Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Software
Security Apps
Other security for Windows, Mac, Linux
macOS needs an AV?
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MacDefender" data-source="post: 954555" data-attributes="member: 83059"><p>Yeah I don’t think it’s bashing Apple, but the subtext is important. Apple executives are basically saying this to argue that it is impossible to solve the malware problem without an iOS style walled garden where the OS does not allow installing things that aren’t signed and approved by Apple. </p><p></p><p>Apple isn’t implying that any third party AV is a viable solution, though of course they have their agenda for pushing this discussion towards a walled-garden App Store.</p><p></p><p>As with most things, the truth is muddy. Apple’s argument doesn’t make sense given that these recent malware samples are notarized and signed by Apple (Note that the signing identity costs at least $99 per human identity, Apple detects trying to use another credit card under the same name to pay for a Developer ID), so it isn’t practical or cheap. And note that SentinelOne has a suggested set of YARA rules for detecting this attack, which simply says Apple’s XProtect ones are not sufficient. It’s not much different from how any malware (Windows or otherwise) attempts to evade static signatures.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MacDefender, post: 954555, member: 83059"] Yeah I don’t think it’s bashing Apple, but the subtext is important. Apple executives are basically saying this to argue that it is impossible to solve the malware problem without an iOS style walled garden where the OS does not allow installing things that aren’t signed and approved by Apple. Apple isn’t implying that any third party AV is a viable solution, though of course they have their agenda for pushing this discussion towards a walled-garden App Store. As with most things, the truth is muddy. Apple’s argument doesn’t make sense given that these recent malware samples are notarized and signed by Apple (Note that the signing identity costs at least $99 per human identity, Apple detects trying to use another credit card under the same name to pay for a Developer ID), so it isn’t practical or cheap. And note that SentinelOne has a suggested set of YARA rules for detecting this attack, which simply says Apple’s XProtect ones are not sufficient. It’s not much different from how any malware (Windows or otherwise) attempts to evade static signatures. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top