[Rumour] Snow Leopard Has Hidden Antivirus Talents


Recommended Posts

500x_snowav.jpg

Well, this is int-er-est-ing: Early testers have come across what looks like a new antivirus function within Snow Leopard. Or to put it another way, Macs don't need antivirus! Wait.

The new feature behaves like a cross between a traditional antivirus tool and the "Are you sure you want to open this?" warnings already present in Leopard. I doubt it's doing any real-time heuristic scanning and it's definitely not running as a visible app in the OS, but if it's checking .PKG and .DMG files for malware before you run or mount them, well, that sounds an awful lot like what your average Symantec, AVG or Kapersky product is intended to do.

The first report came from the Intego blog, (they make Mac antivirus software) and it's been corroborated by Snow Leopard testers over at the MacRumors forums. We'll try to test this one out as best we can, but it's looking like Apple may have slipped this ever-so-slightly unflattering feature into their new OS under the radar.

souricon.gif News source: Gizmodo

Does anyone else find this ironic (if true), considering what Apple's marketing department focused on in the latest 'Get a Mac' ads?

Disclaimer: This post was written on a Mac, running OS X 10.5.

Hardly ironic. They're keeping true to their word by preventing any possible malware from reaching your computer in the first place. It's essentially a re-worded confirmation box for when you run a new program, but made more focused on preventing malware to stop people mindlessly clicking 'run' when the box pops up.

Maybe like UAC, or if not once again Apple allowed to bundle what it pleases in to its OS.

But basic Unix password prompts are already very similar to UAC.

As stated, this isn't really anything new at all, just your typical password prompt, but reworded to call attention to any potential malware you might be installing on your system.

Very good move. This is a message warns the user of what they are installing. There are too many people that will give permissions to just anything these days.

Edit: Pretty much summed up by Quillz. You'd still need an account with SU privileges and would still need to type your password for something like this to work.

Well, this is int-er-est-ing: Early testers have come across what looks like a new antivirus function within Snow Leopard. Or to put it another way, Macs don't need antivirus! Wait.

Does anyone else find this ironic (if true), considering what Apple's marketing department focused on in the latest 'Get a Mac' ads?

Disclaimer: This post was written on a Mac, running OS X 10.5.

I am running 10A432 and I see nothing resembling AV software at all.

By the way, this build is full of WIN.

/System/Library/CoreServices/CoreTypes.bundle/Contents/Resources/XProtect.plist

Contains just the two most active trojans, the DNS changer one and the one bundled with the pirated iWork.

Nice find. I don't use OSX but it's still interesting to know.

Ah so Apple can bundle antivirus software with their OS but Microsoft can't (in Europe)

Because Apple, for whatever reason, isn't considered to have a monopoly.

Also, this isn't really anti-virus software at all. It's just a reworded standard password prompt that simply uses a blacklist, similar to a phishing filter in a web browser.

I notice a lot of people are saying "It's just reworded" or "It's UAC".... Am I the only one that noticed the dialog says "It contains the OSX.RSPlug.A malware"?

It is specically saying "It contains", not "It may contain", not "There is a chance this may contain", but simply stating that it does, indeed, contain malware. If Apple just said that every thing you download specifically contains malware, that would cause all sorts of problems and backlash. It has to either be scanning or using some kind of filter/blacklist/analyzer to detect malware.

I notice a lot of people are saying "It's just reworded" or "It's UAC".... Am I the only one that noticed the dialog says "It contains the OSX.RSPlug.A malware"?

It is specically saying "It contains", not "It may contain", not "There is a chance this may contain", but simply stating that it does, indeed, contain malware. If Apple just said that every thing you download specifically contains malware, that would cause all sorts of problems and backlash. It has to either be scanning or using some kind of filter/blacklist/analyzer to detect malware.

I think it's using a blacklist, and I'd imagine it's something that can and will be updated in 10.6.x builds.

