On November 21 2008, Apple posted an updated support article regarding use of antivirus utilities for “Mac OS” which is getting widespread coverage from axe-grinders worldwide. Instead of quoting ignorance and/or ulterior motives disguised as “news,” here is Apple’s article verbatim along with the original article from June 2007 which proves that Apple’s position is nothing new:
Mac OS: Antivirus utilities
Last Modified: November 21, 2008
Article: HT2550
Old Article: 4454
Summary
Learn about antivirus utilities available for the Mac OS.
Products Affected
Consumer Software, Mac OS
Apple encourages the widespread use of multiple antivirus utilities so that virus programmers have more than one application to circumvent, thus making the whole virus writing process more difficult. Here are some available antivirus utilities:
Intego VirusBarrier X5, available from the Apple Online Store
License: commercial
Symantec Norton Anti-Virus 11 for Macintosh, available from the Apple Online Store
License: commercial
McAfee VirusScan for Mac
License: commercial
Important: Information about products not manufactured by Apple is provided for information purposes only and does not constitute Apple’s recommendation or endorsement. Please contact the vendor for additional information.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Note: The text of Apple’s “Old Article: 4454” verbatim:
Mac OS: Antivirus Utilities
Last Modified on: June 08, 2007
Article: 4454
This article describes the antivirus utilities that are available for the Mac OS.
Apple encourages the widespread use of multiple antivirus utilities so that virus programmers have more than one program to circumvent, thus making the whole virus writing process more difficult. Here are some of the available antivirus utilities:
Intego VirusBarrier X4
Publisher: Intego
License: commercial
Norton Anti-Virus for Macintosh (formerly SAM)
Publisher: Symantec
License: commercial
Virex
Publisher: McAfee
License: commercial
This article provides information about a non-Apple product. Apple, Inc. is not responsible for its content. Please contact the vendor for additional information.
Full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Doug S.” for the heads up.]
MacDailyNews Take: Contrary to The Mothership’s reiterated and updated encouragement, we’re keeping our processor cycles to ourselves. As evidenced by our ongoing poll — “Do you run antivirus app(s) on your Mac?” — we’re not alone, with 91% answering “no.” Currently, outside of the lab (in the wild), examples of Mac malware are few and far between, so this updated, year-and-a-half old article by Apple strikes us as a preemptive move to cover some legal bases, a “just in case” article designed for today’s litigious environment. Trojans (designed to fool the user into granting permission to run) and Website-based exploits that use applications, not Mac OS X itself, as the attack vectors are the issues of which Mac users should be most mindful
Regardless of what we’re doing with our Macs, for piece of mind, and especially for users who are risk averse and/or do not want or know how to clone drives, restore from Time Machine, and/or other rebuilding techniques, by all means, follow Apple’s advice and “use multiple antivirus utilities.” As always, everyone should backup routinely and do not visit or download files from untrusted Websites.
[UPDATED: The original article was published at 9:40am ET. Updated at 11:35am ET with text and link to Article 4454.]
I think I’ll switch to Vista, the virus makers will quit targeting it since it has such a low market share.
As 9to5Mac states, they’ve been doing this since 2002. This is not news.
where is zunetang? i thought he would jump on this
I have used ClamXAV for the past few months and it suits me fine. It doesnt take up many cycles as it only kicks in when a new file arrives into one of the watched folders (I just have it watch Downloads, Mail Downloads and Drop Box).
Only reason I have it is that I have to exchange files with clients and I dont want to pass on any infections from a Windows box.
I love my mac but honestly its just a matter of time. Compromising the Mac may not be via infecting the OS directly but via crappy third party software. An example would be visual basic scripts in MS Office attachments?
Software outside of the control of apple.
@dermotg good on you. The chance of mac users getting a virus might be slimmer that Windows but still there are innocent people out there who don’t deserve a virus from mac users regardless of how naive they might be.
I must laugh at how much publicity this article is getting, its like the greatest news story of the year. The article in Cnet goes on to mention the one trojan for mac Mac OS X Trojan reported in the wild
Do we really trust Symantec, et al., to have a better understanding of the operating system than Apple? Anti-virus is not magic; it requires a problem to transpire and then a fix must be crafted. If there’s a serious threat, Apple will have the fix out first.
Biologically, we can kill all the viruses or build up our immunity. Since it’s really not possible to kill all the viruses, we rely on our immunity. An up-to-date operating system with the latest security patches is our immunity. With that, we don’t need anti-virus.
It’s only a support page article, it’s not as if it’s on their front page or anything. Of course it would be best practise to take extra precautions, but they’re hardly saying you have to use it or that there are almost certainly going to be problems if you don’t.
It will be a cold day in hell before I use anything designed/created by Symantec.
Do we really trust Symantec, et al., to have a better understanding of the operating system than Apple?
Maybe not, but it’s Apple recommending the use of AV software in the support article, not Symantec.
