Wolf! [Apple malware scares]

daring fireball ^

[Gomez]

ping

[Wayne07]

The difference in the stories is that most recent is actually reporting on something real, where the others are just FUD. As you allude to in your title, it really is like the boy who cried wolf. This is now something to take seriously, but will people after all the false alarms?

[PGR88]

damn. I just bought an Apple MAC with OS X.

I never believed the apple store’s saleman’s blanket statements about “never having to worry about viruses” but didn’t think it would come this quickly!

[proxy_user]

Yes, but they have to trick you into voluntarily installing the software and typing in your administrative password, don’t they? No one with any knowledge of security would do such a thing.

[Swordmaker]

Are we Mac users quaking in our boots yet? Nope! PING!

The "kit" that the underground group is completing is just a collection of tools that have been around for the last few years... it's nothing new, nothing earth shaking, nothing that is going to make something suddenly magically work that didn't work before. It just collects all the things that have been tried and failed and makes them available in one place for script kiddies to buy and to try again and fail again. At worst, we will see a few MORE Trojan Horse programs for OSX to warn us about... and to prevent them downloading... because this kit has the known families of Trojan horse engines in it. Whoopee-do. The door is closed on those.

Please, No Flame Wars!
Discuss technical issues, software, and hardware.
Don't attack people!
Don't respond to the Anti-Apple Thread Trolls!
PLEASE, IGNORE THEM!!!

Apple Security Scare (YAWN) again Ping!

If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.

[Swordmaker]

The difference in the stories is that most recent is actually reporting on something real, where the others are just FUD. As you allude to in your title, it really is like the boy who cried wolf. This is now something to take seriously, but will people after all the false alarms?

Nope, this news is no different than the "real" stories that were reported in 2010, 09, 08, 07, 06, 05 ... 0X ad nauseum... Until the crackers find a viable VECTOR to spread their viruses and worms that does NOT involve the willing and active participation of the USER with an administrator's name and password, there's not much to worry about. OSX identifies and warns users if and when you are attempting to download, install, or run a Trojan. There are, at last count only 18 known trojans in five distinct and easily identifiable families of Trojans... and each of the are easy to avoid.

The "security by obscurity" canard has been shot down so many times and proven wrong it is ludicrous. There are better than 55 MILLION OSX Macs in the wild and the number of OSX viruses, worms, and involuntary spam bots is still ZERO. . . after TEN YEARS OF TRYING. That is NOT because it is obscure, MrShoop. Crackers have written viruses and worms that have infected installed bases of fewer than 12 THOUSAND vulnerable machines because it was economically worth doing. You cannot say that a target of 55 MILLION sitting ducks with no anti-virus protection is not an economically desirable target with that kind of evidence slapping you in the face. The simple fact is, contrary to all the screaming the Windows' fanatics do, that it is REALISTICALLY that much harder to do. If it were not, it would have been done and there would be thousands of Mac Spam bots out there. There are not. Prima Facie evidence that it has not happened.

[Wayne07]

OSX is harder to attack (i have an iMac, BTW), but not impossible. You are wrong that there are zero instances of worms/malware/spambots. In fact there were recently numbers released that macs made up 16% of the infected computers in the Jnanabot network. Apple has been recommending anti-virus software for 3 years now. Your attitude is going to make it worse for mac owners because you are discouraging caution which is clearly warranted.

http://www.symantec.com/connect/blogs/exploiting-jnanabot-fun-and-profit

[Wayne07]

Some infection numbers from Sophos from people who run their software. http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2010/11/18/free-anti-virus-for-mac-150000-active-users-and-plenty-of-malware-found/

[PA Engineer]

There is actually one very bad malware in the wild that is attacking many Apple computers, slowing them down, overloading computer resources and crashing applications..... Flash Player! ;-)

[Mind-numbed Robot]

I suspect that the chart reflects the activity of Sophos software installed on Macs. (Yes, some people can be conned into buying av for Macs.) It says that is what Sophos saw and intercepted. What it does not say is that had there been no Sophos software that the Mac OS would have also intercepted those things and warned the users not to install them, or they simply fell harmlessly to the side with no affect on the Mac.

[Gomez]

I checked the top three infections and according to Sophos they are Windows malware. It doesn't look like they would run on a Mac even if someone with admin privileges wanted to install them. Mal/ASFDldr-A
Troj/JavaDl-V
Mal/JavaKC-E

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Thanks. I forgot about that. In the past I ran an av application on my Mac and that was the case with it, too. I would get an alert that it had caught a malware attempt and it was always an MS virus instead of some attempt to infect my computer.

[ReignOfError]

OSX is harder to attack (i have an iMac, BTW), but not impossible. You are wrong that there are zero instances of worms/malware/spambots. In fact there were recently numbers released that macs made up 16% of the infected computers in the Jnanabot network.

Threat Assessment
Wild
Wild Level: Low
Number of Infections: 0 - 49
Number of Sites: 0 - 2
Geographical Distribution: Low
Threat Containment: Easy
Removal: Easy

16% of 0-49 infections = a maximum of eight Macs. My hypothesis is that those infected Macs were running Windows in boot camp. As described in the technical details on the Symantec site, Jnanabot only affects Windows; it infects a system by writing to the registry and downloading and installing several .exe files. The numbers in that pie chart are "from artifacts of the file system."