Hardly ironic. They're keeping true to their word by preventing any possible malware from reaching your computer in the first place. It's essentially a re-worded confirmation box for when you run a new program, but made more focused on preventing malware to stop people mindlessly clicking 'run' when the box pops up.

So wait, when Apple embeds an antivirus checking in the OS it's awesome but when you can choose what antivirus you want to install on Windows than it's PC being hit with viruses and it's ridiculous. GOT IT!

This is the same thing as Microsoft Security Essentials only done Apple way, meaning it's "hush hush" and again closed up and embedded in the OS.

Smells like same crap to me if you ask.

Ah so Apple can bundle antivirus software with their OS but Microsoft can't (in Europe)

Let's just be clear this is not Antivirus software.

  • It does not actively scan the systems Hard Disk or Memory
  • It is not a separate application
  • It does not detect Viruses or Worms

What it does do is check the contents of a mounted disk image before it opens it and checks for two very specific files.

To call this an Antivirus is a huge stretch. It isn't even comparable to Windows Defender.

Let's just be clear this is not Antivirus software.

  • It does not actively scan the systems Hard Disk or Memory
  • It is not a separate application
  • It does not detect Viruses or Worms

What it does do is check the contents of a mounted disk image before it opens it and checks for two very specific files.

To call this an Antivirus is a huge stretch. It isn't even comparable to Windows Defender.

Well it is an antivirus as long as it checks the contents of the files and looks for viruses, thus the name Anti-virus. You don't have to have antivirus resident in memory in Windows either, but you apps do because they want to make sure that they prevent action even if you ran the file.

Norton AntiVirus only runs in memory on my computer to check for emails too (which will undoubtedly happen on OSX if it hasn't already). It's not differnet than AV apps on Windows checking in zip/rar archives and comparing it to the library of viruses. If anything the necessity due to Windows being highly targeted system means that the preventive measures and libraries or viruses are much wider and the heuristic methods of catching viruses have improved, something that OSX is yet to face.

Edited by Boz
Well it is an antivirus as long as it checks the contents of the files. You don't have to have antivirus resident in windows in Windows either, but you apps do because they want to make sure that they prevent action even if you ran the file.

Norton AntiVirus only runs in memory on my computer to check for emails too (which will undoubtedly happen on OSX if it hasn't already). It's not differnet than AV apps on Windows checking in zip/rar archives.

It doesn't even check for or remove Viruses. Since when did an Anti-Virus no longer detect or remove Viruses?

And in-fact this doesn't remove any type of file. It does a very rudimentary check and tells the user. That is it.

Possibly related..

http://developer.apple.com/releasenotes/Ma...MacOSX10_5.html

Quarantine

Applications that download files from the Internet or receive files from external sources (such as email attachments) can use the Quarantine feature to provide a first line of defense against malicious software such as Trojan horses. When an application receives an unknown file, it should add quarantine attributes to the file using new functions found in Launch Services. The attributes associate basic information with the file, such as its type, when it was received, and the URL from which it came. When the user tries to open a file that has quarantine attributes associated with it, Mac OS X inspects the file and automatically prevents known malicious files from being opened. For other files, the system asks the user what to do about the file, providing the user with information found in the quarantine attributes. If the user approves the opening of the file, the quarantine for that file is lifted.

If you are developing a web browser or email program, or if your software somehow deals with files from unknown sources, you should use the Quarantine feature as part of your program?s basic security procedures. Quarantine is part of the Launch Services API, which is itself part of the Core Services framework. For more information about the Quarantine API, see the LSQuarantine.h header file in that framework.

It doesn't even check for or remove Viruses. Since when did an Anti-Virus no longer detect or remove Viruses?

And in-fact this doesn't remove any type of file. It does a very rudimentary check and tells the user. That is it.

