First Scareware For the Mac 301
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property sends us news from F-Secure of what they claim is the first rogue cleaning tool for the Mac. MacSweeper is a Mac version of Cleanator, hosted from a colo somewhere in the Ukraine. The article points out that the company's About page is lifted verbatim from Symantec's site. With the Mac's market share closing in on double digits, perhaps it's not surprising to see the platform targeted with crapware as PCs have been for years. The F-Secure author adds as a footnote that a journalist said to him something you don't hear every day: "I visited the macsweeper.com website. I know I probably shouldn't have but I used a Windows PC so I knew I wouldn't get infected."
gamespot gave it 11 out of 10 (Score:5, Funny)
I didn't realize Kane & Lynch had been announced for the Mac platform
Not the smartest journo (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not the smartest journo (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Pffft. Noone who knows anything about security uses telnet anymore.
Really real security experts ssh to port 80 and hand craft their HTTP requests.
Re:Not the smartest journo (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Not the smartest journo (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Not the smartest journo (Score:5, Funny)
Who needs that newfangled junk. I can whistle at 56k, and do the binary in my head
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not the smartest journo (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
You will be much safer if that Live CD Loads and then Virtualized an other Linux Distribu
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
as to the crapware: gosh and golly gee! Now that I have expressed apropriate concern let us move on...
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not the smartest journo (Score:5, Funny)
If the site was detecting the user agent or using some other method of determining platform and delivering targeted malware based on it, I doubt they would have also been delivering a fake Mac scan to a Windows browser as they did in the article.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on their intentions, and they could have different plans for different targets.
With Mac users, their intentions might be to sell a product to remove a problem that the user doesn't have... or to give them a problem that can be removed through the purchas
Isn't any "cleaning tool" rogue on a mac? (Score:5, Interesting)
And now we have an example of this fine species showing up on a platform that doesn't really have malware. How could anybody trust a cleaner for a platform that doesn't, as yet, need cleaning?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Well, the notion that Snake Oil sold by a carnie could cure you of Quinsy and Polio and whatever else people back then suffered from is pretty crazy too, but people bought it in droves. Heck a few years ago I remember being in a health food store and seeing a large jar of shark cartilage pills next
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Which is ironic, because just as you should still lock your car doors in the suburbs, the principle of de
... and here's a Linux one. (Score:2)
rm -rf /
The point being that if you do dumb shit on any computer you can break stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
A similar script could have backgrounded and not shown any errors or warnings. In fact a deviously written perl script could do so many things it's not funny (and would work fine on modern Macs and Linux).
I use bot
Re: (Score:2)
Because good is dumb.
I just checked with linux (Score:2, Interesting)
Either they changed their website, either the article lies on some points.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
fixed that for you (Score:5, Funny)
oh wait
Yeah and moon is made from.. (Score:5, Insightful)
What, you need to download something to your mac and then INSTALL it?
This kind software has be there long time ago and there is nothing new to see here.
Market share is still smaller than GNU/Linux and it is not having this kind problems, wait, it has.
Come back again when F-secure and others have proof for worm or virus what works like windows platform, automatically.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Yeah and moon is made from.. (Score:5, Informative)
Idiocy can and will spread happily across platform boundaries. It really does not matter what OS you are using. And this article proves it. It's just that until now Windows was losing by the weight of sheer numbers. It has more vulnerabilities, sure. But those are irrelevant to the people who make big $$$ compromising machines. They simply don't need them.
Re:Yeah and moon is made from.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Now take a look at the architectures. A dozen years of Windows since Win95 has only progressively made Windows more secure, and while better than before, still full of a superfluity of exploits (for differing reasons, again, not counting user "stupidity"). You have to do a lot of work to iteratively get past the gatekeepers in both operating systems; it's not as trivial an exercise as it once was; all the really wide-open machines are 0w3d by someone by now.... as part of a botnet.