[TheBattman]

There is some truth to this statement - but not the way the author intended:

The "big" part refers to market share - and while one can see that as a significant reason Windows has been the primary focus of malware pushers, the second part - the "juicy"- is the real open door. Malware pushers are like any other criminal - they look for lucrative - and they look for easy targets. Windows, for a variety of reasons I won't waste time rehashing here, has long been filled with countless back doors, faults, and gaping holes. Microsoft has slowly tightened things up - but some of the insecurities are related to factors that are not so easy to just "close" - including legacy support and the open handles that are necessary for Windows to run on any cobbled together hardware one can assemble (one of the good/but bad facts of the more "open" hardware that Windows runs on... to be able to do that requires lots of access and "open doors"). Microsoft has tightened the screws down somewhat - but the evidence is - there are still vulnerabilities that can cause real problems.

Then we turn to the Apple OS (a UNIX implementation). The whole concept - even if a malware writer were to come up with a "working" model - because of the separation and delineation between portions of the Kernel, serious breeches of security and/or operating system are not likely. I didn't say impossible - but it does require a great deal more effort, and a willing user with administrative permissions. There have been a handful of "proof on concept" bugs demonstrated that can affect the Mac OS. Yet how many have actually appeared "in the wild", causing data loss, security breaches, or hardware hijacking? I have yet to find a credible report of such. Why? The installed user base of OS X computers connected to the 'net is in the hundreds of millions. Is that not a large enough target to draw lots of attention, especially if these were "easy targets" as these writers would like to imply? Remember - criminal-types LOVE easy targets. Most crooks will target the unarmed little-old-lady with $20 in her purse over the dude packing a .45 on his waist, but carrying $50. Its about easy targets. I am sure, as Apple's market share continues to increase, that there will be more attempts. A publication I read monthly has a section of stories where crooks try to rip off/attack armed citizens... and the outcome (not so good for the criminal). And I wouldn't even be surprise if some day, some wise-jerk develops a real, and functioning bit of malware that can really hose a Mac. It is technically possible. I figure it is more likely to be someone with a grudge or a name to make than someone who is actually trying to steal data. But whatever -

Kind of like choosing where to live. You can live in a city with a serious drug/high crime problem, or you can choose to live in a city that has very low crime statistics. Maybe the high-crime city is bigger. Maybe it has a few more stores or restaurants. But which one is going to feel (and be, statistically) safer?

[TheBattman]

OF course - that is, and always has been, the weak point of computers: Users.

Long before “administrator passwords”, computer users were downloading pirated software and music, pron, and other commonly identified sources of infection... all with the well-documented danger. So it isn’t really much of a step for folks to blindly type in passwords to every box that pops up...

That being said - There are viruses/malware for Windows that STILL can infect/cause trouble without ever seeing a warning or opportunity to NOT give permission.

[TheBattman]

“infection numbers” is a truly deceiving name - considering how many in the list are even CAPABLE of “infecting” an OS X machine....

A more accurate naming would be “malware detected”... because this would include such that were in downloaded files, in emails, etc. This does NOT mean these machines were actually “infected”.

A Mac can be a carrier, just as that thumb drive you carried files to work on. But that thumb drive isn’t necessarily “infected”... just has a malware file stored on it.

[Wayne07]

At the time of the article (~5 months old), the folks at Symantec said the number of Jnanabot infections so far is “measured in the thousands.”. What you are looking at is the state of trojan 5 months later, after it has been detected and removed from many systems.

[ReignOfError]

Whatever the peak numbers were, I stand by my hypothesis that the Macs were running Boot Camp. The technical info on Symantec’s site (http://www.symantec.com/security_response/writeup.jsp?docid=2010-102616-4246-99&tabid=2) lists only Windows as vulnerable, and describes the mechanism of placing entries in the Registry and downloading .exe files, neither of which affects Macs.

The pie chart was based on “artifacts of the file system.” A Mac running Boot Camp does mount the Mac OS volume, so that file system would be visible. The blog post does not describe how, or whether, they account for systems with more than one OS present.

[Wayne07]

Also, you can see Jnanabot has code specific to the Mac to allow it to run. It is definitely not windows only..

http://www.symantec.com/connect/blogs/trojanjnanabot-trojanaffecting-multiple-platforms

This particular Trojan (that Symantec detects as Trojan.Jnanabot) is one such attempt to target multiple platforms. Jnanabot has numerous functionalities that include key logging, connection to IRC servers, and posting malicious links on social networking sites, affecting users on Windows, Mac OSX, and Linux platforms.

The threat is composed of multiple files. I will address them as components throughout this blog. Each component is meant for a specific task. Some components are compiled Java files whereas others are platform specific executable files.

1. Library component:  Contains Library files needed to run the threat on various platforms namely: Mac OSX, Linux with AMD 64 machines, Linux with x86 machines, Windows with x86 machines
2. Main component: The main .jar file that controls execution of all the components.
3. Install/update component: Installs and updates the threat.
4. IRC component:Connects to remote IRCs and waits for further commands from the master.
5. Key logging component.
6. Crypt component: Windows and Mac executable files to decrypt the packaged files.
7. Facebook component: We are currently analyzing this component. From our brief analysis it seems as if the threat can read cookies of logged on user and may post malicious links on the social networking site.