Kaspersky anti-virus for Mac
in [UK Mac]
|
From: Jaimie Vandenbergh on 23 Apr 2010 10:18 On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 15:11:17 +0100, Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: >On 2010-04-23 15:01:02 +0100, Dorian Gray said: > >> In article <1jhczgk.kykzja1dr4xbcN%nospam(a)nospamottersonbg.couk>, >> nospam(a)nospamottersonbg.couk (Duncan Kennedy) wrote: >> >>> I >>> use Wirus Barrier on my Macs - OK I *know but I don't want to be the >>> first to be screwed by the first Mac virus in the wild and that is >>> coming one day soon. >> >> But your Wirus Barrier software (or any other "anti-virus" software on >> the Mac) will not protect against the as-yet-hypothetical "first Mac >> virus in the wild" when the latter first appears, because it will be >> new, see? > >Well not necessarily, as they should be able to detect things that look >*like* a virus, ie identify viruses they haven't seen before. To an >extent anyway. But they're all trained up on Windows viruses. It seems pretty unlikely that a true Mac virus will be easily matched from that base - new Windows viruses may well though. Cheers - Jaimie -- "You know how dumb the average person is? Well, by definition, half of 'em are dumber than THAT." - J.R. "Bob" Dobbs
From: Jim on 23 Apr 2010 10:22 On 2010-04-23, Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: > >> 2. Your anti-virus software might introduce security holes in your >> system. > > True. Or, as with McAfee earlier this week, it might inaccurately identify a key and perfectly legit piece of your system as Naughty and nuke it, leading to Endless Reboot Rage. (it identified svchost.exe as malware. Fun for all concerned) Jim -- Twitter:@GreyAreaUK "[The MP4-12C] will be fitted with all manner of pointlessly shiny buttons that light up and a switch that says 'sport mode' that isn't connected to anything." The Daily Mash.
From: Duncan Kennedy on 23 Apr 2010 10:29 Dorian Gray <D.Gray(a)picture.invalid> wrote: > In article <1jhczgk.kykzja1dr4xbcN%nospam(a)nospamottersonbg.couk>, > nospam(a)nospamottersonbg.couk (Duncan Kennedy) wrote: > > > I > > use Wirus Barrier on my Macs - OK I *know but I don't want to be the > > first to be screwed by the first Mac virus in the wild and that is > > coming one day soon. > > But your Wirus Barrier software (or any other "anti-virus" software on > the Mac) will not protect against the as-yet-hypothetical "first Mac > virus in the wild" when the latter first appears, because it will be > new, see? Not strictly true - virus writers usually circulate their work first for a start and users will send in copies when the first one is hit. Kaspersky and VirusBarrier update daily (hourly if you like with Kaspersky) so there is a bery good chance you will be updated before you are hit. And there is a rather nice 2-way firewall. -- duncank
From: Pd on 23 Apr 2010 11:51 Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: > On 2010-04-23, Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: > > > >> 2. Your anti-virus software might introduce security holes in your > >> system. > > > > True. > > Or, as with McAfee earlier this week, it might inaccurately identify a key > and perfectly legit piece of your system as Naughty and nuke it, leading to > Endless Reboot Rage. > > (it identified svchost.exe as malware. Fun for all concerned) Following Microsoft's logic, McAfee should have identified that there was a "virus" on the system, and simply refused to run. Or even deleted itself. After all, a virus-infected system is preferable to a non-bootable system, apparently. -- Pd
From: Jim on 23 Apr 2010 12:04
On 2010-04-23, Pd <peterd.news(a)gmail.invalid> wrote: > Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: > >> On 2010-04-23, Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: >> > >> >> 2. Your anti-virus software might introduce security holes in your >> >> system. >> > >> > True. >> >> Or, as with McAfee earlier this week, it might inaccurately identify a key >> and perfectly legit piece of your system as Naughty and nuke it, leading to >> Endless Reboot Rage. >> >> (it identified svchost.exe as malware. Fun for all concerned) > > Following Microsoft's logic, McAfee should have identified that there > was a "virus" on the system, and simply refused to run. Or even deleted > itself. After all, a virus-infected system is preferable to a > non-bootable system, apparently. > "But...but if they'd installed that update it would have forced the users to completely reinstall their system!" "Good." Jim -- Twitter:@GreyAreaUK "[The MP4-12C] will be fitted with all manner of pointlessly shiny buttons that light up and a switch that says 'sport mode' that isn't connected to anything." The Daily Mash. |