Kaspersky anti-virus for Mac
in [UK Mac]
|
From: Duncan Kennedy on 23 Apr 2010 13:42 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. Unfortunately the idiot who wrote the update didn't seem to realise that there could be several different instances of svchost.exe running at any one time and, for some stupid reason, decided to wipe them all. In fact it seems that it deleted them all even if none were infected. I once had an infected svhchost file on a very old XP box - I gave up trying to clean it as it was installed by a file that kept changing its name. Strangely enough it came from runnng a Live Linux distro, completely forgetting what I was doing and downloading a phoney Flash upgrade and coming straight out of Linux - it infected Win XP before the anti-virus loaded - Linux users refuse to believe that is possible but I actually watched it happen - the infecting application must have been downloaded to the XP drive. -- duncank
From: Rowland McDonnell on 22 Apr 2010 20:25 Peter James <pfjames2000(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > My Bank is offering all of its on-line banking customers the Kaspersky > anti-virus for Windows and Mac for free. > Is this offer worth taking up? > I'm running OS X 10.6.3. My inclination is to say no. The only problem > is when and if my account is hacked I'm told I have no comeback because > I'm not running anti-virus software. 1) Can't be valid unless the hacking is done via your PC. Complain to the banking ombudsman... 2) ClamXAV is worth a look - free. Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Rowland McDonnell on 22 Apr 2010 20:31 Duncan Kennedy <nospam(a)nospamottersonbg.couk> wrote: > Gavin Lawrie <gavin.lawrie(a)2gc.co.uk> wrote: > > > It probably won't do any harm, but probably won't do any good either. > > Not looked at the Kapersky mac software, > > I've used Kaspersky ful jternet suite (including 2-way firewall) for > many years on many Windows boxes. The company support is excellent. 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. There are plenty of Mac viruses out there. Lots and lots. But they all broke when MacOS X came out and none of the successes of the pre OS X viruses has been repeated. Thing is, there are no viruses for MacOS X. And there probably won't be, because that mode of infection is so very hard to exploit on a reasonably secure OS like Unix that it's much more sensible to think about other methods of infecting the machine in question - basically, it's all done with Trojans and social engineering these days. So relax, your MacOS X Mac will never catch a virus[1]. It'll just get ill another way when the malware strikes. Don't forget, there is plenty of MacOS X malware out there, so be careful what you install. [snip] Rowland. [1] Maybe. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Chris Ridd on 23 Apr 2010 01:32 On 2010-04-22 23:23:39 +0100, Bruce Horrocks said: > On 22/04/2010 16:59, Chris Ridd wrote: >> I was trying to find the post from Bruce that proposed asking the banks >> to get the security software properly certified (CC) first. Why would >> you trust something *claiming* to be secure? > > It was me. The relevant bit was: > >> Anyone wishing to stall their bank could write and ask why Trusteer >> Rapport doesn't appear to have a CESG Claims Tested Mark nor a Common >> Criteria certification. >> <http://www.cctmark.gov.uk/> >> <http://www.commoncriteriaportal.org/> Ta. Google *still* can't find it :-( -- Chris
From: J. J. Lodder on 25 Apr 2010 04:06
Duncan Kennedy <nospam(a)nospamottersonbg.couk> wrote: > Gavin Lawrie <gavin.lawrie(a)2gc.co.uk> wrote: > > > It probably won't do any harm, but probably won't do any good either. > > Not looked at the Kapersky mac software, > > I've used Kaspersky ful jternet suite (including 2-way firewall) for > many years on many Windows boxes. The company support is excellent. 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. It doesn't work that way. First *you must get screwed, then all others will profit from the anti-virus software that is developed from the remains of your screwed system. You are wasting money and time anyway, Jan |