Professional Web Applications Themes

Is the Mac susceptible to be infected by the Sobig virus ? - Mac Applications & Software

In the past two weeks, I have been flooded with Spam messages with subject lines like: "Your details" "Re: Your Application" "Re: Thanks !" etc., all related to the Sobig virus Whilst I have not opened any of these, and sent them all to the Spam folder of "Mail" before deleting them, I am wondering if a) they can have affected my Mac (OS 10.2.6) - I have no antivirus... b) they can be ted from my Mac and sent to others without my knowledge of it Any idea ? (and sorry if the subject has already been discussed here, ...

  1. #1

    Default Is the Mac susceptible to be infected by the Sobig virus ?

    In the past two weeks, I have been flooded with Spam messages with
    subject lines like:
    "Your details"
    "Re: Your Application"
    "Re: Thanks !"
    etc., all related to the Sobig virus
    Whilst I have not opened any of these, and sent them all to the Spam
    folder of "Mail" before deleting them, I am wondering if
    a) they can have affected my Mac (OS 10.2.6) - I have no antivirus...
    b) they can be ted from my Mac and sent to others without my
    knowledge of it

    Any idea ?

    (and sorry if the subject has already been discussed here, I do not
    download ALL posts).

    --
    François de Dardel
    --
    http://mapage.noos.fr/dardelf/
    Utilisez mon adresse sur noos seulement
    Use only my noos e-mail

    François Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Is the Mac susceptible to be infected by the Sobig virus ?

    In article <3f53bd8f$0$29850$noos.net>,
    François de Dardel <net> wrote:
     

    Nope, you're fine. The Mac doesn't have the vulnerability that this
    virus exploits, meaning it can't hurt your Mac, and it can't
    automatically te itself and send itself via your Mac. The only
    way you could send it to others would be to specifically forward the
    whole message to them, attachment and all.

    --
    Garner R. Miller
    Manchester, CT =USA=
    Garner Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: Is the Mac susceptible to be infected by the Sobig virus ?

    In article <3f53bd8f$0$29850$noos.net>,
    Francois de Dardel <net> wrote:
     

    No and no.

    They're windows executables. Which in turn means that unless you're
    running Softwindows, virtualPC, or similar, they can't run and therefore
    can neither propogate from your machine, unless you manually mail them
    out yourself, nor accomplish their intended task.

    Why can't they run? Well, basically, it's because the Intel processors
    that Windows runs on "speak" Swahili, and the PowerPC or 680X0
    processors that MacOS runs on speak Portugese - They're totally
    unintelligible to each other. Net result: Windows virus on Mac hardware
    = a string of useless, almost certainly inert gibberish. "Almost
    certainly inert" because there may, by pure chance, be a few bytes here
    and there in the windows code that correspond to legitimate (but almost
    certainly not the same, functionally) PowerPC/68K instructions. The
    chances of those bytes being in the right places to actually get
    executed are somewhere betwen slim and none, especially since Macs
    expect their executable code to be in a specific format, unlike Windows
    boxes, where you can just hand them a string of numbers that make up the
    program you want to run, and it'll be treated exactly like a program.
    With "PEF" containers, Mach-0 code packages, and CFM modules (All unique
    to Mac executables) it's much harder to throw an arbitrary string of
    bytes at a Mac and get it to actually execute, even if it is a
    legitimate program.

    --
    Don Bruder - net <--- Preferred Email - unmunged, SpamAssassinated
    Hate SPAM? See <http://www.spamassassin.org> for some seriously great info.
    I will choose a path that's clear: I will choose Free Will! - N. Peart
    Fly trap info pages: <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/Horses/FlyTrap/index.html>
    Don Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: Is the Mac susceptible to be infected by the Sobig virus ?

    In article <3f53bd8f$0$29850$noos.net>,
    François de Dardel <net> wrote:
     

    As others have said, Sobig can't harm your computer or use it to
    propagate. You are getting these messages because someone using a PC has
    your email address in their address book and they have been infected. Be
    glad you have a Macintosh!

    Regards,

    Don

    --
    Donald S. Hall, Ph.D.
    Apps & More Software Design, Inc.
    www.appsandmore.com
    don at appsandmore dot com
    "Schedule your AppleScripts with Script Timer"
    Donald Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: Is the Mac susceptible to be infected by the Sobig virus ?

    In article <3f53bd8f$0$29850$noos.net>,
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fran=E7ois_de_Dardel?= <net> wrote:
     

    No.
     

    No.

    The messages contain a program written for some versions of
    Windows. Your Mac cannot ever run that program.


    Simon Guest

  6. #6

    Default Is the Mac susceptible to Blaster? (was: Sobig...



    A Mac running file sharing with
    System Preferences -> Sharing -> Services -> Windows File Sharing
    ticked to run, will have by default at least port 139 open and may
    subsequently generate or accept traffic on ports 137, 138

    MacOS-X server 10.0 & 10.1 had port 111 RPCs open,
    but 10.2 has closed that, and opened 311 for remote admin.

    Is it just lack of geek appeal to hack OS-X?
    or have Apple really bolted things down tighter than MS?
    Peter Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: Is the Mac susceptible to Blaster? (was: Sobig...

