“Thank you for helping mark the 200,000th entry into the VirusScan malware (malevolent software) detection database,” Jimmy Kuo writes for McAfee Avert Labs Blog.
“We mark this moment simply as a milestone in our continual trip to fend off the bad stuff from everyone’s machines,” Kuo writes. “It is alarming that we reach this milestone so soon after September 2004 when the count reached 100,000. Eighteen years to reach 100,000. Less than two years to double. Looking ahead, our researchers expect yet another doubling in a similar timeframe. So, 100,000 new threats in the past two years, 200,000 new threats to come in the next two years!”
“Thanks also to the cadre of dedicated anti-malware researchers who on this day added that 200,000th malware detection entry, so we may pursue our enjoyment of the Internet experience with a little less worry,” Kuo writes.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: What worry? Oh, sorry, we use Macs. Happy 200,000th!
From Apple eNews, June 1, 2006:
It’s really sad that so many people have to be wary about opening email, visiting websites, chatting with presumed “buddies,” or downloading music, photos, movies or other files over the Internet.
No one should have to zealously guard their computers against spyware, viruses, trojan horses, or various other types of malware. Or run a bewildering assortment of (quickly obsolete) virus-protection apps. And no one should have to run a computer to a nearby computer store, so it can be “cleaned” on a routine basis.
Do you know why people put up with that? If their cars didn’t drive where they wanted to go; their TVs didn’t play what they wanted to watch; or their phones didn’t connect to the party they called, how long would they keep using them?
Apple provides more info online about Mac’s lack of viruses here.
By the end of 2005, there were 114,000 known viruses for PCs. In March 2006 alone, there were 850 new threats detected against Windows. Zero for Mac. While no computer connected to the Internet will ever be 100% immune from attack, Mac OS X has helped the Mac keep its clean bill of health with a superior UNIX foundation and security features that go above and beyond the norm for PCs. When you get a Mac, only your enthusiasm is contagious. – Apple’s “114,000 viruses? Not on a Mac.” webpage.
Advertisements:
• Introducing the super-fast, blogging, podcasting, do-everything-out-of-the-box MacBook. Starting at just $1099.
• Get the new iMac with Intel Core Duo for as low as $31 A MONTH with Free shipping!
• Get the MacBook Pro with Intel Core Duo for as low as $47 A MONTH with Free Shipping!
• Apple’s new Mac mini. Intel Core, up to 4 times faster. Starting at just $599. Free shipping.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Sophos Security: Dump Windows, Get a Mac – July 05, 2006
16-percent of computer users are unaffected by viruses, malware because they use Apple Macs – June 15, 2005
Apple: ‘Get a Mac. Say ‘Buh-Bye’ to viruses’ – June 01, 2006
Apple Macs and viruses: Fact vs. FUD – May 26, 2006
Mossberg: Is there a virus threat for Apple Macs? – May 11, 2006
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
Defending Windows over Mac a sign of mental illness – December 20, 2003
Seahawk, I understand the definition of a Trojan and how it does damage.
My question is, Is a Trojan part of the Virus family and therefore accurate to be considered of the Virus family.
So far, these fairly reputable sources have claimed in one way or another that a Trojan is in fact a type of virus, while many Mac users deny it.
1. Websters Dictionary defines a Trojan as ” A type of virus which normally requires a user to perform some action before the payload can be activated.
2. Wiikipedia calls a Trojan a type of virulence and refers to them as Trojan Horse viruses on the same page..
3. Microsofts Website says “Certain viruses, called Trojans (named after the fabled Trojan horse), can falsely appear as a beneficial program to coax users into downloading them. Some Trojans can even provide expected results while quietly damaging your system or other networked computers at the same time.
4. Apple lumps all 114,000 known PC viruses, trojans and worms and malware together as being just “Viruses,” yet denies that the two OSX trojans are “Viruses.”
5. Walt Mossberg recently said “There are two known Mac OSX Viruses.”
So basically, I understand that a Trojan requires user interaction to spread, but is a Trojan a type of virus and is it considered to be part of the virus family?
Trevor: Strictly speaking, no, Trojan Horse programs are not, by definition, viruses. What blurs the lines is the fact that Trojan Horse programs may contain viruses, or they themselves may be embedded within a virus.
The definition of a Trojan Horse program has already been covered in this thread. The definition of a virus is “a self-replicating computer program that spreads by inserting copies of itself into other executable code or documents.”
