“All, right, I’m sick of people reporting that Mac OS X is ‘mostly’ virus-free. It is, as far has been proven, ENTIRELY virus-free. Macs are not magical, and one day there will be virus that infects them. However, I don’t think it’s happened yet, and I think it’s time we, the Mac community, started saying, ‘No, we don’t have any viruses,” Wil Shipley of Delicious Monster fame writes in his blog “Call Me Fishmeal.”
“Let me be clear: not having had a virus is NOT the same as being immune to viruses. I think part of the reason almost nobody has been willing to stand up on this crusade has been that we get shouted down with cries of, ‘Well, no OS is perfect; Mac OS X will get its virus!’ And I have no doubt we will. But Windows gets a virus every freaking week, and we’ve never had ONE. I think that’s also relevant,” Shipley writes.
“I’ll admit, others have come up with the idea of offering a bounty for Mac OS X viruses before, but I think those plans failed due to the way the challenge was structured. I don’t want to incite someone to create the first Mac OS X virus,” Shipley writes. “I’m going to offer a bounty of $500 to the first person who can prove that a Mac running Mac OS X (version 10.0 or greater, and patched to the latest security level available at the time from Apple) was accidentally and detrimentally infected with a virus that exploited a flaw in the base Mac OS X installation (not, say, Microsoft Word) before September 20, 2005. The definition of ‘virus’ will for this contest will be either a virus or worm as described by the wikipedia. The challenge ends at 23:59:00, October 16, 2005.”
Shipley writes, “I will only offer this bounty once, and as you can see, the deadline for the viruses to have done their dirty work is in the past. So, if you’re planning to write a new virus just to win the challenge, well… that won’t work unless you also make a time machine. (Which, frankly, I’d be willing to fund for $500.) This is a research project, not a programming project: find one of us who has been infected at some time, and tell the world about it.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: As regular readers know, we call writers on their descriptions of Mac OS X as “mostly virus-free” whenever we see it happening. Mac OS X to date has had no (zero) known viruses.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Apple hires Delicious Monster co-founder, user interface designer – July 22, 2005
Symantec: 10,866 new Microsoft Windows virus and worm variants in first half 2005 – September 19, 2005
Cargo magazine describes Apple’s Mac OS X’s immunity to viruses, spyware as ‘relative’ – September 10, 2005
ZDNet Australia publishes latest Mac OS X security FUD article – September 9, 2005
Hackers already targeting viruses for Microsoft’s Windows Vista – August 04, 2005
16-percent of computer users are unaffected by viruses, malware because they use Apple Macs – June 15, 2005
ZDNet: How many Mac OS X users affected by the last 100 viruses? None, zero, not one, not ever – August 18, 2005
Intel CEO Otellini: If you want security now, buy a Macintosh instead of a Wintel PC – May 25, 2005
Apple touts Mac OS X security advantages over Windows – April 13, 2005
97,467 Microsoft Windows viruses vs. zero for Apple Mac’s OS X – April 05, 2005
Joke of the month: Gartner warns of Mac OS X ‘spyware infestation’ potential – March 30, 2005
Symantec details flaws in its antivirus software – March 30, 2005
Motley Fool writer: ‘I’d be surprised if Symantec ever sells a single product to a Mac user again’ – March 24, 2005
Symantec cries wolf with misplaced Mac OS X ‘security’ warning – March 23, 2005
Symantec’s Mac OS X claims dismissed as nonsense, FUD – March 22, 2005
Symantec warns about Mac OS X security threat – March 21, 2005
Apple’s Mac OS X is virus-free – March 18, 2005
Cybersecurity advisor Clarke questions why anybody would buy from Microsoft – February 18, 2005
Security test: Windows XP system easily compromised while Apple’s Mac OS X stands safe and secure – November 30, 2004
Apple: ‘Opener’ is not a virus, Trojan horse, or worm – November 02, 2004
Microsoft: The safest way to run Windows is on your Mac – October 08, 2004
Information Security Investigator says switch from Windows to Mac OS X for security – September 24, 2004
Defending Windows over Mac a sign of mental illness – December 21, 2003
Columnist tries the ‘security through obscurity’ myth to defend Windows vs. Macs on virus front – October 1, 2003
New York Times: Mac OS X ‘much more secure than Windows XP’ – September 18, 2003
Fortune columnist: ‘get a Mac’ to thwart viruses; right answer for the wrong reasons – September 02, 2003
Shattering the Mac OS X ‘security through obscurity’ myth – August 28, 2003
Virus and worm problems not just due to market share; Windows inherently insecure vs. Mac OS X – August 24, 2003
Doesn’t Will now work for Apple? or was that the other guy from Delicious Monster?