    On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Peter KERR wrote:
     
    >
    > A Mac running file sharing with
    > System Preferences -> Sharing -> Services -> Windows File Sharing
    > ticked to run, will have by default at least port 139 open and may
    > subsequently generate or accept traffic on ports 137, 138
    >
    > MacOS-X server 10.0 & 10.1 had port 111 RPCs open,
    > but 10.2 has closed that, and opened 311 for remote admin.
    >
    > Is it just lack of geek appeal to hack OS-X?
    > or have Apple really bolted things down tighter than MS?
    >[/ref]
    Just because you provide the same services doesn't mean you suffer from
    the same security holes, since usually the code is different (eg windows
    doesn't use samba for its file sharing).
    Even if they did, something like
    blaster works because it is able to get the host computer to execute code
    it has received. A Mac wouldn't have the faintest idea to do with that
    code, the process trying to do that would just crash.

    Fred

    Frederick Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: Is the Mac susceptible to Blaster? (was: Sobig...

    In article <auckland.ac.nz>,
    Peter KERR <domain> wrote:
     

    A combination of the two. Why do you think some people insist on calling
    Windows an open system? ;)

    G
    Gregory Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: Is the Mac susceptible to Blaster? (was: Sobig...

    Peter KERR wrote: 

    It's a numbers game. Why waste time looking for an open
    Mac when there are 10s of millions of open Windows boxes
    guaranteed ready to go at any time.

    OS X may "only" receive 12 security patches per year (vs.
    70 or 80 patches for Windows) because there aren't enough
    guys on Apple's security payroll yet. But it may well happen that
    OS X patches will outnumber Windows patches if Jobs boosts
    Apple's market share back above 10% (about the same time Arnold's
    grandson runs for president).
    George Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: Is the Mac susceptible to Blaster? (was: Sobig...

    >It's a numbers game. Why waste time looking for an open 

    No, it's also a security model game.

    Unix uses a different security model than Windows uses. Windows pretty much
    assumes that any program should be allowed to do whatever it wants; Unix does
    not. Windows allows user applications to have access to system resources that
    Unix does not.

    Windows also has a bunch of gewgaws built into the operating system at a very
    deep level--HTML renderers and the like--that MacOS X does not. A virus or worm
    can always count on being able to access a known (and often buggy) HTML
    rendering engine running with what essentially amount to root privileges; an OS
    X app can't.

    Even if OS X and Window seach had 50% market share, you could still expect to
    see more viruses on the Windows side.

    --
    Rude T-shirts for a rude age: http://www.villaintees.com
    Art, literature, shareware, polyamory, kink, and more:
    http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

    Tacit Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: Is the Mac susceptible to Blaster? (was: Sobig...

    In article <com>,
    George Williams <com> wrote:
     
    >
    > It's a numbers game. Why waste time looking for an open
    > Mac when there are 10s of millions of open Windows boxes
    > guaranteed ready to go at any time.
    >
    > OS X may "only" receive 12 security patches per year (vs.
    > 70 or 80 patches for Windows) because there aren't enough
    > guys on Apple's security payroll yet. But it may well happen that
    > OS X patches will outnumber Windows patches if Jobs boosts
    > Apple's market share back above 10% (about the same time Arnold's
    > grandson runs for president).[/ref]

    There's more to it than that. Mac OS X is Unix, and Unix is a mature
    operating system by this point. Many things that might have become
    problems were discovered and fixed years ago. Plus the security model
    tends to make the system less susceptible anyway.

    --
    Tom "Tom" Harrington
    Macaroni, Automated System Maintenance for Mac OS X.
    Version 1.4: Best cleanup yet, gets files other tools miss.
    See http://www.atomicbird.com/
    Tom Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: Is the Mac susceptible to Blaster? (was: Sobig...

    In article <com>,
    George Williams <com> wrote:
     

    I'm not sure I buy that, George. Although it's true that the user share
    for Mac OS X isn't there, by and large the security issues stem from the
    open source services that are distributed with Mac OS X. Those are much
    more widely distributed.

    So while there's an element of truth to it, I suspect the services in OS
    X are more secure.
    Steven Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: Is the Mac susceptible to Blaster?

    George Williams <com> wrote:
     
    >
    > It's a numbers game. Why waste time looking for an open Mac when there
    > are 10s of millions of open Windows boxes guaranteed ready to go at any
    > time.[/ref]

    Except that the numbers don't quite add up. Windows is vastly
    over-represented, relative to its market share or number of systems in
    use, when it comes to viruses, worms, trojan horses, etc. And while a
    commercial software developer may be satisfied to be a small fish in the
    Windows pond, creators of computer mischief are motivated by reputation
    as well as by sheer numbers. Doesn't the very rarity of successful
    attacks on Macs constitute an incentive to make one?

     

    Well, I count five security updates to 10.2 since it shipped more than a
    year ago; and, AFAIK, they all plugged holes before any Mac user
    suffered damage. In any case, I hardly see how the payroll argument
    benefits Microsoft. With so many employees, why can't they find more of
    these security holes before the software even ships? Windows' market
    share makes it a big target, but that market share also provides the
    financial resources that ought to make it more and not less secure than
    other platforms.
    Neill Guest

  14. #14

    Default Re: Is the Mac susceptible to Blaster?

    On Thu, 4 Sep 2003 about 23:03 -0000 UTC Neill Massello wrote:
     

    Because Windows cheap, home operating systems are like plates of cold
    spaghetti?

    (Or perhaps vermicelli.)

    --
    rdr
    Obfus Guest

Similar Threads

  1. POP3Filter for SoBig.F Virus:
    By Austin Ziegler in forum Ruby
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: September 23rd, 08:55 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: September 9th, 07:11 PM
  3. OT - SoBig Virus
    By Chuck Snyder in forum Adobe Photoshop Elements
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: August 21st, 04:06 AM
  4. Infected
    By Nicholas in forum Windows Setup, Administration & Security
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: August 12th, 10:01 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139