Clearly a single program can have both characteristics, thus it may be both a virus and a Trojan Horse program (hence the term “Trojan Horse virus”). But Tojan Horse programs are not, by definition (as you are inquiring), a type (or subset) of virus.
PS: A Trojan cannot be “a type of virulence” because “virulence” is an adjective.
Just because something is virulent does not make it a virus. It simply means it is extremely severe or harmful.
How many geeks does it take to argue about the meaning of ‘trojan’?
Thanks Rainy Day,
So if the Oompa Loompa Trojan contained a virus that spread once opened. Isn’t it safe to say that OSX has had at least one known virus?
And furthermore, isn’t Apple being deceitful in it’s marketing by saying “PCs have 114,000 viruses, Macs have zero. When in fact, thosusands of those Viruses are actually trojans that may not contain viruses, and at least one Mac Trojan (Oompa Loompa) did in fact contain an OSX virus?
Wait a miinute… Thank you?
Wow… They’re putting it right out there, aren’t they? Way to be honest. They may as well just say, “We’d like to take a moment to show our appreciation to all the virus writers out there, for keeping us in business.”
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Trevor–
Oompa Loompa is not able to self-propagate. In other words, it is simply a program. It does what it was designed to do, it just doesn’t market itself.
Trevor: Oompa Loompa is a virus-wanna-be, i’ll grant you, because it tries to spread itself (which is virus-like behavior). However it doesn’t meet the definition of a virus because it always requires operator consent to “infect” a system (i.e. it always behaves like a Trojan Horse program).
As to your other question, is Apple being disingenuous or applying a double standard?, it’s hard to say. The article above says that there are over 200,000 pieces of malware for Windoze; Apple only claims there are 114,000 viruses. While i do not recall the source for Apple’s figure offhand, i do know they were citing a statistic from a third party. Numerically, it is possible that there are 114,000 viruses and 86,000 other kinds of non-virus malware.
The truth is, after you run out of fingers and toes to count on, nobody knows for sure how many pieces of malware there are for a platform, much less exactly which kind they are. But what we do know is there is a whole boatload of them.
Trevor, the existence of this very same thread is the reason why Apple calls virus all malware out there exploiting flaws in Windows OS. The majority of people understands them as virus although it dilutes the real meaning and the real threat as well. In this case, as this thread also has demonstrated, for general user it is a matter of hair splitting, or geek mental masturbation.
For security purposes, distinction is useful in that different kind of malware require different type of precautions.
Conversely, Apple could say malware. After all, Windows is as well affected by spyware, bots, keyloggers that are certainly not virus but are malware and harmful to have running in the backstage without users being aware of it.
A trojan horse program is not a virus per se. I do not understand the term some website or bloggers have created Virus Family. Usually the term family is used for a same virus/worm and its variations.
A trojan horse program could also contain a bot, a keylogger, spyware, remote control system calls to turn the PC into a zombie at will, etc.
For the user, ultimately, your system has been *infected* and from the spread of this term in the common language then every started to be called a virus.
The reason in Mac threads people really point out the difference lies on the fact that a true virus – that replicated and spreads without user intervention – is a reflection of a more dangerous flaw wrt to malware needing social-fishing solutions and user intervention.
It is a matter of pointing out the levels of danger and criticality of the varios malware out there. Saying “Macs had two virus already so it is not different than Windows, hence it is just a matter of time or matter of getting in the right radars” is in a way just the same old FUD of ‘security by obscurity’.
Does it really matter? The only reason there aren’t viruses for macs isn’t because they are so much better than pc’s, it’s because there aren’t enough users and virus creators don’t waste their time making a virus for such a small percentage of people. As it stands macs are currently virus free, but as the number of users increases, there will be viruses created for the mac and it will be the same story as pc’s.
A trojan is something that claims to be one thing but is another, usually bad.
A virus is something that replicates.
Those are the most basic definitions. But it allows for intersection. So a particular trojan can be a virus. A particular virus can be a trojan.
That is for common use. (Well, at a slightly higher level than “Everything bad that happens to a computer is a virus.” Webster, though, is at this “everything is a virus” level. And to the general public, that’s how they use the word. And that’s Webster’s audience.)
For security industry use, we do away with the intersection and say that a trojan does not spread.
Note, in this definition, a worm is a subclass of virus. A worm spreads as a full copy of itself, generally over a network.