I was under the impression that Apple employees couldn’t comment about anything Apple does online.
“…was accidentally and detrimentally infected with a virus that exploited a flaw in the base Mac OS X installation”
I’m glad to see he clarified.
From what I know, Macs can harbor and transmit a virus. These will be found and cleaned when running anti-virus software. However, no damage will be done and as claimed the Mac is immune. I think those who have in the past reported a virus on their Mac have had confusion on this issue.
never mind! I just checked, and it’s the other guy (Mike Matas) that now works for Apple.
Will’s free to say anything he wants about Apple.
Look! Mac OS X is great, but its not full proof in regards to security, no operating system is. Windows just happens to be an easy target, so crackers go after that system mostly. Though OS X is BSD-based and BSD having a really awesome security track record as compared to Windows and Linux, it surely doesn’t mean it can’t be cracked.
Here is the link I always post about this (I love this article) detailing why OS X will ALWAYS be more secure than windoze:
http://daringfireball.net/2004/06/broken_windows
(I think John Gruber owes me some hits
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”tongue rolleye” style=”border:0;” /> )
I’m don’t see how this will work.
If someone did in fact have a virus, they probably would have removed it long ago while trying to fix their computer.
And how would a person even know they had a virus? Since there are no known OS X viruses, an antivirus program wouldn’t be able to identify it. So there’s no proof you had it unless you still happened to have the source code, which is pretty doubtful if it was giving your computer problems.
Let’s say you have the source code saved somewhere, how do you prove that it infected your computer prior to 9-20, especially if you’ve fixed your computer a long time ago? Additionally, how do you prove that your computer was accidentally infected (as opposed to maliciously uploaded)?
Unless I’m missing something, it seems like this guy has created enough filters to prevent anyone from being able to claim the bounty.
“Mac OS X is great, but its not full proof in regards to security”
I believe you mean to say “foolproof.”
I’m split on this subject. We have current bragging rights to a virus-free platform, but I don’t think we should be openly encouraging any negative development on the platform, and regardless of the “structure” of this contest, it is doing just that. Let’s get back to building great applications, of which the Mac has many and needs more.
I’m offering a $500 for the first person that develops the next mind-blowing, eye-candied OmniGraffle-class Mac-only application for collaborative project management. It has to be full-featured and ready for market. The deadline for this bounty is Oct. 31st, 2005. Contact me by email if you’re interested.
Re: “correct me if I’m wrong…”
That’s the whole point. Nobody will be able to prove they had a virus so the bounty will never be paid. This is simply to raise awareness that there are no viruses, period. But it is still a challenge to someone with the balls to create one.
Yeah, like anyone is going to waste there time on a 500 dollar gift card to the apple store just to create a virus or something..Thats Gay…Really Gay.
Here guys work for hours and hours and days maybe even months for 500 dollah.
Puh-Lease.
I would rather someone offer like 100k. then it would happen for sure.
I know there is an FBI commission that investigates malicious computer viruses. Would offering $500 dollars for a virus be the same as paying for any othe illegal activity. I think that constitutes a felony. People look at cyber crimes that dont involve identity theft as meaningless. I read a disturbing poll on CNN.com in which people overwhelmingly supported stealing WiFi service. I dont get it? Many people stated there reason was because they should have secured their connection. Basically if the connection is open then it is free game. So does that mean that if I check around the parking lot and your car door is unlocked then I am okay to take everything inside. Or if I check houses in your neighborhood and if your doors and windows aren’t locked then anything inside is free. As long as it is cyber no one cares. The world is burying itself morally.