Given a 5-10% of the market for Apple, depending on whom you believe, you're only now seeing a MacOS ruse. Think about that for a moment. Think about both motive and opportunity. Motive we understand. Opportunity hasn't been very strong until now. The weapon? Two decades in to desktop operating systems (three if you count CP/M, UCSD Pascal and so on) we're only now seeing a MacOS exploit. A common denominator among the exploitable: stupidity. Now let's scratch off stupidity and talk about architecture. It's not Microsoft's fault that they used a root-level database (the 'Registry') that could be twigged by any user-mode app in pre-XP SP2? Hmmmm. Or the mindless ways that people found to explode IE? Or the TCP/IP stack? Or how long it took to get a WEP-128 parser and still longer for a WPA parser? Microsoft's sloppy code created an industry, one to fix the code, and another to exploit it. They didn't take security seriously, then paid it only lipservice. They're paying the price in disrespect for not being respectable!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
For this reason, until four years ago (Windows early XP era), Windows and its myriad faults were untenable. MacOS X, by contrast, at least warned people before they were about to get a knife stuck in their operating system. FireFox, Mozilla before it, S
Re: (Score:2)
10 INIT A
wow, I can't believe I remembered that.
This is about the caliber of the "malware" on this site. Though I wonder if apple will react by pushing out their first clamav update?
Re: (Score:2)
whoever thought this was aimed at you.. it wasn't... *rolls his eyes*.. now I need to hunt him down again.
Re: (Score:2)
Looking at the screenshots... (Score:2)
Unfortunately, this is likely to become more (Score:3, Insightful)
The same could happen to Linux, (Free|Open|Net)BSD, etc. All it takes is an uneducated* user behind the console, and Linux's drive to take on the desktop makes that all the more likely.
* I mean uneducated in the security sense. You can be highly intelligent, have 3 PhD's, and still not know a thing about what downloads to avoid. We can't know everything about everything, after all.
Re: (Score:2)
What? A trojan [slashdot.org] on [symantec.com] Linux [symantec.com]? That's crazy
Why Linux and Mac OS will be safe (Score:2, Interesting)
Windows has such a large userbase, there are many shady-looking shareware apps that work just fine and do what they're supposed to. The problem is that Windows has developed a culture of suckiness such that users can't readily tell the difference between a legitimate vendor and illegitimate software. I had a webcam where I had to obtain the driver on a website that looked ripe for hosting malwa
double digits? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:double digits? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Market share refers to the percentage of total install base that are macs [wikipedia.org].
In all honesty, mac has been closing on double digits for the last... well, how long have they been in business?
They're definitely doing a good 'little engine that could' impression, though. Most companies that can only maintain a small percentage of the market place fold. I suspect that the reason Mac hasn't is due to the exceedingly large size and gr
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you're making a profit it doesn't matter how many customers you have: you're still in the black. Sure, more customers then means more profit, but usually you hit a wall where you have to cut profits in order to stay competitive. If a company is happy with its single digit market share (what most would call a ni
Re: (Score:2)
Eee PC outselling Apple (Score:2)
First Scareware? (Score:5, Funny)
Contact Us page changed already (Score:5, Informative)
Okay, smarty-pants... (Score:2)
Real cleaning software for the Mac, that you've actually used and deemed worth continuing to use?
Best web sites to learn about Mac security?
Re: (Score:2)
(cue after 10 seconds) Just kidding.
Re: (Score:2)
Hi i'm MacSweeper Developer, listen to me (Score:5, Interesting)
Personally I adore Mac Platform, and it hearts to here that the program you wrote is said to be some kind of "Rogue application" , i wouldn't like to destroy good manners of software written for it
I would like to say sorry for all inconveniences that we could bring to you, but believe MacSweeper is meant to be a useful application.
You can ask Questions, and i will try to answer them! Thank You!
Re:Hi i'm MacSweeper Developer, listen to me (Score:5, Funny)
thank you for make clear mistake. I find myself have found an inheritance of 50 BILLION DOLLARS (AMERICAN). I rely my confidence on your arm in relate your website macsviper.kom be legitimate business as of identity yours will be made clear as mine is, for this I will need your kindest help with transfer five hundred dollars of administration price, for which of as of now I am not in relation available.