Well that just makes it a bad anti-virus not a non-anti virus. The fact that it checks against the library of viruses to make sure you didn't catch is the definition of anti-virus program. That's how Windows anti-virus programs work too. They check your files and archives to make sure you don't have a known virus but also include a smarter heuristic methods that help prevent from those viruses that are unknown. Of course, if you are infected on OSX I'm not sure what you are to do. Reinstall the OS?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • So I did a quick test based on 3+ different public instances from the litany at searx.space ... and it spins everything rather differently. It seems that SearXNG is a meta-search engine (queries multiple search indexes rather than only Google's or Bing's or Wikipedia's or Reddit's) that operates in two modes: > public instances ... each instance opens itself to outside users who piggyback on its cached search history; this instance's own identity becomes known/tracked but end-users are hidden similar to an anonymization proxy; this instance's querying of major search indexes may be API based [rated limited, blocked, etc.]). > private instances ... your private install/instance that itself queries multiple (configurable) search indexes of crawled web content; every major Search Engine associates all traffic to your private instance (so your traffic is tracked via network usages) but client-side tracking (your own browser/computer specs) is flushed because it's a "server" doing the querying rather than your browser. My test asked the same 1 question to the 3+ engines and they all returned vastly different results: some had CAPTCHA failures against Google, some had failures against Wikipedia, and the actual results were also different -- some had auto-complete enabled, others returned a wikipedia highlighted excerpt despite the Wikipedia failure (hinting at results being cached from previous keyword matching), and others just gave an Are-You-Human non-CAPTCHA loop before returning random results. So this begs the caveat: Search query results will vary based on which instance is used because every instance queries the other search indexes separate (and thus its results are influenced on that instance's aggregate search history and index-access limitations). The major distinctions for SearXNG versus DDG or Brave: > The search UI is 'untracked' since no UI trackers are baked-in which would phone home or lay cookies into your browser (for DDG/Brave usage stats), > There is no 'crawler' that canvasses the Internet to discover fresh content (it leaves that to the major search indexes), > Queries multiple search indexes ("meta-search engine") based on the configurations and usage history of the server instance, > Privacy-friendly due to its ability to shield user tracking via standing up a non-local server instance connectable to major VPN providers: queries would all appear to come from general VPN/Proxy providers rather than your private instance (whether installed locally or on your own VPS in the cloud). PS: I've previously come across specialized search engines of this nature that indexes searches across media assets like YT, OF, etc. SearXNG seems to be a good backbone...if the rate-limiting/captcha/etc. issues were resolved.
    • For a guy who claims to hate Farage and the ignorant, gullible, rightwing racist skinheads sponsored by Putin that his lies represent, you sure are quoting them time and time and time again, mate. I guess you're conveniently ignoring the fact that your country and commonwealth just happened to work much better when it was still part of the E.U.? Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.
    • Do you live in the U.K? Do any of the people here that are against the UK leaving the E.U, live in the U.K? If not then why are you bothered? If you do live here then it is a different thing . Brexit was a good idea, should have done it years before, it was done badly, but the idea was good. You are saying the same thing as remainers do, oh we did what Putin wanted, we listened to the lies and Farage. I hate Farage and never believed most of what he said, certainly did not believe the £350m a week for the NHS. But we did pay a lot of money to the E.U and yes some of it came back, but what is the point of paying it out for only some of it to come back? Get out of the E.U, no money to them and in theory we can use the money to do things in the country. I said in theory, but our governments are a total and complete waste of space. No matter what colour rosette they wear. You and others say it was a mistake and yet the two main parties in the U.K are not looking at rejoining the EU, I wonder why that is? I was not tricked by anyone. Makes no odds now, we are out and have been for 10 years, what we need is a decent government to run the country. All they do is shout at each other like a load of kids and seems to do nothing and make this country more into a police and nanny state. Getting more like China all the time.