Biologically, we can kill all the viruses or build up our immunity. Since it’s really not possible to kill all the viruses, we rely on our immunity. An up-to-date operating system with the latest security patches is our immunity. With that, we don’t need anti-virus.
We can also take drugs — antibiotics (for bacterial infections) or any of a multitude of antivirals — to help fight infection. That’s your AV software. Anyone who chooses to rely solely on “building up immunity” to fight off infections is foolish.
Being extra cautious… kind of like being extra cautious with your wife of 20 years by using a condom every time, not for birth control, but to protect yourself from STDs, ’cause, you never know…
I think Apple knows that someday viruses will start to get to the Mac, and I think they already have a solution. Certainly, a solution I’m hoping to see by MWSF 09. It’s a solution they’ve already perfected and proven to be a viable business model and a profitable one at that:
The App Store.
For the Mac.
You heard it here first.
Imagine: you could see all the available applications for the Mac in one convenient space: the iTunes store. You could download and install them in no time. They would let you know when updates were available. You wouldn’t have to keep track of licences, no more entering your credit card details.
It is odd that Apple, after decades of publicly denouncing the susceptibilities of Windows, would admit that its Unix-based OS also offers weak protection. What inspired this mea culpa? Perhaps, Steve Snobs, fearing eternal damnation is unburdening himself of the lies he has told by now confessing his sins.
I used Norton for awhile but it acted like a virus so I deleted it.
The main threats OS X faces are from *trojans*, not viruses. Unfortunately, a technologically-ignorant tech press doesn’t know what the difference is between the two, and the fact that anti-trojan programs are still labeled “antivirus” doesn’t help any.
Nowhere does Apple explain precisely how an outside third party can possibly provide better security than the operating system itself. Indeed, it has been shown that these “antivirus” suites can sometimes open more vulnerabilities than they close.
Additionally, the fact that Apple’s article exclusively lists *commercial* programs, and excludes mentioning ClamAV (which is quite odd, as ClamAV is included by default with OS X Server), suggests to me that this is more of a business relationship thing, rather than a technologically-based recommendation.
I very occasionally use ClamXAV, the OS X app which uses ClamAV behind the scenes, but unfortunately it’s not always kept up-to-date, and the automatic folder scanner likes to crash a lot. Regardless, that’s as far as I plan to go in the “antivirus” direction, regardless of Apple’s recommendations, unless there’s compelling real-world evidence otherwise.
Apple is obligated to publish an article along these lines. It doesn’t mean that they necessarily believe that anti-virus protection is necessary. It’s simply a means of covering their asses in the event that something DOES occur. It doesn’t mean that occurrence is likely. Nothing to see here folks, move along now.
–mAc
There is no point to having an anti-virus app. None of them know what to look for and none of them have any virus templates because there aren’t any viruses. If a virus was released tomorrow, no anti-virus app would recognize it.
As has been said, Apple is covering its ass legally.
Furthermore, Symantic should be destroyed.
Wish apple would write their own. They know the system better and do a better job writing software.
Gabriel makes a good point about Apple not mentioning ClamAV even though they bundle it with OS X Server. Unfortunately this underlines the suspicion held by many that AV software is just a money-making racket.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
ClamAV is described as “an open source (GPL) anti-virus toolkit for UNIX”.
<a href =”http://www.clamxav.com”>ClamXav</a> is essentially a GUI frontend app for ClamAV. Its written by a UK based programmer called Mark Allan. Its free but you can donate through paypal if you like.
I have not noticed any performance issues with it – unlike Gabriel – but maybe I’ve been lucky. Anyway, for me its a no-brainer, as my concern is mostly to avoid spreading Windows-originating malware to my 99% Windows-using clients. At present I only use the Sentry feature to monitor mail attachments, downloads, drop box files and client files I receive on flash drives. I don’t currently perform scheduled scans on my hard drive.
Finally, I don’t think us mac users should view this kind of software as an affront to our manhood
Speedyg:
That’s rich, Apple writes its own anti-malware software. Wasn’t that the reason for Unix-based OS X?
The real question is… Does Apple install anti-virus software on its own corporate computers? I rather doubt it. I tend to agree with MDN. This is just Apple Legal covering the corporate ass.
A personal tale: About seven years ago, following an agency reorganization, I began working with our Research group, a number of whose developers still used Macs. They’d struggled to obtain anti-virus software for the Macs. I managed to get it for them. But within a year or so, we all dropped use of AV software on our Macs. Didn’t hurt us in the least. We never told HQ.
Yeah! Now Macs will also know what true life means!
To Not Zune Tang at all (alias almux – for this matter!)
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
I think Apple loves Developpers, developpers, devil hoppers, devell hopers, deve a loper’s! And dearly wish to have them all keeping their jobs… even useless anti-virus makers on Mac platform! Ha! Ha!
I have never used anti virus software in the almost 25 years of Mac use and have never suffered any viruses.
That speaks for itself to me.