Jump to content

Kaspersky: Mac security is '10 years behind Microsoft'


Recommended Posts



Kaspersky: Mac security is '10 years behind Microsoft'

In an interview, the security firm's CEO says Apple has a lot more malware coming its way, and that it's not putting enough resources into protecting users.

by Josh Lowensohn April 25, 2012 4:08 PM PDT


Forrester's CEO isn't the only one spouting doom and gloom for Apple today.

Now Eugene Kaspersky, the CEO of security firm Kaspersky Lab, says Apple is headed for a rough patch. However, this one's in the world of computer security, and he says Apple is already getting into the thick of it.

Speaking to Computer Business Review at Info Security 2012 show in London this week, Kaspersky said that when it comes to computer security, Apple's Mac platform was a decade behind Microsoft's, and that it's got some things to learn from its rival.

"They will understand very soon that they have the same problems Microsoft had 10 or 12 years ago," Kaspersky said in an interview. "They will have to make changes in terms of the cycle of updates and so on and will be forced to invest more into their security audits for the software."

"That's what Microsoft did in the past after so many incidents like Blaster and the more complicated worms that infected millions of computers in a short time," he added. "They had to do a lot of work to check the code to find mistakes and vulnerabilities. Now it's time for Apple [to do the same]."

The statements come on the heels of Flashback, a high-profile piece of Mac malware that is estimated to have infected more than 600,000 Macs at its peak. More recent figures put its current infection somewhere at less than 185,000 machines worldwide.

Apple patched the system vulnerability the Flashback attacks were using, and released a removal tool for infected machines. But the company got flack from security experts for not fixing it sooner. Security companies -- including Kaspersky -- also made Apple look slow to react by offering up their own detection and removal tools ahead of an official fix.

Apple has, in fact, hardened Mac OS X against attackers in recent years, as well as shown off plans for added protective measures in future versions of the software. The last two major versions of Mac OS X has a built-in malware scanner called XProtect that is able to spot and quarantine known malware. Soon the company will also mandate that apps sold on its App Store will be compliant with new sandboxing rules designed to keep apps from doing any damage to user files, or other parts of the OS.

Related stories

Apple's also announced Gatekeeper, a technology that will be built into the upcoming release of OS X Mountain Lion, that gives users a way to install only software that's been signed by registered developers.

Even with those things on tap, Kaspersky argues that Apple's success will continue to make the Mac a bigger target.

"Cyber criminals have now recognized that Mac is an interesting area. Now we have more [malware], it's not just Flashback or Flashfake," Kaspersky told CBR. "Welcome to Microsoft's world, Mac. It's full of malware"

An Apple spokesman declined to comment on Kaspersky's remarks.

(via The Next Web)

SOURCE: http://news.cnet.com...hind-microsoft/


Link to post
Share on other sites

The sad part is the overall Mac culture needs to adjust and realize that they are not bullet proof.

As long as Apple users (especially the Mac) think they are the "elite", chosen people, it'll never happen.


Apple ][, ][+, and //e User 1982-1990.. ; PC since 1990

.. *grin*

Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as Apple users (especially the Mac) think they are the "elite", chosen people, it'll never happen.

The same thing happens in the Linux world. I have known people who sat there reading Ubuntu fanboy blogs all day, and you would not believe the insanity that these people would believe as fact just because they read it on some blog about Ubuntu. The sad truth is that because these operating systems are not put to the test constantly like Windows is, that we really don't know just how vulnerable they are.

I have no delusions that Windows is secure, or even that it is a great operating system. It has its faults and flaws, and at times it certainly can have many of them. Unfortunately, I have been in discussions with people where I have had to debunk insanity and defend Windows (myself having been in the past a fervent hater of Microsoft and their software), because people are reading too much garbage on the Internet. Did you know that Windows has System File Protection, and prevents even administrators from overwriting System Files? Linux, on the other hand, allows anyone with root access to overwrite/edit/delete any file or folder on the system, no matter how vital it is. All it takes is one security vulnerability in SUDO (or a service running with root privileges that has a code execution vulnerability), and Ubuntu can be completely decimated by malicious software. And, of course, in Ubuntu-fanboy circles there is usually nothing good said about Fedora, which does not have SUDO setup by default, and is therefore not quite as vulnerable (Fedora uses SU instead of SUDO, and SU requires you enter the root password when escalating to root, and SUDO is passwordless).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
Back to top
  • Create New...

Important Information

This site uses cookies - We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.