Why malware for Macs is on its way

By | May 5, 2011, 12:02pm PDT

Summary: This isn’t about Mac-versus-Windows. It’s about engineering and (shady) economics. I see convincing evidence that the tipping point is here, or will be soon. Read on and make up your own mind.

Follow-up: Malware attempts that use Apple-focused social engineering are now in the wild. I just found one via Google Image search. See for yourself: What a Mac malware attack looks like.

Oh, the rationalizations people come up with to explain away what they don’t want to hear.

Last week, when I wrote Coming soon to a Mac near you: serious malware, I expected to get an earful from Mac partisans telling me how wrong I was. They didn’t disappoint.

In this post, I want to respond, in detail, to the arguments that I heard in response to that post. They’re the same ones that come up over and over again when the topic turns to Macs and malware.

First, there’s the contention that OS X is architecturally superior to other operating systems, that its very design confers immunity from infection. Second, there’s the perfectly reasonable question of numbers: if Macs and Windows PCs are equally vulnerable to attack, how come there are hundreds of thousands of Windows viruses and only a handful of specimens of Mac malware?

Those are reasonable arguments, and I want to address them fully, with enough evidence to help you make your own conclusions. This isn’t about Mac-versus-Windows religion. It’s about engineering and economics.

I’ve got my flak jacket fastened, so let’s dive in.

Is OS X architecturally superior to Windows?

That’s the argument several commenters made in response to my post. Here’s one example, complete with obligatory homage to Steve Jobs:

The architecture and methodology is different at Apple, which is why so many developers (and hackers) hate Macs and iPhones, they can’t get in to do anything really serious. Not to deny anything is possible, but I still feel left out when I use PCs that get infected regularly. And thank Steve for that feeling!

Sorry, but that’s not true. Sensible third parties have acknowledged this for years. In a 2008 post at the Mac-centric Tidbits.com, Security Editor Rich Mogull wrote:

It’s not that Mac OS X is inherently more secure against viruses than current versions of Windows (although it was clearly more secure than Windows prior to XP SP2); the numerous vulnerabilities reported and patched in recent years are just as exploitable as their Windows equivalents. But most security experts agree that malicious software these days is driven by financial incentives, and it’s far more profitable to target the dominant platform. […] At some point, assuming Apple continues to make appealing products, we Mac users will become bigger targets and face a higher level of risk. [emphasis added]

As I’ve documented in a series of recent posts, social engineering has become the dominant technique that malware authors use to spread their poison. If you can convince someone that your hostile program is useful or necessary, they will happily (or fearfully) click through all necessary prompts and enter their administrative credentials where required.

This is true in Windows, where User Account Control has been a default since 2006. It is equally true in OS X.

But, the argument goes, Windows users are victimized by drive-by downloads, and Macs are immune from those!

Sorry, but that’s not true either. Like any modern operating system, OS X contains flaws that can be attacked fairly easily. That is why Apple updates it so regularly. Let’s take just one recent example…

In Apple’s security bulletin for the April 22, 2011 release of OS X 10.6.7, I counted 23 separate fixes for vulnerabilities that allow “arbitrary code execution” in the current shipping version of OS X. At least three of those vulnerabilities are new in Snow Leopard and did not exist in previous versions of OS X.

For those who aren’t familiar with security terminology, “arbitrary code execution” means “no user interaction required.” It is the nightmare scenario of online security: The attacker sets up a web page containing hostile code or creates an ordinary looking document, image, or movie file. When you visit that web page or open that document or look at that picture or play that video clip—or even if you just download a file—the attacker’s code runs, potentially giving him complete control over your machine.

No permission dialog boxes pop up, and no password prompts are required.

But don’t just take my word for it. I’ve gone through that April document, line by line, and pulled out the details.

Page 2: 23 flaws, no user interaction required –>

Topics

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications.

Disclosure

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is a freelance technical journalist and book author. All work that Ed does is on a contractual basis.

Since 1994, Ed has written more than 25 books about Microsoft Windows and Office. Along with various co-authors, Ed is completely responsible for the content of the books he writes. As a key part of his contractual relationship with publishers, he gives them permission to print and distribute the content he writes and to pay him a royalty based on the actual sales of those books. Ed's books are currently distributed by Que Publishing (a division of Pearson Education) and by Microsoft Press.

On occasion, Ed accepts consulting assignments. In recent years, he has worked as an expert witness in cases where his experience and knowledge of Microsoft and Microsoft Windows have been useful. In each such case, his compensation is on an hourly basis, and he is hired as a witness, not an advocate.

