Symantec Warns of OS X Security Threat

I saw this comment elsewhere and my first reaction was, "Symantec just wants to sell more virus protection to people who don't know better." My second thought was "If Macintosh gets a big enough market share to attract virus writers, Steve Jobs will be even richer..." I've used Macs, Windoze and *nix machines for over 20 years now, and I have had (wait for it) not one single virus on any of my computers. I take that back. I had a friend who got a virus once, and I put the code on a floppy disk so I could disassemble it to see how they had done it. It wasn't very impressive, and it disappeared into the trash can very rapidly. Maybe Symantec is going to work on the new Disney Digital animation "Chicken Little."

Call me a nay-sayer but I'm not overly worried about virii because Mac's "marketshare is growing". I mean, the best estimates are only pointing to maybe 10% marketshare. Heck, the marketshare was that high just a couple of years back and we didn't have any problem. But even with 20%, why would they bother? Windows, on the other hand, is a target for two main reasons. First, they 0wn over 80%, so if you're going to attack a system to create widespread havoc, you aim for the majority. And second, the system structure of the OS allows so many cracks and crevices and backdoors or loopholes to execute malicious code. It's fundamentally harder to do on OS X. Now, I'm not saying that it's impossible, I'd be stupid to claim something like that, but it would obviously take significantly more effort than developing a M$ "hack" for a gain that's not even comparable. That being said, I wouldn't be surprised to see people targeting Macs as a way of spreading more windows malware. The majority of users I know, don't scan their machines for virii, because they know nothing exists for the Mac (yet), but they forget about the fact that they still connect to a windows network. We could all become "carrier monkeys" =)

Or one that never connects to the internet and you never put extenal inputs like CDs and DVDs into it.

As I posted on ZDnet, Symantec's, motivation is questionable. While the information in the study may be true and OS X is far from immune, Symantec makes a butt-load selling software and annual subscriptions to their anti-virus wares. I wonder if they're attempting to create demand for Mac security products or even reduce customer loss (switchers) by diminishing the belief that OS X is more secure.

I've been using Windows for 15 years and haven't been infected once... hardly a scientific way to prove a platform's security record. Now, was it my OS, my AV software, or common sense with a lot of luck that helped keep me virus free all these years? All three things helped I think, but I'm pinning the majority of it on luck. That and the fact that I won't open attachments unless I know the person that sent them and even then not usually. To me that's a lot like Phishing: you can only protect the user from themselves so much. I know Symantec loves the doom and gloom, but yes, if OS-X market share is rising at a great rate - and given the traffic at my local Apple store, I think it's increasing - I would think that there's a greater chance for infection. After all, it makes for a larger "attack surface" if there's more machines out there to pound on... The only completely secure machine in the this world is one that is unplugged.