Path: csiph.com!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Jolly Roger Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system Subject: Re: Mac Malware Date: 11 Mar 2017 16:26:32 GMT Organization: People for the Ethical Treatment of Pirates Lines: 51 Message-ID: References: <4wPvA.84517$i7.38100@fx30.fr7> <100320171345028704%nospam@nospam.invalid> <100320171653216700%nospam@nospam.invalid> X-Trace: individual.net OulG3EMu2orGsWPQAcdhkg4esIguSK9BED81lgGyDS0okwRRoo Cancel-Lock: sha1:dxM6eDIYcR+RhNclv/BnGop/2lQ= Mail-Copies-To: nobody User-Agent: slrn/1.0.1 (Darwin) Xref: csiph.com comp.sys.mac.system:102197 On 2017-03-11, Ken Springer wrote: > On 3/10/17 2:53 PM, nospam wrote: > >> although an older article, it still holds true: >> > cle.php?story=20060511065134478> >> The bottom line is that Mac OS X virus software has, collectively, >> precipitated more security flaws, slow-downs, accidental file >> deletions and overall system issues than perhaps any other grouping >> of software. >> >> and much of the time, it doesn't even work: >> >> Almost one third of internet users in the European Union caught a PC >> virus despite the majority having security software installed, >> statistics show. > > IMO, in the world of computer aging, the articles are too old to be > trusted for relevance today. No, 2011 isn't too old to be relevant. > Rather like reading a 20 tear old newspaper, and thinking the articles are current. Nope, not at all. > But they are interesting if you want to gain an historical viewpoint. The above referenced articles show just how crappy anti-virus utilities have been historically, and yet you seem to be advocating trust where none is warranted. Fool me once... ; ) >> and it's not just macs either: >> >> A Symantec antivirus signature update mistakenly quarantined two >> critical system files in the Simplified Chinese version of Windows XP >> last week, crippling PCs throughout China. > > I've probably posted that I work part time at a local PC repair shop, > although I don't do any of the repairs. We don't recommend either > Symantec or McAfee. Who said shoddy development, buggy behavior, and adding their own security holes are things that apply only to Symantec and McAfee? Tell me you're not that naive. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR