As a side note, I have worked with computers since the early ’80s and have NEVER been infected. I have cleaned up many a computer with Malware, and its seems its always the same “I just clicked on the ad”.

I believe the answer is still basically zero so I don’t use anti-virus and anti-spyware software on my own Macs or recommend it to others. If things change, so will I.

Ed, do you run a Windows PC as your primary system?

The reason I ask, is that I’ve seen Windows users come to believe that is perfectly normal to install an anti-virus software, one or more anti-spyware software and a 3rd party firewall. They wind up getting pestered with messages (downloading update now, installing update, scanning email messages # 1, scanning email message # 2, Starting scan, scan in progress, etc.), having system resources get gobbled up and still are convinced their system is infected.

It is hard for a Windows user to embrace the Mac and its’ ready out of the box experience.

Let’s just say that a real virus or spyware problem becomes a reality for the Mac, then is the time to install protective software. Protecting against a problem that doesn’t exist is pretty silly.

On the other hand…what’s suspicious activity? Who defines it in those programs? Or is it like SELinux, where everything is suspicious unless you tell it it isn’t?

Antimalware has made great strides in the past few years. Your impression of this type of software is slightly dated.

It is *not* the first botnet using/involving Macs (check some sites about real security, you’ll see reports from *at the very least* last year about a botnet running on Macs), so…wrong.

Also, trojans like this one depend on only one vulnerability…users’ stupidity…and no amount of antimalware will save a system from that.

In other words…a) this is nothing new and b) there’s no anti-stupidity program that will save a system…which means, nothing to see here, move along.

I’m no fan of the J-school dogma that every article contain quotes from partisan voices on both sides of each issue. I welcome reporting from a point of view as long as the point of view is acknowledged. I can certainly see how reporting on Apple news requires thick skin.

Yes, Macs are increasingly the targets in hacking contests. Many believe that paid hackers have long targeted the Mac because users of Apple products tend to be high-value targets. High disposable income, high net worth, etc.

Running malware scanning software on Windows can be burdensome, yet I would recommend it for most users. I do know of many savvy Windows administrators who effectively use Intrusion Detection Systems to scan their networks for signs of trouble rather than relying on scanners running on Windows. This certainly isn’t for everyone, but we have to remember that Conficker disables malware scanners and even access to scanner update sites. So it’s unwise to be overly reliant on Windows malware scanning alone.

The need for scanning is probably proportional to the vulnerability of your platform, the riskiness of your behavior, and number of machines on your network. Perhaps we could agree that Windows users surfing porn sites from large networks are more likely to benefit from the burdens of virus scanning than the little old lady using a Mac to E-mail family from home?

You do tire of it after awhile, and sometimes it comes through.

But I think here we now see that yes, there is the threat, and yes, not even the admistrator safeguards will protect some people. The fact is, people pirate software. Is it wrong? Yes. But I cannot see a valid argument in why anyone, regardless of operating system, should not have malware safeguards installed in this day and age.

It’s no secret at hacker conventions that Mac OS is now the target of choice in contests. Eventually, they’re going to find a hole. Nobody, or no company, is perfect.