Ed does not own stock or have any other financial interest in Microsoft or any other software company. He owns 500 shares of stock in EMC Corporation, which was purchased before the company's acquisition of VMWare. In addition, he owns 350 shares of stock in Intel Corporation, purchased more than two years ago. All stocks are held in retirement accounts for long-term growth.

Ed does not accept gifts from companies he covers. All hardware products he writes about are purchased with his own funds or are review units covered under formal loan agreements and are returned after the review is complete.

Biography

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications. He's served as editor of the U.S. edition of PC Computing and managing editor of PC World; both publications had monthly paid circulation in excess of 1 million during his tenure. He is the author of more than 25 books on Microsoft Windows and Office, including the recently released Windows 7 Inside Out.

Talkback Most Recent of 343 Talkback(s)

  • More factors
    The bad guys have invested in tool chains for creating Windows malware. This creates inertia and may delay the point at which macs are becoming mass-exploited.

    Windows Vista and 7 are significantly harder to exploit (much harder than macs). This may push the exploitable population closer to a point where macs are becoming the juicy target. This will move up the point at which mac will see mass-exploits.

    While Windows XP is harder to secure than the later Windows versions, it is entirely possible to lock down a Windows XP. Enterprises have been doing this successfully for a long time now. If the XP population that is left are all deployed locked-down in enterprises, the "XP share" is not a good index. Many/most of the exploitable XPs are pirated copies which may even have been infected before installation. Remember how our resident Linux advocate/peddler insisted that Windows had open ports even with the firewall on? Only to find out that he used a pirated (and infected) copy downloaded from the internet because he was too cheap tp pay for it (or rather his "friend" was. This always happens to someones "friend").
    ZDNet Gravatar
    honeymonster
    5th May
  • Still, malware for Mac was promised countless times, but the cases are just
    @honeymonster: ... anecdotal to this day; lets see how these "Spy Eye" kits will do.

    Just recently a security tacking firm said they register like 40 000 attacks on PCs comparing to 8 (eight) on Mac.

    So lets ask Edward about malware for Macs when it will be actual reality, rather than theoretical possibility.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    DeRSSS
    5th May
  • I guess Ed needed more hits
    @denisrs

    on his blog forum or really really needed to hear all of the same old arguments all over again.

    Reprising his role as Chicken Little wasn't really necessary. You can use a Mac sensibly without worry from the barrage of malware that Ed predicts, just like Windows XP which is a lot more vulnerable than OS-X (I'll continue to use the hyphen, tyvm). The first step to sensibility is to not use Safari. The second is not to install or run anything that you don't absolutely know of its origin.

    Most of the new Mac users are refugees from Windows anyway and they know these simple, sensible guidelines already.

    If this great Mac exploitation happens in my lifetime, I'll be the first admit he was right. But I won't hold my breath.

    Thanks, Ed, for beating the dead, rotting carcass of a horse some more.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    jacarter3
    5th May
  • Not anecdotal; it's basic economics
    @denisrs

    Economics of scale. Macs has had more (many times more) vulnerabilities than any version of Windows over at least the past 5 years. Every year. Exploitable vulnerabilities.

    At the same time Apple has had one of the worst patch records out of all; often leaving users hanging while vulnerability information was publicly available for months. Case in point: Several Java vulns.

    The only thing protecting OS X users have been the fact that a more lucrative target was available. Not Apple, not Unix heritage (with measly 12 bits of security), not "magical" but undisclosed OS X security mechanisms. No, macs were always protected by Windows, ironically

    What is going to be interesting is when the bad guys really takes an interest in OS X they will have plenty of vulnerabilities to choose from. For one, OS X is quite simply the most buggy OS of all mainstream desktop OSes.

    But worse, the OS X stack is assembled from a variety of 3rd party and open source components (like libxml) which not only has frequent vulnerabilities but for which Apple cannot control disclosure. This is a systemic problem for OS X which does not exist in Windows. Providers of the libraries and 3rd party components are not going to wait for Apple to get their act together. They are going to patch when they have a patch ready. But when the patch is in the open, simple reverse engineering will reveal the vulnerability. Often the bad guys will not even have to reverse engineer as vulnerability info is often released along with the patch - especially if it is open source.

    What this means is that OS X has had - and will continue to have - a problem where vulnerability information will be available to the bad guys long before Apple patches OS X.

    This is going to be a disaster.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    honeymonster
    5th May
    • Flagged
  • RE: Why malware for Macs is on its way
    @jacarter3 ... You obviously didn't bother reading the article or failed to comprehend it, otherwise you would understand that it's not just Safari, it's all browsers and all platforms.