Sincerely yours,
Ba Ba Baa, Nigeria
Re:Hi i'm MacSweeper Developer (Score:5, Informative)
Oh, and you mis-spelled "purchase" in two methods in MacSweeperDaemon.
The binaries have references to KIVViSoftware throughout them -- you wouldn't happen to be one and the same with these guys [kivvisoftware.com], would you?
Disclaimer: I didn't find anything blatantly malicious -- but I only took a quick look. Given the folders that it tinkers around with, any bugs could do some damage to your Mac, so be careful.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Hi i'm MacSweeper Developer, listen to me (Score:4, Funny)
Satisfaction guarantee! (Score:2)
Copyright 2007 MACSWEEPER.com.
infection (Score:3, Insightful)
Stupid, meet journalist, your brother.
Re:Cross platform spyware! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:the shit hits the fan! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:the shit hits the fan! (Score:5, Informative)
Or heck, just put it on the desktop where the user can click it. No special permissions needed. Most
Re:the shit hits the fan! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:the shit hits the fan! (Score:5, Insightful)
Our data is far more critical, making the ~/Applications folder (or the ~/Desktop folder) a dangerous place for executables.
Of course, in these enlightened days we all have regular backups now or Time-Machine-enabled external drives. Hmm...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
With some more thought I can probably come up with a pile more.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
OS X:
Ok, sure, OS X is not perfectly safe. Clearly it is the better choice though in terms of protecting system data.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm sure people care more about the contents of their /bin folder (or whatever passes for that in OS X) than the graduation pictures of their kids and their tax returns. So I guess that's OK. The OS was never compromised! Incidentally, you don't need root to turn a machine into a spam-spewing zombie. On any OS.
it cannot access or modify anything that needs root permissions without asking for the root password.
Well then, it will just ask for the ro
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure people care more about the contents of their /bin folder (or whatever passes for that in OS X)
For the record, there is a /bin folder, but that is only for the low level Unix style tools.
The main applications can be located anywhere in the hard-drive, but are most often kept in /Applications. Of course the bundle system that the apps use make browsing the installed applications as easy as browsing the /Applications folder, which is why there is no real need for a statr-menu like system. The Dock and desktop can hold shortcuts to the most commonly used applications, otherwise, you just browse /Appli
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe im just an expert on windows malware, but pretty much all of them install as root and they are for the most part not difficult to get rid of. You just have to learn where things can hook into, and have some common tools by your side. For joe user, I would argue that its just as difficult to delouse a PC or a mac. What about a polymorphic spyware that drops copies of itself everywhere, renaming itself randomly to mimic user created f
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Personally I've never fretted over having to reinstall an OS. I typically clean install with every major release. What I dread is losing my data.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it does. The
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Using a Mac is safer than using Windows, though using something like NoScript to di
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not saying that having a secure OS is an unworthy goal, by any means, but whatever OS is top dog will always be the most plagued by stupid users... and unless you lock them out of the system (which is just going to piss them off), there's nothing that can be done about it.
Re:Wait, why would you even use this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Oh no! (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Privileges, an ordinary user can't mess up the entire system. Unless the user is *really* stupid, they are not root and therefore do not have Write privileges on system-critical files. So even if you ran "rm -rf
2. Most software is installed through a repository. Now, I realize that Mac does not by default (although there are projects to port apt-get and the like to it) but most distros of Linux have a way of installing via the repository.
3. Most first-party OS-X software is at least partly open-source including the key components of the OS such as the Kernel, Browser rendering engine, and some of the other utilities. This adds a layer of protection to prevent programming errors from not being noticed as anyone can look at the code and submit fixes to it. In addition, this adds security by having parts of Safari being looked at to prevent such flaws as drive-by-downloads which were a major problem of IE and a reason many Windows users got infected by malware.
While it is true that if someone really wanted to mess up OS-X or were just plain stupid they could. However, the chances of Unix breaking from normal usage are far far smaller then those of Windows.