    • 4TB TEAMGROUP MP44Q, 2TB T-Force G50, and 2TB WD My Passport SSDs drop to great prices by Fiza Ali Prime Day may be over, but there are still worthwhile storage deals available, including discounts on SSDs for shoppers who missed the event or are looking to upgrade their storage solution. Particularly, 2TB Western Digital My Passport, 2TB TEAMGROUP T-Force G50, and 4TB TEAMGROUP MP44Q SSD are selling at great prices with up to 23% off. The 2TB TEAMGROUP T-Force G50 is an M.2 2280 PCIe 4.0 x4 NVMe SSD with sequential read speeds of up to 5,000MB/s and sequential write speeds of up to 4,500MB/s. The drive has an endurance rating of 1,300 TBW (terabytes written) and features a DRAM-less design. The company specifies a mean time between failures (MTBF) of 3 million hours. The drive includes an "ultra-thin" graphene heat spreader that helps dissipate heat without significantly increasing the drive's thickness. It also supports S.M.A.R.T. monitoring, allowing compatible software to monitor drive health and operating status. The SSD is rated for operating temperatures from 0°C to 70°C, with a storage temperature range of -40°C to 85°C. The drive is backed by a five-year limited warranty as well. 2TB TEAMGROUP T-Force G50 SSD: $269.99 (Amazon US) The TEAMGROUP MP44Q is an M.2 2280 PCIe 4.0 x4 NVMe SSD that delivers sequential read speeds of up to 7,000MB/s and sequential write speeds of up to 5,900MB/s. It uses 3D QLC NAND flash memory to provide 4TB of storage capacity for games, applications, media files, and other data. The drive has an endurance rating of 2,000 TBW and an MTBF of 1.6 million hours. The SSD features a DRAM-less design and supports TEAMGROUP's S.M.A.R.T. monitoring software, allowing users to monitor drive health, temperature, and remaining lifespan. For thermal management, the MP44Q also includes an "ultra-thin" graphene heat spreader. It is designed to operate at temperatures between 0°C and 70°C and can be stored at temperatures ranging from -40°C to 85°C. The SSD is also backed by a five-year limited warranty. 4TB TEAMGROUP MP44Q SSD: $478.99 (Amazon US) The 2TB WD My Passport SSD connects via a USB-C port using the USB 3.2 Gen 2 interface. It delivers sequential read speeds of up to 1,050MB/s and sequential write speeds of up to 1,000MB/s through NVMe technology. In terms of security features, the drive includes password protection with 256-bit AES hardware encryption. The SSD is also designed to resist shock and vibration and is rated to withstand drops from heights of up to 6.5 feet. The recommended operating temperature range is 5°C to 35°C, while the non-operating temperature range is -20°C to 65°C. This drive is also backed by a five-year limited warranty. 2TB Western Digital My Passport SSD: $279.99 (Amazon US) Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Yeah... The root of my comment, ostensibly, is how to spin the story via the actual technical merits of the solution! * Decentralized (aka federated) solution with built-in encrypted ephemeral message transport, * Transport via Relays (intermediary servers) with no message archival, * Second configurable pathway are actual email servers (if DNS records are programmed accordingly) via IMAP protocols carriage, * "Chat-over-Email" is the design pattern adopted; it can either leverage full-blown Email Server (must use the INBOX folder) to exchange all received messages/edits/reactions (so be weary of notifications overloads) [best practice is creating a separate email acct used explicitly for federated chat purposes!] or leverage its built-in Relay Server mechanism which actually resides on-device (by default but can be configured otherwise), * By virtue of be a decentralized/federated model, all other intermediary servers who may pass-along messages (while the recipient's final relay/device is inaccessible) cannot snoop on the messages due to the encrypted nature of contents. The intermediaries may, however, analyze the metadata due to the simple fact that routing mechanisms require hints for relay destinations. Unfortunately, whomever is posting about DeltaChat across socials are misleading with "zero metadata" claims -- especially when the Relays (according to their own technical documents) mandate the addition of chat-version metadata and other decorations in order to actually transport any message. -- Based on this summary, I'd prefer if they'd better dual-path message transport (email server add-in, federated relay engine) rather than patch-on email protocols to existing federated social media frameworks. They're frankensteining something rather than extending widely-deployed technology stacks.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      492
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      225
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!