I don’t get why so many people care about whether other people think OS X can get viruses or not. It’s almost like people’s personal ego and sense of pride is being attacked when someone casually says that the Mac is relatively virus free. Unless you work at Apple or sell Apple products, I just don’t see why you would care so much.
People like this guy end up sounding arrogant. What’s the point in bragging about something like this anyway? Do people actually feel better about themselves when they brag about Apple? Is their self confidence somehow linked to Apple’s stock price or something? Get real people. I love my Mac because it doesn’t give me problems, but that’s no reason for me to spend my life defending or evangelizing everything Apple.
he made it quite clear that he’s not offering money for a virus
dudemac, did you read the article? Wil admits that. He is just saying that there is no virus written thus far and he intends to prove it.
Wasn’t there something like this similarly offered sometime a few months back, and then the so called”contest” got revoked b4 then end of the day for some reason, also isn’t there some legal reason why offering money to do something damaging, (if not offered by the compnay that owns the item/prduct against sone sort of law?)
I found two things very entertaining in this fellow’s blog:
A) How many of the commentators did not RTFA
B) This fellows post:
“The moment I see somebody portraying ‘Mac’ as an acronym is the moment I stop reading their post; from there, I can logically conclude they have no f@#%ing clue what they’re talking about.
Re: “I don’t get why so many people care about whether other people think OS X can get viruses or not.”
Because people are sick of media blurring the facts – most times intentionally, as this site often points out. There is a significant difference between being “mostly” virus free and being 100% virus free. Mac OS X is not a lesser even in the virus domain – but, mainstream media doesn’t have the balls go all out and say this, for various (most economic) reasons.
I like (and agree with) that quote about MAC vs. Mac.
I have a similar rule regarding those who write in haxor. Friggin’ script kiddies.
joe-m,
Seriously, how many people do you think planned on buying a Mac, then heard that there might possibly be the potential for a virus, and then decided to buy a Dell instead?
The difference between “mostly virus free” and “currently virus free when using to OS X” is so small that it probably has no impact on sales.
The only reason why people care so much about such a minor detail in semantics is because they have a misplaced sense of pride and ego.
joe-m,
In actuality, most media sites use terms like “Macs are relatively immune to virus attacks” or “Macs are mostly virus free.” These are in fact true statements.
it is not a minor semantic distinction – it is a clear difference and an important one. The novice Mac user may, when a problem arises, wonder if they have a virus and spend effort and money to get rid of it when, in fact, they don’t have one. Also, my experience is that people will either equate “mostly virus free” with “still gets viruses” or simply repeat it as “has viruses”.
why, shenanigans on you. There’s a huge difference between being told by ‘reputable’ tech sources that “Macs have relatively fewer viruses, but only because of low market share”, and “Macs have NO, zero, nil, viruses, because it’s programmed infinitely better.” The former will be blithely accepted by Dell-buying morons, whereas the latter might (eventually) penetrate their pointy little heads.
What does he mean that Macs are not Magical?
‘ow else does he think virus free is accomplished.
Bloody Muggles!
Yep. It’s like the difference between “I’ve got a head cold.” vs. “I’ve got <insert chronic disease of your choice>.”
OR — “I’m in good health today; no problems.”
There’s a big difference. Especially to someone who’s sick of MS because of the VIRUSES!
If those folk KNEW that, so far, OS X runs healthy everyday, instead of the occaisonal cold (and no it’s not perfect; things break, but not due to infections/malware) they’d find the nearest Apple Store quick.
Those CPU sales bring ‘developers…” repeat ballmer times.
Might even convince Adobe to get coding.
MW = ‘present’ an in: “At present, there are no known viruses on OS X. NONE. ZERO”