> > But it's a Trojan, which requires user interaction, downloading
> > something manually, and expressly granting it administrative
> > privileges to your machine.
>
> This brings up an interesting point - how many Mac users go to the
> trouble of setting up a nonprivileged account and then do their
> normal work under that? I don't know, but my guess is that it's a
> pretty low percentage, especially as, at least with Tiger, one runs
> into some issues such as borked /Applications perms/ownership which
> require a *NIX background to even understand, much less remedy.

On every install of OSX I've ever had (which includes an old PearPC
install), the first thing I do is to set a strong password for
Administrator, and then create a "normal" user that can't administer the
box. I then use that user for all interactive logon sessions and specify
the admin account when and where I need to.

> How many Mac users have been faced with a seemingly-random request to
> grant a non-obvious background app/utility Keychain access, not to
> mention commonly-used apps asking for it without an easily-discerned
> reason? And in such situation, what do they typically tend to do
> (I've my own opinion about this, but clue welcomed).

I've never been presented with anything like that on the Mac. Regarding
this whole "MAC Trojan" thing, I have to say-- if anyone on the MSFT
side of things came out and tried to claim "Windows Trojan" on something
the user had to manually (and purposefully) download, manually execute,
and then explicitly grant administrative rights to, they'd get
firehosed.

t

[ reply ]