Re:Oh no! (Score:4, Interesting)
Your comments on OS code, whilst quite valid, are actually rather incorrect. Something that a lot of people seem to fail to remember with open source code is that the code IS available IF you wish to look at it. Personally I've never gone near the Kernel code, so I wouldn't have a clue if it is secure or not (perfect example of this: Firefox).
My $0.02 AU, Ignore at will.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They're designers... they've been using Mac since before I was born. They also tend to stay away from the command line (that Terminal.app thing scares the hell out of them whenever I fire it up). The popularity has nothing to do with their usage of the system, as they were fine using OS 9 before hand.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
1 Mac OS X Server, configured with all users in Open Directory, and policy to lock out users from system preference panes they have no business being in
1 FileWave server for application deployment and file integrity checking, obtainable from www.filewave.com (note, this will cost money, but will pay for itself the first time you don't have to reinstall
Re:Oh no! (Score:5, Insightful)
For me, the worst thing that can possibly happen, is somebody destroys my home directory. Ok, that's easy, if a virus is logged in as me. If they hose my system, so what? I can always re-install linux, that isn't a problem. There aren't any other users. I allow myself access to the internet and to email, so if a virus starts spamming the world, well, that isn't stopped by security policy either.
What you're talking about is a linux server. There, it's hard to root the machine and cross-infect, sure. But what spreads viruses the most these days is users downloading shit in email and not knowing that their browser just executed something. Linux is *not* more secure. *I* am a user am less prone to viruses because I maintain a strict policy of which sites I use each browser for, where I take cookies from, and I browse sketchy shit only inside vmware and restore from a clean image frequently. But I'm still vulnerable to all sorts of attacks -- if google pushes an ad with linux-targeted malware, for example.
If you think linux is somehow inherently virus-proof, you're deluding yourself. Using linux on the desktop is the same as using any other desktop system -- if somebody else knows how to make an executable for your system, it's probably vulnerable.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I maintain a strict policy of which sites I use each browser for, where I take cookies from, and I browse sketchy shit only inside vmware and restore from a clean image frequently. But I'm still vulnerable to all sorts of attacks
I understand that meth addiction is difficult to kick, but I urge you to please consider it for your health, both physical, and - particularly - mental. With time the paranoia will subside and you will be able to return to rational, productive behavior. Remember, we're here for you.
OpenBSD is more secure... (Score:3, Insightful)
...here [openbsd.org] is why:
Re:Oh no! (Score:5, Insightful)
As a desktop user I severely disagree, I'd rather lose everything but ~ and if I'm stupid enough to run malware that malware will have the necessary permissions to delete everything I care about.
And about opensource being better because people can look at it and find vulnerabilities. Have you ever looked at the Mozilla code? Lots of people have and yet regularly there are new exploits found, some that have been there since the browser was called Mozilla.
I monitor a few open source applications mailing lists and often when a security vulnerability is found, it has been there a long time. How many more are lurking in that mess of C++ code?
Re:Oh no! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oh no! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
This is an under-appreciated benefit of a less user friendly operating system: fewer "stupid users" will be interested in using it -- at least to any deep extent -- thereby leaving those that do in a safer community.
Re:Oh no! (Score:5, Funny)
Who's snobbish? (Score:3)
I'm not sure who's the snob here, Artie MacStrawman or you, who seems to think Mac users are dumb, deluded snobs.
"registry cleaner recommended" (Score:2)
The first funny part is it desperately tries to look like an IE window with a close and cancel button etc which just clicks the download link, which is laughable since the browser is clearly firefox. Then next you notice the apple in the upper left of the screen...
Re: (Score:2)
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/15/232258 [slashdot.org]
Not sure what it is, but I think Taco will save the day. He doesn't get to be a Commander for nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
What if somebody compromised the software repository you are downloading from? Or subverted DNS so that you aren't actually downloading from the server you think you're downloading from? Or simply included a subtle back door in their app, and waited a few months/years for it to spread before using it to launch an attack?
I'm not saying these things are likely, but I don't see