Focus on Apple
ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 10 2007 02:43PM
Pfost William B (William Pfost ci irs gov) (4 replies)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 10 2007 09:28PM
Todd Woodward (todd_woodward symantec com) (2 replies)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 11 2007 12:07PM
David Harley (david a harley gmail com)
Re: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 11 2007 02:33AM
Edward R Marczak (marczak radiotope com) (2 replies)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 14 2007 09:42AM
David Harley (david a harley gmail com) (1 replies)
Re: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 14 2007 01:18PM
Edward R Marczak (marczak radiotope com) (1 replies)
Re: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 14 2007 08:43PM
Radoslav Dejanoviæ (radoslav dejanovic opsus hr) (1 replies)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 15 2007 10:14AM
David Harley (david a harley gmail com)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 13 2007 09:51PM
Todd Woodward (todd_woodward symantec com) (1 replies)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 14 2007 10:09AM
David Harley (david a harley gmail com) (1 replies)
Re: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 14 2007 08:32PM
Michael Dalling (mtdalling gmail com) (2 replies)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 15 2007 09:53AM
David Harley (david a harley gmail com)
Re: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 15 2007 07:32AM
Howard Oakley (h oakley btconnect com)
Re: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 10 2007 07:24PM
Rob DeWitt (diggertadmin gmail com) (1 replies)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 10 2007 08:53PM
David Harley (david a harley gmail com) (2 replies)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 10 2007 09:17PM
William Holmberg (wholmberg amdpi com) (1 replies)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 11 2007 11:41AM
David Harley (david a harley gmail com) (1 replies)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 14 2007 07:43PM
William Holmberg (wholmberg amdpi com) (1 replies)
Re: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 14 2007 09:16PM
Dave Mangot (dmangot terracottatech com) (1 replies)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 14 2007 09:41PM
William Holmberg (wholmberg amdpi com) (1 replies)
Re: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 14 2007 10:02PM
Dave Mangot (dmangot terracottatech com) (1 replies)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 15 2007 01:29PM
William Holmberg (wholmberg amdpi com)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 10 2007 09:10PM
Dixon, Wayne (wcdixo aurora lib il us) (2 replies)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 11 2007 01:29PM
David Harley (david a harley gmail com)
Re: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 11 2007 10:16AM
Radoslav Dejanoviæ (radoslav dejanovic opsus hr) (1 replies)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 14 2007 09:48AM
David Harley (david a harley gmail com)
Re: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 10 2007 06:56PM
Tom Yarrish (tom yarrish com)
Re: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 10 2007 06:50PM
Roland Dobbins (rdobbins cisco com) (1 replies)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 10 2007 07:35PM
Pfost William B (William Pfost ci irs gov) (1 replies)
Re: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 10 2007 08:09PM
Rob DeWitt (diggertadmin gmail com) (2 replies)
Re: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 10 2007 11:11PM
Paul Schmehl (pauls utdallas edu) (2 replies)
Re: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 12 2007 12:37PM
Casper Gasper (casper gasper gmail com)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 11 2007 12:13PM
David Harley (david a harley gmail com)
Re: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 10 2007 09:22PM
Kevin Finisterre \(lists\) (kf_lists digitalmunition com) (1 replies)
RE: ClamXav for OS X 10.4 Aug 11 2007 12:22PM
David Harley (david a harley gmail com)
> If you are going to use A/V on mac at least use Intego... or
> something with some kernel level protection.

I've never tested Intego (not, at any rate, in its more recent incarnation),
but agree in principle. The other obvious alternatives are Symantec, Virex,
and Sophos. A lot of people find Sophos very heavy-footed. Symantec are not
my favourite AV vendor, but their Mac product integrates better than most
with their enterprise and Windows s/w. Virex has been very patchy over the
years.

> > older Macs; considering that the only reason we were
> running antivirus
> > was to protect the Windows machines, that burden was
> widely* resented
> > by the Mac users.
> >
> > *And properly so, in my opinion.

Point taken. But I remember a time when my principle problem on site was
macro viruses spread by Mac users who thought Disinfectant protected them
from everything, so it can be more of a two-way street than you might think.

> > One possible negative is that Clamav exceeds its authority to the
> > extent of classifying "phish" as viruses; only recently has it been
> > possible to turn this off. Some of my peers were upset
> about it, as
> > they prefer to distinguish between "threats to machines"
> vs. "threats
> > to naive users."

That's not a real distinction. A lot of phishing mail is connected to
attempts to install keyloggers, backdoors etc. somewhere along the line. The
fact is, that anti-virus hasn't been anti-virus for a long time. It's
anti-malware...

--
David Harley
http://www.smallblue-greenworld.co.uk

[ reply ]


 

Privacy Statement
Copyright 2010, SecurityFocus