SecureMac from MacScan protects Mac users from nonexistent viruses for only $24.95

“Spyware and keystroke loggers have often been thought of as a Windows only problem, but Nicholas Raba, CEO of and co-author of Maximum Security says many Apple Macintosh users may have a false sense of security. SecureMac has released MacScan which detects and removes Macintosh spyware, remote administration utilities and keystroke loggers. In a telephone interview, Raba talked to us about current and future Macintosh spyware and virus threats,” Humphrey Cheung writes for TG Daily.

Cheung writes, “MacScan, one of the few Macintosh anti-spyware programs, was released in 2002 and recently reached version 2.0. It currently recognizes, quarantines and deletes dozens of spyware programs and keystroke loggers and Raba adds, “And I’m not talking about cookies. You’ll see that other anti-spyware programs classify browser cookies as spyware.” The program is freely downloadable for a 15 day free trial. Afterwards, a perpetual license is $24.95. With a booth at the upcoming Macworld in San Franscisco and a retail push, Raba wants MacScan to become a household name like Ad-Aware or Symantec.”

Cheung writes, “People who are frustrated with computer viruses and spyware are constantly told to buy a Macintosh, but Raba told us that this just gives them a false sense of security. ‘Sure it may be one of the more secure operating systems, but you can’t go with the attitude that there are no viruses for the Mac,’ says Raba. He adds that proof of concept virus code is already running around the Internet and that a major Mac virus is inevitable. ‘Anyone with programming skills could make something, the majority don’t bother because they don’t want to go to jail,'” says Raba.”

Full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: There are zero Mac OS X viruses. Surely there are better ways to promote your product, Mr. Raba? You want to become to “become a household name like Symantec?” Well, you’ve certainly started down the right path to becoming as poorly-regarded as is Symantec by Mac users worldwide. Why are you talking about viruses when your product promises only to “detect, isolate, and remove: spyware, keystroke loggers, trojan horses, and administration applications?” What’s next, galoshes for earthworms, just $24.95 a pair?

The New iPod with Video. The ultimate music & video experience on the go. From $299. Free shipping.
Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.00.
The New iMac G5. Built-in camera and remote control. From $1299. Free shipping.
Apple USB Modem. Easily connect to the Internet using your dial-up service. $49.00.

Related MacDailyNews articles:
Why pay Symantec for flawed ‘security’ app designed to protect Apple Macs from nonexistent threats? – December 27, 2005
‘Highly critical’ flaw in discovered in Symantec AntiVirus for Mac OS X – December 21, 2005
Why Symantec’s ‘scare tactics’ don’t worry Mac users – September 28, 2005
$500 bounty offered for proof of first Apple Mac OS X virus – September 27, 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


  1. “proof of concept virus code is already running around the Internet”

    Is this the virus code that SecureMac maybe attempted to spread across the internet in order to sell more virus protection software, and which disappointingly failed to infect any Macs??

    Gee, I hope they leave their modems unplugged so that proof of concept virus doesn’t escape the laboratory. Remember that’s how killer bees came to bee.

  2. Another quote by Mr. Raba on

    “While Mac OS X has yet to suffer from the widespread Trojan Horse, spyware and virus attacks seen in the Windows world, CEO Nicholas Raba told Mr. Lemos: “Mac OS X is currently more secure than Linux or Windows only for the fact that the shares of users is smaller thus the (number of) researchers discovering the flaws is smaller.”

    This guy is a security expert? Not only does he buy into the false security through obscurity crap, but he thinks Linux has larger market share than OS X. I Googled OS market share to check that right when I saw it. Maybe I’m wrong, but I think OS X has larger market share than Linux and yet the “expert” is spewing crap. Bet you money if you google some more on him you’ll find more FUD in the same sentence as the name of the snake oil he’s selling.

  3. Let the recent $ymantec security risk be a lesson to you weenies: If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!

    Why would you spend perfectly good money (not to mention cpu cycles) on shit you DO NOT NEED?

    ” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”raspberry” style=”border:0;” />

  4. Jake,

    I actually don’t see a problem with Munkee working to try to create a virus. If he’s not working on putting one in the wild, but rather working to see if it can be done, I see no harm. Research like that can only work to make OS X stronger if he does it right. Report his findings back to Apple rather than release it into the wild, or release the mechanism to the “bad guys”.

  5. Gosh, all the old forum content is gone from their site. They can’t name what keyboard loggers and spyware they remove. At least Symantec does to some degree. Does MacScan remove or indentify all versions of Spector? Or BackTrack? Is it a kernel extension? How badly does it muck with permissions (like earlier versions did)?

    I tried an early version a couple of years ago. It created problems with my machine then. I know better now.

  6. “‘Anyone with programming skills could make something, the majority don’t bother because they don’t want to go to jail,'” says Raba.”

    Anyone could, but they don’t want to go to jail? Wouldn’t that apply to every OS, Raba? Also, if anyone could it, why is there only one POC virus out there? Shouldn’t there be a lot if it was so easy that any hacker could do it.

  7. Yeah, speaking of viruses, did you see the latest one making the rounds lately? It jumps into a fully patched and updated Windows XP system, just by clicking on a freaking link.

    “Security researchers have released instructions for exploiting a previously unknown security hole in Windows XP and Windows 2003 Web Server with all of the latest patches applied.

    Anti-virus company Symantec warned of the new exploit, which it said uses a vulnerability in the way Windows computers process certain image files (Windows Meta Files, or those ending in .wmf).

    Symantec said the exploit is designed to download and run a program from the Web that downloads several malicious files, including tools that attackers could use to control vulnerable computers via Internet relay chat (IRC) channels.”

  8. Nice Guy writes: “A lot of Mac user pass files to and from PC users, I use Anti-Virus as a courtesy to people using Windows, even if they do use Windows.”

    This is a bit like trying to protect people from lung cancer and heart disease by buying up lots of cigarettes. It doesn’t really solve the problem, and you are the one who suffers.

    You might think you’re being nice by not passing along Windoze viruses, but i assure you even if every Mac user did as you do, it would hardly faze the onslaught of Windoze viruses.

    You can’t protect all the fools in this world from their own folly. Don’t try. If someone is stupid enough to run Windoze, let them waste their time and CPU cycles. Why should you pay to upgrade your computer to faster model so you can run Windoze Anti-Virus software? Or said another way: Why should you give up performance for the sake of Windoze heads?

    If someone wants to do something self-destructive, be it smoke cigarettes or use Windoze, you probably can’t do anything about it. Unless they don’t know that what they’re doing is harmful (in which case, education is what will help them, not smoking the cigarette on their behalf).

  9. Just went through quite a few of the forum posts at, looking for ANYONE saying thanks for MacScan detecting ANYTHING. Not one post about anyone finding anything, but several saying it didn’t find anything, and a few questions & complaints about it not running properly.

    Course, we all knew that anyway.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.