macnn
11/24/2008, 9:30am, EST
Monday, November 24th
Second Trojan poses moderate threat
A second piece of Trojan-like malware is currently threatening Macs, say security vendors. OSX.Lamzev.A, also known as OSX.TrojanKit.Malez, allows hackers to install a backdoor on a victim's computer and thereby assume control of it. The software is said not to be a true Trojan, however, as an attacker must already have access to the target Mac to make use of the code.
Because Lamzev nominally requires physical access to a Mac to work, it is only being classified as a mild threat by security companies. Danger is said to persist though, as an attacker could cloak the code with the trappings of legitimate software, and thereby persuade people to download and install it themselves. Intego observes that Lamzev is unrelated to RSPlug.D, which also requires people to download an app under false pretenses, but is a true Trojan and will execute itself after the initial deception.
, 
, 7
, 
, 
, 
, 
, 
, 
Top
subscribe to comments
for this article
i wonder....
what would happen if every single Windows threat was posted to windows news sites? The fact that these little blurbs can even be considered news demonstrates how OS X is less likely to have security issues. You can argue that is because of the UNIX underpinnings, or just that the marketshare is smaller drawing less attention, but whatever the reason, it is still less crap we have to worry about on OS X. Other than some basic common sense (don't run from an admin account, know what you're downloading etc.) the machines are relatively safe.
idiots!
Yes, those people who seem to think that no computer is ever used by anyone other than themselves.
Hmm, here's a thought. Such a backdoor would be problematic at an internet cafe, an office, a school, etc. Let alone, as the article states, added to 'legitimate' software to open an unsuspecting backdoor.
Now, what isn't said, and is a valid question, is whether the threat requires any type of administrative access.
Testicular.....
I mean Testudo, must have been looking in a mirror when he said the word idiots!
at an internet cafe...
Yeah!
Okay - Testudo - how would a person being at an internet cafe be any differnt than being at home and maintaining security on the same laptop in both places?
Is the laptop going to somehow be less secure at the cafe unless the User goes and disables their security 'cause they "feel" Safe?
Schools/ Offices: If the Sys admin is a Tool and does not know how to secure a LAN from vulnerability and gives random users Admin or Root access to the computers then again Yeah! Besides the Sys Admin should be fired and they need to get someone else who knows what they're doing.
Remeber Testudo - research the topic - then think about the topic - then "speak".
on the subject...
Yep - point me to it so that I can download this and voluntarily install it on my system - if only for the ability to run the "free" anti-virus provided me by my ISP.
[sarcasm] I've been really wanting to use it for a while! [/sarcasm]
Re: at an internet cafe
Okay - Testudo - how would a person being at an internet cafe be any differnt than being at home and maintaining security on the same laptop in both places?
Because a person at a home is using his/her own computer, and safe to assume it is his/her own computer.
At an internet cafe/school/business, the problem isn't YOU, the current user, its the neanderthal user before you, who may have intentionally or inadvertently installed said software.
Or do we not count those people?
Is the laptop going to somehow be less secure at the cafe unless the User goes and disables their security 'cause they "feel" Safe?
No, I was using 'internet cafe' as a place one goes to use a computer there, not a place one brings a computer (why the hell would you need to go to a special place to use your laptop?).
Schools/ Offices: If the Sys admin is a Tool and does not know how to secure a LAN from vulnerability and gives random users Admin or Root access to the computers then again Yeah! Besides the Sys Admin should be fired and they need to get someone else who knows what they're doing.
OK. So the sysadmin is a tool. What's your point. Are you saying this never happens in the real world, because all sys admins are competent? Really?
And this gets to the point brought up about the level of access you needed. If the trojan doesn't need admin rights to install, would that not be more of an issue?
Remeber Testudo - research the topic - then think about the topic - then "speak".
And you could try to comprehend and look at larger pictures. Oh, wait, that would be too difficult.