haha:

And, sice linux uses the same unix core, Linux might have the same problems. :fear:

Actually, this is not true. Linux is a derivative of unix only in the loosest form... Infact most organizations that use Unix are switching to Linux now, especially within the server market. A virus from OS X shouldn't affect linux, and vice versa...

And there are lots of viruses, or "bugs" that have existed previously for Macs, just that most were created to prove the vulnerability existed but were never released into the wild or given a malicious "payload" of some type. That last instant messenger virus that targeted OS X users is one example though, from earlier this year...

[tomato]

Macs can and are just as vulnerable to viruses as PC's... it's just that the Mac user base is much smaller than that of the PC, so any malicious content created for the Mac would not affect as many people as a PC... hacker must seek to affect/screw as many people as possible, jerks :(

[HARTZJD]

I heard something about the new Mac OS running on PC's. Do you think the Mac community would welcome this since it would only lead to more attacks?:wink:

[Kougar]

Welcome to the forums, Hartz!

Switching to "PC" architectures might make it a little easier to attack, but really there are plenty of exploitable holes currently in OS X already. As more and more people buy Macs every year I think it is only a matter of time before those kind of people decide they're enough OS X users that it is worth their while to exploit those vulnerabilities. For the moment at least, Windows is much more worth their while.

[vfrex]

Macs can and are just as vulnerable to viruses as PC's... it's just that the Mac user base is much smaller than that of the PC, so any malicious content created for the Mac would not affect as many people as a PC... hacker must seek to affect/screw as many people as possible, jerks

Eh, up until MSFT released SP2 for XP, I definitely would have disagreed. An OS can certainly be designed with security in mind, and XP was not.

[Kougar]

Well, ya sure can't say that about Vista.

But it won't change much, if people want to hack or find a way around something, it will happen. And once ya consider that at least three fourths of the world uses the same underlying OS, it's really not more surprising more people aren't trying to exploit it already through all of the various means, at least in my opinion...

[vfrex]

Linux/Unix holds around 40% of the server market. That isn't a trivial number, not to mention hacking servers could probably be considered more disruptive than hacking desktops.

[Kougar]

I was referring to consumer desktops... and the thing with hacking servers is that most seem more interested in using their botnets of zombie PCs to DDOS various servers. The usual server hacking seens to mostly be major stuff, like to steal databases of personal informtation or company secrets, etc. Get in, and get out, and that is that.

[vfrex]

For one, people buy botnets to do their work. I don't think it is typically the people who capture the bots that actually use them. That implies that botnets are substantially easier to form! That might be an issue of social engineering though.

[Kougar]

For one, people buy botnets to do their work. I don't think it is typically the people who capture the bots that actually use them. That implies that botnets are substantially easier to form! That might be an issue of social engineering though.

Yes, people do. It's already known most hacking and releated actions are from financial motivation. What I am saying is that if half the world's PC users switched to OS X, so would half the hacks and exploits.