    The ultimate unpatched exploit is the user, and while I've argued for years that humanity is in desperate need of a service pack, it's not gonna happen. People are dumb.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    GoodThings2Life
    5th May
  • RE: Why malware for Macs is on its way
    @denisrs Just 2 days after Ed's earlier post on a Chrome vulnerability, guess what - the same exploit was used to infect my wife's iMac via a Google search on social work academic literature. I think that counts as actual reality. If you haven't installed an AV product on your Mac, I wish you good fortune.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    donaldvc
    5th May
  • RE: Why malware for Macs is on its way
    @donaldvc Just posted this reply to denisrs and it has been reported as spam:

    "Just 2 days after Ed's earlier post on a Chrome vulnerability, guess what - the same exploit was used to infect my wife's iMac via a Google search on social work academic literature. I think that counts as actual reality. If you haven't installed an AV product on your Mac, I wish you good fortune."

    Hmmm... I hope this is not a case of someone trying to conceal an unpalatable opinion. For the record, I am writing this post from my Mac mini.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    donaldvc
    5th May
  • RE: Why malware for Macs is on its way
    @denisrs

    Let's say Mac Guy has only one bullet, and PC Guy has the arsenal of the whole state of Texas. It doesn't matter which of them shoots me, I'm dead either way.

    I read Ed's article before there were any comments, and I'm just checking back now in fascination at the number of silly excuses the Mac fans find to dispute him, defying any attempt at logic and totally missing the point in the process.

    You should be gleeful that your chosen platform finally has enough users to be noticed.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    DaveN_MVP
    5th May
  • Again: it is 40000 cases of malware attacks for Windows against 8 for ...
    @DaveN_MVP: ... Macintoshes -- this is actual reality.

    But PC fanatics defy basic facts and reason, so no wonder.

    By the way, I am writing this from Windows 7 PC and I never had Macs; but I am not a PC or Mac fan -- I just know how to keep in mind basic actual reality facts rather than never ending threats of theoretical doom.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    DeRSSS
    5th May
  • RE: Why malware for Macs is on its way
    @honeymonster "This is going to be a disaster."

    When? When it was supposed to happen in 2004? 2005? 2006? 2007? 2008? 2009? 2010? Or this year? Or next year? The year after that?

    And where do you guys keep pulling these stats from? Oh right. Out of your ass.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    His_Shadow
    6th May
    • Flagged
  • On being bulletproof ...
    @DaveN_MVP:
    Let's say Mac Guy has only one bullet, and PC Guy has the arsenal of the whole state of Texas. It doesn't matter which of them shoots me, I'm dead either way.

    A Mac without anti-malware is like walking down the street in a nice neighborhood. You are not personally bulletproof, but there aren't any gun battles in the streets, either.

    A Windows PC with anti-malware is like wearing a bulletproof vest in a war zone. You are protected from a lot of the gunfire, but you are also constantly being shot at from every direction.

    You are much less likely to be shot in the nice neighborhood. This post doesn't do a really convincing job of arguing that the streets of Macville will be overrun soon with gun-wiedling lunatics.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    RationalGuy
    6th May
  • RE: Why malware for Macs is on its way
    @denisrs

    My sentiments exactly.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    heathmaxie
    6th May
  • RE: Why malware for Macs is on its way
    @denisrs I have exactly the same point of view sir, I've been waiting for facts for years now and nothing changes, not even the story "This new windows is safer" grin
    ZDNet Gravatar
    deBrice
    6th May
  • RE: Why malware for Macs is on its way
    @jacarter3 Denial of the issue will not help. Ed presented some very well researched and thought out arguments in two articles far different from the usual ZDNet propaganda. You and other Mac fanbois are taking this as an attack and it is not. The fact is that the hackers are turning more and more to hack into the Mac OS and the "security by obscurity" you have enjoyed so much over the years is slowly evaporating. You can choose to keep on blasting Ed and others who try to tell you this and fall victim to malware OR you can man up, take what he says seriously, and be proactive about protecting your mac and it's data. In other words one can lead a horse to water but one cannot make that horse drink it.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    Pete "athynz" Athens
    6th May
  • RE: Why malware for Macs is on its way
    @RationalGuy

    I LOVE your analogy about neighborhoods! I'm going to use that. Tell me where to send the royalty checks!
    ZDNet Gravatar
    jscott69
    6th May

Talkback - Tell Us What You Think

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources